A DEFENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT ESTABLISHED IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND FOR ECCLESIASTICAL MATTERS. Containing an answer unto a Treatise called, The Learned Discourse of Eccl. Government, otherwise entitled, A brief and plain declaration concerning the desires of all the faithful Ministers that have, and do seek for the discipline and reformation of the Church of England. Comprehending likewise an answer to the arguments in a Treatise named The judgement of a most Reverend and Learned man from beyond the Seas, etc. Answering also to the arguments of calvin, Beza, and Danaeus, with other our Reverend learned Brethren, besides Caenaiis and Bodinus, both for the regiment of women, and in defence of her Majesty, and of all other Christian Princes supreme Government in Ecclesiastical causes, Against The tetrarchy that our Brethren would erect in every particular congregation, of Doctors, Pastors, Governors and Deacons, with their several and joint authority in Elections, Excommunications, synodal Constitutions and other Ecclesiastical matters. Answered by john Bridges Deane of Sarum. Come and See. joh. 1.36. Take it up and Read. Aug. lib. conf. 8. ca 12. AT LONDON, Printed by john Windet, for Thomas Chard. 1587. The Preface to the Christian Reader. WHereas in a Sermon preached at Paul's Cross about two years past, I had touched (on occasion) some part of this Learned Discourse, then lately set forth; and for the people's satisfaction, I had answered some principal arguments of the same, in defence of her majesties supreme government in Eccl. causes, and for our Bishop's jurisdiction; as appeareth by the Sermon itself, which for the further manifesting the occasion hereof, I have set forth also, and recommend (dear Christian Reader) to thy favourable interpretation: which Sermon (according to the diverse affections of the auditory) took diverse effects; some beginning to relent and be resolved, which before had been greatly carried away, in the contrary persuasion of these matters, and promising reconcilement unto their Bishops, whose state before they had misliked; some (on the otherside) took such offence at that part of the Sermon which touched these things, that they ceased not to deface it, and to challenge me for it: I then promised, not only the anowing of that I had spoken; but also (God assisting me) the publishing both of the whole sermon, and the answering atlarge of all the Learned Discourse. For discharge of which promise, and because this book pretendeth such a plausible title, and withal is reckoned of so great account; as I afterward could get opportunity and leisure thereunto, proceeding by little and little in the same; and (by the way) taking withal some parts of the like argument, that other our Brethren have since composed; and partly passing up from them, to the very fountains, (as I take it) from whence all our Brethren fetch their chiefest motives, or the grounds of them, especially in these three reverend and learned Fathers, calvin, Beza, & Danaeus: I have now (thanks be to God) at length, after many delays and stops thereof, thus far forth accomplished & set out the same. It is no small grief to me (I protest) that on this occasion, I was thus drawn into these questions, with those, whom otherwise in Christ, I humbly acknowledge to be our dear Brethren. And much gladlier (the Lord knows) would I be, to have wholly objected myself (as before to my mediocrity I have endeavoured) against the public adversaries of God's truth. And would God, all we which are of the household of faith, professing the light and liberty of the Gospel, would again bend our forces that ways, against the errors and tyranny of Antichrist. In which course a while, we did run well (but as the Apostle saith to the Galathians) who hath let us? Gal. 5. ●. For so long as we jointly followed the quest of that uncouth beast, and of the purple Harlot on his back; God mightily prospered us in all our affairs. Yea it is wonderful to consider, if we have grace to acknowledge it, how God hath still hitherto, (above any Nation in the world, in this last age thereof) and yet doth not cease to bless us, his name of us again ineessantly, be blessed and magnified for it. Howbeit, the shadow is not more concomitant to the body, than envy is emulous of virtue and glory. As there is no state so happy on all parts in this life, but it shall ever be crossed with some or other danger, or disturbance: so doth the envious man (in these our Altions' days) labour nothing more, than to impugn and to overthrow this our bless●d state, yea, to have bereft us of the Lords anointed, his holy handmaiden, our most gracious Sovereign, by whom (under our Lord jesus Christ) God hath vouchsafed us all these blessings. In which practice, although the adversaries attempts have been so perilous and unnatural, that the very remembrance of them breedeth horror: yet the Lords continual deliverance from them, hath been so admirable, and almost miraculous; that we can not but all rejoice together, & break forth into the praises of our so gracious father, our most mighty, righteous & merciful God, and cast all our repose upon his providence. But as the holy Apostle S. Peter prudently forwarneth us, be sober and watch, for your adversary the devil as a roaring Lion walketh about seeking whom he may devour: 1. Pet. 5.8.9. so, see the malice and craft of this old serpent. That thing which he could never achieve by himself, withal the subtleties of his smooth temptations; nor by his grand deputy, the man of sin & son of perdition, withal his stratagems & violent forces: Satan eftsoons hath now not only crept in among the children of God; but hath so broken a sunder the bonds of God's peace; hath sown the cockle of such contentions, & divisions among us that are brethren; whereby such discord hath also risen, even among those that sowed before the good seed wheat; that no small hindrance hath grown thereby to the course of the Gospel, & as great hazard to the state of all our Church & Realm; as could have been inflicted by the open hostility of the public enemy. Yea, what could lay us more open to his injuries, than to fall out thus among ourselves into these garboils? Or how freely can we now oppose our faces to confront our adversaries; when evermore we must have a skew eye, to the awke blows of our own fellows & Brethr. hard at our elbows? Which double fight is so dangerous & so distrustful; that it maketh many amongst us to revolt or at least to hover: and is such an encouragement & advantage to the enemies, to be more confirmed in their errors, & strengthened in their confederacies: that they insult upon us both; yea they blaspheme the very gospel itself which we profess; and all by occasion of these intempestive, but too tempestuous disagrements. When Abraham saw the falling out between his and Lot's herdmen; fearing the evil event of such discord, he saith unto Lot let there be (I pray thee) no strife between thee & me, neither yet betwixt thy herdmen and mine: and he addeth this reason, For we are brethren. Which reason did so move the prudent joseph, that after he had revealed himself unto his Brethren, returning them to fetch his father; fearing lest any expostulations might breed jars among them, he gave them this especial charge; See that ye fall not out by the way. Thus did these ancient & holy patriarchs esteem of concord among brethren, & shunned (as a thing most unnatural) all brethren's discord. Which the godly & prophetical kings, David & Solomon well considering; Psal. 133. the father stirring us up to embrace this virtue; Behold (saith he) how good and comely a thing it is, for Brethren to dwell in one together? Liking it to the precious balm that was powered on the head of Aaron, and to the sweet dew of heaven that falleth on the mountains, to make them fruitful. The son (in detestation of the vice contrary) when he had set down the 6. things that the L. hateth; Haughty eyes, a lying tongue; hands that shed innocent blood; an heart imagining wicked enterprises; feet that are swift in running to mischief; and a false witness that speaketh lies: Prou. 6.16. he concludeth (as with a greater vice than all these) in the seventh and complete number, with this sin, which he saith, the soul of God abhorreth; And him that raiseth up contentions among his Brethren. And therefore when our saviour Christ had foretold his Disciples, all the persecutions that they should sustain by their outward enemies: against all these, that they might have brotherly love among themselves; Peace (saith he) I leave with you, my peace I give unto you. joh. 54.27. And again; These things have I spoken unto you▪ that my joy (which is the fruit of peace) might remain with you, joh. 15.11.12. and that my joy might be full. This is my commandment, that ye love one another. joh. 16.33. And so, he knits up his exhortation with this repetition; These things have I spoken to you, that ye might have peace in me. Which bond of peace and love in jesus Christ one towards another, both the Apostle S. Paul, the Doctor of the Gentiles, and especially S. john whom the Lord loved, and S. Peter that so loved the Lord, and S. james the just, in their Epistles, so often and so earnestly call upon, and so vehemently dissuade us from contentions. Empedocles among t●e heathen Philosophers, beholding the sympathy and antipathy that is in natural creatures, and being moved with the admiration thereof, concluded, that all things were do●● and undone, by concord and discord. But, to have this order of nature so inverted, that those persons which are not only chained in this natural Harmony, but also in a mo●e heavenly consent, should dissent & be dissolved; is far more wonderful than the composition of things contrary; and (that which is worse) is much more jeopardous. For (as the Apostle warned the Galathians, and by them us; If ye bite and devour one another, Gal. 4.15. take heed lest ye be consumed one of an other. And since our Saviour himself hath so severely denounced that dreadful sentence, and it is a Maximie grounded on good reason, Math. 12.28. Every kingdom divided against itself shall be brought to nought, and every City or house divided against itself shall not stand: no merua●le (if these contentions should hold on & increase) though our Brethren and we be moved hereat, beholding this our most flourishing kingdom, with these divisions to be thus rend in sunder, that almost no City or Town in the same (I can not say, no house) but is either divided, or at least disquieted by these factions. Nevertheless, this among other is our chiefest comfort against all these and other like temptations; that having both of us (for the ground of our religion) Gods everlasting & infallible truth; for the which our common adversaries do malign and oppugn us, but can never expugn and overcome us; for always (as zorobabel ●ayde) The truth is greater and stronger than all: Howsoever therefore we be exercised with such plunges, 1. Esd. 3.35. I mean not of the open enemies (for the troubles that we receive from them, do more corroborate us in God's truth) but arising by the waywardness of our own dear Brethren in the gospel: that yet we should not be too much dismayed, but stayed & recomforted. Sith that, albeit these last days (according to Christ's and his Apostles prophecy) are more contentious: yet in searching the former ages, we shall find that this self same trial of our faith, is not now first laid upon us alone; but that heretofore the Church of God, and the most excellent Princes, Prelates, and people among them, have often times bought this experience very dearly, and with great molestations even from their brethren. No sooner had God delivered his peculiar people, from the Egyptians bondage and idolatry, by the conduct of Moses and Aaron, and given them laws and orders to be governed by; but those their guides were more molested, and the people more wasted themselves by their own mutinies, than by the hand of any foreign enemies. And since the coming of our saviour Christ, so soon as ever Constantine (worthily surnamed) the Great, had extinguished all the tyrants persecutions, and procured public peace unto the gospel: what a number of contentions straightways broke forth (besides the conflicts with the pestiferous Heretics) among the true professors of the right faith, even for matters of discipline and orders, disquieting the unity and concord of the Church, and breeding no small grief, and stoppall to that good Prince's proceedings, as we feel and lament the like in these our days. There is great difference (I grant) both in matter and manner of these contentions, and in the qualities of the persons that breed these vexations; even as much as is, between him that would pluck my coa●e from off my back, and so spoil me; and him that would pull my skin over mine ears, and so destroy me. The controversies between the common adversaries and us, are pro Aris & focis; for matters, & that capital matters, of the substance & life of our Christian religion; not trifles, as some newtrals would bear the people in hand. And therefore our adversaries in matters of religion, are incensed against us with mortal, or rather, with immortal hatred. Whereas the controversies betwixt us and our Brethren, are matters, or rather (as they call them) but manners, and forms of the Church's regiment: Howbeit, whether by sufferance, or by neglect of them, grown yet unto so many heads, and so sharply prosecuted: not now contending so much for cap & surplice; nor for quarrels at the unlearneder sort of the poor ministers; nor invectives against the Bishops & their titles, or their superior jurisdictions only: but withal, calling in question all their whole authority, & their very ministry of the word and Sacraments; and all our form of public prayers; yea, the prescription of any form at all; the alteration of all the Clergy; the translation, and new limitation, of every Diocese, and particular parish in the Realm; the erection of a new tetrarchy, in eu●ry several congregation, of Doctors, Pastors, Governors, and Deacons; by which four estates & offices, all matters should be directed, and all crimes eccl. or civil censured by their discipline. Yea, they mount up to the highest top, even of the Princes supreme government. Since that therefore, these contentions have aspired thus far, to the imminent danger of all our whole estate; though in an other sort than do our adversaries in religion: it is more than high time, against these (though otherwise in Christ our well meaning, but misweening Brethren) to enter into the necessary defence, of these, be they matters, or manners of such moment. I am not ignorant that unto many, this labour will be thought superfluous, either of those that would have these matters go forward without misliking; or of some also that allow them not. Howbeit, because they have either before been sufficiently traversed in, by other already, both pro & contra: or that now these controversies (if they be not dead and buried long ago) yet the fervour of them is meetly well slaked; therefore according to Pythagoras' wise counsel, ignem opertum noli fodere, it were much better to let it alone, than to rake abroad the fire, that is covered in the cinders: these men think this to be the best answer, not at all to answer them, but to pass them oue● in silence and contemn them. Whereby, either the parties contending (having wearied themselves in vain) will the sooner give over; or at least, other will think the matters not worthy, to be vouchsafed any answer. And that to answer, yea to confute them, is but to provoke further controversies, of which we are pestered with too many, and those not a little raised, or enkinled, by often and intemperate disputing, answering, and replying one to an other. And in very deed, with them that think thus, in some matters and manners of proceeding, I myself am of their opinion. For this licentiousness of writing such reciprocal invictives, hath bred and breedeth much unnecessary trouble. Notwithstanding, as the Preacher (among all other things, that keep the revolution of their seasons) reckoneth up this; there is a time to keep silence, and a time to speak; when a matter groweth to importance, and is urged too importunately, admitting it be a wrong and dangerous error, and yet on all sides it winneth favour; to let it so pass without all controlment; what were silence then, but gross negligence, the very yielding to the error and danger, yea the wilful betraying of the truth, and consenting to the overture of our state? And even so fareth it in this matter. The Papists, from whose gross errors in doctrine we both dissent, and against whom, in the unity and substance of God's truth we both agree (and for a while conjointly we impugned their errors, idolatries, and superstitions) at the first in defence of them, they began to write freshly and stoutly against us, but when they saw, they were not able that way, to maintain the badness of their cause, they left off writing, and followed (for the most part) this policy, to seem to despise all further trial, by disputing and writing of the matter, and would seek to uphold it only or chief, by countenance and authority: but finding again the experience of this, that Voluntas non potest cogi, the will of man must be persuaded, can not be compelled: and that nullum violentum est perpetuum, the thing that is only with violence coacted, can not possibly continue: and that in these controversies, all men are most desirous to be satisfied with some answer or other: they fall again to writing, though hardly driven thereto, using all the shifts they can, to bodge up the insufficiency of their cause. But in a good matter there need no such practices. True it is (as I said before) that the points to be discussed betwixt our Brethren and us, be nothing of such weight as those are, wherein our Brethren and we do vary from the adversaries, in the main and principal standards of our faith, but are questions most what of discipline, and of the Church's government. Nevertheless, since that herein also, our Brethren have not only made a breach from us, but they have bred such further contention for them, as in which, a pacification is so requisite, that without it, we see what broils and dangers daily grow, to the disturbing of our own estate, to the advantage of the public adversary, to the hindrance and obloquy of the Gospel. It is necessary therefore, that (as God be praised) we have the truth in doctrine, and defend it well, not only by the authority of the Magistrate, but by the words own authority, ●●enly in writing by the Ministers thereof, set forth to all the world, against all the resisters of the same: so, having (as we trust) a good established form, of the regiment & discipline of our Church of England; if any either of our professed adversaries, or of our malcontented Brethren, shall withstand or write against it: we are all obliged (after the measure of each one's calling and ability) to maintain and defend it, and that not only against the breakers of it, by the Magistrate's execution of authority, but the Ministers no less in their vocation, when it is openly written against, are bound by their writing again (if the goodness of the matter be able so to justify itself) to lay open all the whole state thereof, by detecting and confuting all the paralogisms and fallations of the gaynesayers, and by defending it, even with the firmness of the grounds, and the own good nature of the cause: which manner of defence, being not destitute of lawful authority, to see it observed, not only represseth the resisters body, but satisfieth, or convinceth his mind, which is chief in these contentions to be respected. And although this also be true, that both our adversaries in the controversies of our religion, and our Brethren, in the questions of our regiment (for such matters as then were moved) have been by other of excellent learning, sufficiently answered already: yet must we be still as ready to answer, in defence of both these causes, as either of them are ready to oppugn them, seeing that (God be thanked) we maintain nothing in our doctrine, or in our regiment, whereof we can not render a sound reason, and sufficient proof, from the very foundation of God's word, to maintain it with a good conscience. Howbeit, sith that our Brethren cease not, but as they first began these controversies, so they hold not yet themselves contented, but Plus ultra, they proceed further, and to further matters, and as they rise higher, so more eagerly they press upon them; not only declaiming in the Pulpits, as they get any opportunity thereunto, and exclaim if they be put to silence, but also put up bills and supplications at every Parliament; compile and scatter abroad their printed treatises; insomuch, that in all degrees of men and women, noble, worshipfuls, ●●d of the vulgar sort, many begin to doubt of our established government, and to suppose some great and invincible validity to be in their assertions, if too many be not already carried away too far in thi● opinion, that the regiment and discipline which our Brethren desire, is suppressed only by mere authority, against the manifest prescription of God's word, against the clear examples of the Primitive Church, against the manifold testimonies of the unsuspected histories and ancient Fathers, against the sound interpretations, and approved practice of all or the best reformed Churches, and against reason itself, as they pretend: how much behoveth it us again, in all brotherly modesty, constantly to stand upon our guard in so just a defence? For although many godly, learned, and wise, have in searching found out the shallowness herein of all their grounds, yet is it requisite to lay them open to all other, that desire to be more thoroughly satisfied, yea, even to exenterate and rip up the very bowels of the whole cause, to examine their chief and principal arguments, to go to the authors themselves from whence they fetch them, to set them down at large, (lest any might complain they were mangled or inverted) and to do all this by the more diligent search and conference of the holy Scripture, by the better examining the state of the Primitive Church, by the particular perusing the authentic histories and testimonies of the ancient Fathers, by revising the states, and writing of the reformed Churches, and by weighing the poise and inference of their reasons; if happily by all, or by any of all these means, we shall see all, or any of the things that they cry so much upon, to be truly and substantially proved. Which thing, while here I have laboured to perform, though the volume have grown big, and the search may seem tedious unto some, yet the desirous reader's satisfaction may be part of his recompense, which I have chiefly intended in this answer. I know that some, too much dazzled by preoccupate affection, and wholly mancipated to their forestalled opinion, will be still picking byous quarrels, to reply upon one thing or another. But to him that is desirous indeed to bolt out the truth, to sound the matters to their depth, to level his aim, not to every incident, but to the head and state in question: such replies (as bubbles) will die as they rise, being of no regard, but serving only to feed and foade contentions, and foreseasoned humours: and such (I grant) it is in vain to answer, except they be too urgent, or prevail too much, or by silence and permission get too great credit. But when as here the persons with whom I deal, profess in the front and first title of their book, that this is, A brief and plain declaration, concerning the desires (not of such, or such an one, or of some few or many of them, but) of all those faithful Ministers that have and do seek for the discipline and reformation, of the Church of England: and say again, in their conclusion and last leaf of this Discourse, that if this form of reformation (which they have here set forth) may not now be received; yet the present age may see and judge, what is the uttermost of our desire concerning reformation, which hitherto for lack of such a public testimonial, hath been subject to infinite slanders, devised by the adversaries of God's truth, and hindrance of godly proceedings unto reformation: And for remedy hereof, they have now at length joined all their heads together; consulting and consenting upon this plotforme of the Church's government; which for greater estimation they recommend unto us, with this plausible title on the top of every leaf; A Learned Discourse of Ecclesiastical government: And that this is now set forth to this end, that the posterity may know, that the truth in this time was not generally unknown, nor untestified, concerning the regiment of the Church of God: thus courageously provoking us, to answer unto this Learned Discourse, if we be able so to do, or else to hold our peace for ever hereafter: who may not hereby see, that it is high time, either now, or never to speak for ourselves, and for our Church's defence; or else (as convicts) by silence to yield unto them? But now again, while we thus contend by inveighing against, and answering one another; some good men (I know) there are, that wish us both well, which are most of all afraid of this, that we shall lay our shame and nakedness open to all the world, and namely to the public and deadly adversaries of us both; who by occasion of these inferior matters of circumstance, wherein we agree not; diffame the higher matters of substance wherein we agree. And I confess with grief, so we do. But when this ariseth not by us, nor by us is grown so far; and yet between our Brethren and us, it is so far grown, that the adversary already, and all the world doth, or may see our dissent herein, although neither our Brethren, nor we had set it forth in writing: yet when our Brethren by writing also divulge it to the wide world, and still follow it with one treatise on the neck of an other: what booteth it any longer for that respect, to refrain from the public defending of our cause? Yea, how doth it not now stand us more upon, to publish our so necessary defence, that all men may better know and judge it, hearing both parts? So that we defend ours, and answer theirs, in such reverend fort, as the Apostle putteth us in mind; Let your modesty (or your patiented mind) be made known to all men. And when the world shall see us deal together thus: Phil. 4.5. they shall see, that although we must needs (as the son of sirach bids us) Strive for the truth unto the death, Eccl.. 4.28. and defend justice for thy life: yet still we are desirous (as the Apostle also willeth) If it be possible, so much as lieth in us, to have peace with all men. Rom. 12.18. And when the adversary shall see, how loath we are, and even haled to enter into this conflict against our Brethren; and with what reverence (for our parts) we strive with them, or rather, stand only at the bay of our defence, in the shielding of our Church's state and governance: And again, when they shall see, how that notwithstanding all these contentions for our regiment; we do yet (as I hope hitherto we do, and shall, the Lord be praised for it) continue in the union of all the groundwork and building of our faith, doctrine, and religion; which the adversaries among themselves (for all their cracks) do not: they shall or may the easilier perceive, (even in the matter and manner of our contentions) both the sincerity of our cause, and the temperature of our dealing. Which may (by the grace of God) turn to their bettering; or at least, (to their shame) they shall or may full well discern, how far our verbal contentions with our over zealous Brethr. differre from their verberall persecutions of them our over furious adversaries; and are indeed no sufficient cause, to confirm or stay them in their errors. Albeit (I grant) they do so, of the which I am the sorier, if it otherwise pleased God. And would to God, our Brethren with us, would better think hereon, that we might both of us being Brethren, once again brotherly join and combine ourselves together 〈◊〉 in the unity of ●●r doctrine, so in the uniformity of our discipline, against the professed adversaries of the Gospel and of us both, either to their conversion or confusion. And I doubt it nor, but that if our brethren shall yet now at length, enter with us into a more advised view, and circumspect examination of these matters: either they will remit their further contention; or debate them with more deliberate moderation, to the better stopping of the adversaries mouths, and to our own fuller resolution. Which sequel (if it please God) to effect, I have thus far hazarded, (in this just and necessary defence) to expose myself to the hartburning & hard speaking (God knows) of how many a one, whom in the Lord (these opinions herein set aside) I love and honour in all duty, and glad would I have been, that some other had employed their travails in this business, whereof many on our side (the Lord be praised for them) had been able to have discharged the same a great deal better. And I lingered the longer, expecting if any would prevent me: but when none did it, or did vouchsafe it, and I was drawn into the action, on the foresaid provocation; and was afterward of divers requested, not to withdraw myself from this occasion; considering withal, that I had before opposed myself against the public adversary, in the like argument of the Christian Princes supreme government in Ecclesiastical causes, which our brethren here also (though in another manner, but no less perilous) call again in question: that now I should likewise bear myself on even hand, yea, were it against mine own dear brethren in Christ, and her majesties loyal and loving subjects, though greatly over reached in the heat & preposterous earnestness of their pursuit herein. How levelly I have borne myself, without gall, or spleen, in affection, or style (my duty to God, to his truth, to his church, and to her majesty reserved) having my quarrel only to the matters, not to the persons: I refer me to the equity of the reader. My purpose (God he knoweth) is not wittingly, to give just offence to any of our brethren. Which if notwithstanding any shall take, for that I spare not to discover the defects of their arguments; for that I admonish them (albeit I trust, in spiritu lenitatis,) of their untempered speeches, aswell against our and their most gracious Sovereign, and all Christian Princes sovereignty, as against the authority and persons of our prelate's, and of us their fellow ministers in the Gospel, and against our ministery, and prescribed form of prayer and sacraments; or for that I observe more narrowly now and then, their absurdities and contradictions to themselves, and their dangerous positions to our state; or for that I send home again unto themselves, those foul-mouthed slanders, wherewith untruly they burden our church and us; or for that I descent from the judgement or interpretation of those famous late writers, whom our brethren stand so much upon; or for that I go to the pitch of the controversies, and so largely prosecute the chiefest of them: If our brethren shall think these things too hardly followed, their own importunity being the cause, and their full, at least their further satisfaction being my drift; I hope they will the easilier afford me their excuse. And I humbly beseech all our good meaning Brethr. that are otherwise persuaded herein than we are, to suspend their sentence but for the while, that they shall with indifferency, and without partiality, read and ponder these debatings to and fro, betwixt our brethren and us, and then a gods name, give their verdict, as God shall move them, having the fear of God before their eyes, and a right zeal of his truth and glory in their hearts, with ●n unfeigned love and reverence to his church. Which done, if I for my part have herein offended any, I heartily cry them mercy, and shall be ready (by the grace of God) on all ●ue warning and convincing to the uttermost of my skill, and power, to retract or amend 〈◊〉: and so I trust and crave of all our brethren, that they will not disdain to do the like. Not regarding the person of the defender, but the proves of the defence, whereby (God ●illing) we shall the sooner find, and the better conclude, the clear, true, and full deter●inations of all these questions. And to the intent (gentle reader) thou shouldest the readilier find out any of the ●ointes here in controversy, I have distributed all this answer to our brethren's learned discourse, into several books, prefixing their arguments to every of them, besides the titles of the pages, and the marginal quotations, which in stead of an Index may serve 〈◊〉 lead thee. And though directly it pertain not to me, yet I crave the Printers and 〈◊〉 own pardon, for a great number of petit, and some gross escapes in the impression, 〈◊〉 have fallen out the more, for the difficulty of my copy unto him, and by so often interchanging of the character, either in citing our brethren's words, or some other testimony, or the text itself of scripture, as Pag. 146. lin. 34.35. Pag. 227. lin. 6.7. where the letter of the text is not distinguished. Besides the Hebrew words for the most part, & some Greek, with wrong letters. And many words and sentences, which the composer nor corrector did well conceive, and have so passed, I being not always present at revising the proves. But the learned and discreet reader may discern them, of which escapes the chief and most are noted. The residue, I pray the reader vouchsafe to amend with his pen, sith I cannot do it with mine in all the copies. And so committing it to the good success that God shall send it, and to the gentle construction of all our learned and other good brethren in the Lord, and of every indifferent Christian reader, that is rightly desirous in the fear of God and love of his truth, for t●● benefit of his Church, and stay of himself, to fathom the bottom of these controversies, and wisheth the final pacification of them: Phil. 1.9, 10, 11. I conclude with the holy Apostles most godly prayer. Phil. 1. And this I pray, that your love may abound more & more in knowledge & in all judgement; that ye may discern things that differ one from another; that ye may be pure & without offence, until the day of Christ, being fulfilled with all the fruits of righteousness, which are by jesus Christ, unto the glory & praise of God. So be it. Blessed are the peace makers, for they shall be called the children of God. Math. 5.9. AA A DEFENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT ESTABLISHED IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND FOR ECCLESIASTICAL MATTERS. The Preface of the learned discourse unto the Christian Reader. THE holy Prophets having oftentimes, but searched, when and at what time, the foreseeing spirit of God declared unto them, the manifold afflictions and troubles of the Church to come, The Preface. have thereupon entered into great lamentations for the same: and have not only wept and fasted themselves, but have compiled for the Church, 1. Pet. 1.9.10 Lamen. 1.2.3 4. whole books of Lamentations: therein instructing them what way to take, for appeasing the wrath of God breaking out against them. joel. 2. The Defence, etc. IN this applying the great lamentations, weepings and fastings of the holy Prophets, Bridges. for the manifold afflictions and troubles of the Church to come, either in their days, or the time● succeeding, whereof they prophecies, 〈◊〉 the semblable manner of weeping, Our Brothers abusing of the spirit of God, and of the Prophet's lam●tations. ●asting & compiling like books of Lamentations, by the foreseeing Spirit of God, revealing unto these our brethren ●●e li●e manifold afflictions, now to in●●● upon the church for the like offences: our brethren here in 〈◊〉 both too much abuse the foreseeing spirit of God, and take too far upon them 〈◊〉 be such Prophets, and offer too great an injury to God's Church, 〈◊〉 time, (God be praised) here in England, both in threatening us 〈◊〉 like calamities, and in burdening us with the like causes: 〈◊〉 ●hey can show in themselves, the like warrant of the foreseeing 〈◊〉, and show also that we provoke the ●ierce wrath of God, in like offences. But what speak I of their abussingthus' the applicationof t●●se hol● Prophets, when they dare also abuse the Apostle S. Peter's words, and his application of those Prophets, and of the forseeing Spirit of God in them? Doth Peter apply it to any such manifold afflictions and troubles of the Church to come, S. Peter's Testimony wrested. to provoke any to enter into great lamentations for the same, to weep and fast, and to compile for the church, whole books of lamentations? and not rather in that place here quoted, cite only the Prophets foretelling of our salvation, and of the coming of Christ: and although withal of his sufferings, yet of his glory, etc. to confirm our faith in him? whose words are these, 1. Pet. 1.9 etc. Receiving the end (or reward) of your faith, even the salvation of your souls: of which salvation the Prophets have inquired and searched, which prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: searching when or what time the spirit which testified before of Christ which was in them, should declare the sufferings that should come unto Christ, and the glory that should follow: unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they should minister the things that are now showed unto you by them, which have preached unto you the Gospel by the holy Ghost, sent down from heaven, the which things the Angels desire to behold. What is here in this application of S. Peter, that is not clean contrary to that, whereto our brethren do apply it? This therefore is too foul a wresting of the Scripture, and that in the very first entry into the matter, to stumble upon such an untruth, or rather so to enforce it, to discourage the people, and to slander all the state of the Church thereby. The acknowledgement of our sins, and God's wrath. I note not this, that we on the other side should instifle ourselves, as though we were not sinners, or as though our sins were not manifold and grievous sins: or as though we wouldflatter any in their sins, or lay pillows under their arms, & lull them in the sleep of security, with singing unto them Peace, Peace: No, howsoever they burden us untruly with that point, we do (by the grace of God) as much acknowledge our manifold wickedness, The fault in ourselves, not in our Laws and Orders. and heavy provocation of God's wrath as do our brethren; though in other respects than they do. For, that which they impute to the laws & orders established in our Church, we see not any just cause, so to divert the fault from us, but rather to acknowledge in repentance, the disorders to be in ourselves, in not submitting ourselves (as we ought to do) in the duty of our obedience to the laws and orders. For when we consider the sincerity of our faith, whi●h God hath given us grace by his Gospel to profess; and behold the ●●●uelous light of his kingdom, into the which out of the power of darkness, The True Causes of our joy & mourning. and shadow of death, wherein we sat, he hath translated us: the vn●●ekeable joy and consolation of the spirit of God, that we receive hereby, doth recomfort and confirm us, against the fear of our sins, and terror of the wrath of God. But when again, we consider, how we walk not in this light that shineth to us, but profess to be the children of light, and commit the works of darkness: how our laws be good, and our lives be evil: this is a great touch unto our conscience, which rebating our joy, bringeth fear, lest the kingdom should be taken from us, and given to a nation that shall bring forth better fruits thereof. When we see how these three capital vices of the world, whereof S. john complaineth. The lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, & the pride of life. doth so mightily carry away the greatest part: this we cry out upon, 1 john. 2. and bewail. the event whereof indeed we fear, and give warning of it, as much (we hope) to our powers, as any of our brethren do: at least, we confess this is our duty, & offer to join with our brethren, in the earnest reprehension of these and all other vices, and in denouncing Gods righteous judgements, on all those that continue unrepentant in their sins: and we rejoice with them that rejoice, and mourn with them that thus do mourn: wishing to god herein, that they also would join with us. But their mourning is not for such grievances, nor their thretning for such vices. For we see many that are great favourites of their plotformes, both dwell & swell in these vices, and nothing by our brethren said unto them, yea, they are of them (to all appearance) not a little esteemed, as of whom they are most maintained and upholden. But our brethren's chiefest mourning, is a grudging & repining at their brethren preachers (as themselves are) & professors of the Gospel with them, The causes of our brethren's mourning. and the chiefest spiritual fathers in our Church, be they never so learned & godly: yet are they grieved at their superior dignity, better maintenance, and greater authority. Yea, they malign, and burden the laws, orders, and government itself, not the abuses only. Yea, they spare not the authority that is given to the Prince, their most gracious Sovereign but are offended therewith, that they cannot thereby, have the entry which they seek for, into those laws, orders, authority, offices and discipline which they would bring in, and whereof they have here prescribed a form unto us. All their chiefest mourning and lamentation is for this, if indeed they weep and mourn at all, and that every tear be not (as they say) as big as a millstone. For (God be praised) they are merry enough and in good liking, save that they put on a sour viso of mourning and terror. But since their grief, and all their threats of plagues and destructions, are not for our sins, or contempt of God's word, but for that we follow not their misconceaved form of reformation: we are the less to be moved with this tragical beginning, that they tell us here of their mourning and lamenting, as those that made their faces look sad and pale, or for that they would take upon them as Micheas, jeremy, joel, & the ancient Prophets to prognosticate great calamities and destructions, to come upon us, for that we admit not their forms of reformation. O, would God that we needed to mourn for no worse matter, & that we needed to fear nothing else but that. But let us lament and abhor in unfeigned repentance our manifold sins and amend our lives: and then recomforting ourselves in the truth of God, which we profess, and better esteeming and living after our laws, and order of governnment established: let us put our whole affiance in God, that for Christ's sake he will extend such mercies unto us, that he will not lay greater, tentation on us, than he will make a way for us to pass through the same: even to that consolation of the comforter, in the militant state of his Church in this present life: even that joy, that none shalb● able to take from us, till we attain to those joys that we hope for (though we cannot yet conceive them) that in his Church triumphant he hath for evermore prepared for us. Which duty in semblable manner should now long agone have been done of us, did not the hope we conceived in the midst of many tempests, Preface. confirm us in such expectation of her Majesty, and her most honourable Counsel, as that according to their clemency towards the poor ministers and their families, but most especially according to their holy and zealous care, which ought to abound, for the clean driving out of the Canaanites, and planting, hedging, pruning, and continual preserving of the Lords vineyard from foxes, yea little foxes: this civil war (as a man may say) of the Church, wherein so much of that blood (whereof S. Paul speaketh) is powered on the ground, should by their holy and just authority, fully be ended. See how quickly our brethren have wiped away their tears. they say this duty in semblable manner should have been done of them now long ago, Bridges. did not the hope that they had otherwise conceived, so turn their mourning from this semblable manner: and whereunto? to a dissemblable show of that, which indeed they did not, but made us afraid of? For, if they meant good sadness: what was the reason that they did it not, but made only a copy of their countenance to do it? Forsooth the hope that they had conceived, and such expectation of her Majesty, and her most honourable Council etc. Her M● & his most ho. counsel wrongfully challenged. See again, after they have not spared to wrest Gods holy Scriptures, how undutifully our brethren here also forget themselves, even almost in the beginning of their Preface, or ever they come to their learned discourse on these matters: to burden her Majesty, & her most honourable counsel, for frustrating their hope, and deceiving their expectation, and that they do not that which they ought to have done & should by this time, have fully ended. This is a sharp onset that is here laid unto their charges, for the breach of their duty. No marvel, though they spare not the laws nor the Bishops, nor the residue of their brethren: when they adventure at the first dash, so hardly to challenge both the Queens Ma. & all her most honourable Counsel, for not answering their hope & expectation (as they say) that by this time, yea long ago, they should and ought to have done. Yea, and whereas they say that they conceived this hope & expectation of them, in the midst of many tempests: how do they not also burden them (though with a little more biows) as though they had been the causes, or at least the sufferers of them to be tossed in the midst, and that of many tempests? But what tempests, and those many, have they been tossed with? God be praised, her majesties reign hath been the days of the Altions' sitting in the nest, most free from tempests, of all other parts of God's church: insomuch, that it hath ever been a refuge and haven, to harbour at anchor many other churches, Her Mayest. reign not tempestuous. that have indeed been tossed in the midst of many tempests: all which are strangers borne to us (save in the new birth and commonwealth of the Israel of God) and hath denied succour to none: and are now our own native people, yea, the poor Ministers, and faithful ministers too and their families also, denied this clemency; that they only should be tossed in the midst of many tempests? It is said, there is a lake in Ireland, in the which if a man cast but a stone it causeth tempests: and are these ministers of that nature? verily it is contrary to the nature of her Majesty, Her Maie●●. comfort to the ministry. whose clemency is known to all Churches, yea to all the world, and to her enemies: especially to all her loving and obedient subjects, chief to godly Ministers, be they rich or poor. And also her most honourable Counsel are most ready to help and comfort any such godly Ministers: and if any should offer any wrong, unto any the poorest of them, would (upon just complaint) quickly help the matter. They should not need to complain, that they also deceived them of their hope and expectation, which were a great blot unto their honours, if they should so do, or should willingly suffer any such wrongs to be done. And if this be not done of them, nor by them suffered to be done; what a great fault and unfaithfulness is this then, in these faithful ministers, so untruly to burden her Majesty, and her most honourable counsel, with so great a crime? If therefore any of our brethren, or any poor Minister have been tossed, in many or any tempests, in these calm days of her majesties peaceable, merciful, prosperous, and most godly reign: it is most likely, that there is some matter in themselves, that either they are not so faithful and godly, as they pretend, nor of so quiet disposition, or so obedient to her majesties laws, and to their superiors as they ought to be; or else, there is in them some such other matter, as whereby they have done, or do procure their own trouble. And (till we enter further into the examining of the cause) we may a while, rather suspect such matter in themselves, then to believe this their accusation of her Majesty, & her most honourable Counsel, to have been the causes, or permitters of their tempests, which they complain they have suffered: or that her Majesty, and her most honourable Counsel have not extended their clemency unto them, as they ought to have done, in not satisfying the hope and expectation of these Ministers. But beside, that thus (no less undutifully then untruly) our brethren do burden her Majesty and her most honourable Counsel: not so content, they charge them further, and in a higher matter, saying: But most especially according to their holy and zealous care, Her Mayest. & her most hon. counsels zeal & care, wrongfully burdened of our brethren for not driving out of the Cananits, etc. which ought to abound for the clean driving out of the Cananits, etc. No doubt her Majesties & her most honourable counsels care, is both zealous and holy: & because it is so, it hath (we trust) to their abilities abounded, in performing that they ought to have done herein: and even therefore, our brethren offer th● another injury. Yea, if the driving out of the Cananits, had been indeed their hope and expectation, it had been satisfied long a-go. What Cananits are there remaining, that should have been driven out; that in such sort● as they ought to do, and might have done, they have not done it? and who are these Cananits? Do they mean the Papists? but they are more aptly compared to the Idolatrous Israelits and jews, not to the Cananits, that were mere heathen. And although in some sense, they may be so compared, yet were not the Canaanites so utterly to be driven out; but that if anya would become in religion true Israelits, as Rahab and the Gibeonits', &c. they were permitted to abide, How far christians are charged with that commandment notwithstanding the express commandment given them to the contrary. Whereas Christians, have no such especial or general charge, to drive clean out all that have been Papists, or superstitious, or Idolatrous, or Heretics, or Insidels, if they were truly converted to the faith and religion of jesus Christ, or else, how ha● Christ translated his Church from the jews to the Gentiles? And so (God be praised for it) hath he converted in these last days infinite Papists to the Gospel. But if they mean those that remain Papists: I do not thinks that they can show, any such to be maintained in the Ministry. Although their words run at large, of the clean driving out of all Cananits or Papists out of the realm, of what state or condition soever they be: How much better is it (in my opinion) and more agreeable to the mercy of the Gospel, and to the clemency of her majesties most holy & zealous care, so to abound, Difference of the open & covert obstivare and weak papists. that her Majesty hath assayed to have woonn those Cananits to the Gospel, by letting them abide, & so drive out from them their Cananitisme, rather than to drive out all the Cananits, except they obstinately profess themselves to be Canaanites, & to drive out such, at least out of all authority and public Ministry, Ecclesiastical or civil, or to restrain or punish them otherwise, as they deserve. although dissembling Cananits can never sufficiently be clean driven out, Her Ma. & her most hon. counsels zeal & care in plan●ing, pruning and hedging of the L. vinyeard. that show such outward conformity to the Gospel, that they deceive her Majesty, her most honourable Counsel, & all other, save God only. Quis hominum scit quae sunt homini● nisi spiritus hominis qui in eo est. As for planting, hedging, pruning, & continual preserving of the Lords vineyard from foxes, yea little foxes: we trust also (as becometh us, and as we have found by the benefit thereof, good cause so to think) that her Majesties, and her most honourable counsels holy and zealous care, hath not a little abounded herein. And this, (before we shall enter into this learned discourse,) is a good hearing, that they acknowledge her Majesty ought to have, with her most honourable counsel a holy and zealous care, to abound in the planting, hedging, pruning, and continual preserving of the Lords vineyard, Our brothers restraining the authority of her Majesty. from foxes yea little foxes. For when we shall come to this learned discourse we shall there see, that our brethren so abridge & restrain this their authority here in, that they their selves have been a great occasion (if there have been any defect) that the Lords vineyard hath not been planted, hedged, pruned, & continually preserved, with so full effect, as her Majesties, and her most honourable Counsels holy care & zeal hath endeavoured to bring to pass. For under pretence of these Cananits and foxes great or little, our brethren mean not indeed, so much to challenge the Papists, as our Bishops and Prelates, to be the great foxes, and other the poor ministers of gods word, the little foxes: and in general, Whom our brethren mean by Cananits & Foxes. all those to be Cananits (Bee they never so zealous protestants) if they acknowledge the laws and orders of our Church of England by her Majesty established. And to show this, they mention not the open war with the common adversary, which is the Papist: but (say they) this civil war (as a man may say) of the church, wherein so much of that blood (whereof S. Paul speaketh) is powered to the ground, should by their holy and just authority fully be ended: The impediments of ending this civil war. And so (say I) it might have been ended long ago, had it not been more by the importunity of our brethren themselves, who, (as the old saying accordeth, the Fox the first finder,) have both made & continually renived this civil war, more than either the Bishops, or any of us, who have been and are conformable to the laws now established, or any negligence in the behalf of her Majesty, or of her most honourable Counsel, that they should be thus wrongfully burdened, to have been the nourishers as it were of this civil war, but have still employed all their holy and just authority to the full ending of it. And sith they give it rightly this term of civil war: (which is a great deal more dangerous war, than the foreign war with the open and common adversary) who hath raised this so dangerous civil war? We, The raisers of this civil war. that in all due obedience acknowledge the laws and orders established of the Church of England? Or they that have and do impugn them? and who hath contended against her Majesties, and her most honourable Counsels holy and just authority? we or they? yea indeed, they have not only not yielded to her majesties supreme authority herein: but they plainly deny the full ending and determining of this civil war, consisting in these controversies to appertain unto them, but only to themselves, as (God willing) we shall see, when we come (in this learned discourse) to the examining of the authority, that they give to the civil Christian Magistrates in these matters. Now, (say they) when as we at this time, The Preface. are subject almost unto all the afflictions, which can come unto a church, blessed of God with such a Christian and happy regiment: Nehem. 4.2.3.4. Nehem. 4.7. Neh. 6.5.6. Neh. 10.11.12. as to the profane scoffing of the H●monits at the building of the church, as at a wall which a fox should destroy: to the conspiracies of the Arabies and those of Asshod: to the false charges of sedition, contempt of all good laws and proceed, like to that of Sanballat: yea to the Prophets themselves, undermining, nay reviling, displacing, and grievously afflicting the godly and learned Ministry, and so consequently plaguing the Church with that plague whereby the Priests may mourn, joel. 19 Amos. 8.11.12.13. because there is no offering, and the people perish, even the young men with the famine of hearing the word of God preached: when (I say) we are subject to all these, we can think of no way for reconciling the brethren at variance, and after a most sure and holy union of both their forces, for a courageous setting upon the common adversary, than the certain, peaceable, and reasonable way following. Bridges Here our brethren declare who they are, whom before they calle● Cananits and Foxes: not the common adversary, but the brethren at variance. Whom our brethren call Cananits &, foxes. So that either they mean us, or it must light on themselves: & if now they vouchsafe us the name of brethren: how unbrotherlike have they dealt with us, to revile us by these vile terms, Cananits & foxes. As though we were beastly or heathen men, and not men and brethren as they are. How these terms redound on themselves. But if we be their brethren, though at variance, and yet foxes and Canaanites: what? and are they also of the same brood or brotherhood▪ But such is the eagerness of their zeal, that in their heart, they regards not what foul terms they afford us, howsoever they rebound: and so, expose themselves and us their brethren, to be hissed and derided at, of the common adversary to us both, and not to be feared of him. But they have here devised a way which they call a certain, peaceable, The peaceable and reasonable way that our brethren devise of reconcilement. and reasonable way following, so to reconcile us being brethren at variance, that after a most sure and holy union of both our forces, w● might give a courageous onset upon the common adversary. This way were worth the hearing, and if it be such a way indeed, God forbidden, but that we also (as becometh brethren) forgiving their so late reproaches, should so much as lieth in us, accept this offer. But see, how peaceably and reasonably they begin the very mention of this way. First, they complain again, that at this time, they are subject almost unto all the afflictions, which can come unto a Church, blessed of God with such a Christian and happy regiment. I confess, it may be, that in a church of God, and in a Church also blessed of God, The regiment cannot be christian and happy wheral the godly learned and faithful ministers s●ffer affliction. Our brethren grant the church of Eng. regiment to be christian & happy. Our brethr● causers of their own● afflictions. and that with a happy and Christian regiment, some few particular persons, upon some accidents by occasion, may be subject to some afflictions. But if those afflictions should be general to all that were the godly, learned and faithful ministers of the Church, and that also even directly for the same Church's christian and happy regiment: how could that church be truly said to be, a church blessed of God with a christian and happy regiment. But since they grant (and I hope they think as they speak, and dissemble not) that our Church of England is blessed of God with such a Christian and happy regiment, not meaning a mean degree of the Christianity and happiness thereof: it therefore followeth and that of good consequency, if our brethren be at this time subject to afflictions and that, all (as they pretend) for the Church's regiment: that they are not so godly, learned, and faithful ministers, as, would to God they were. Yea, they plainly bewray, in that they impugn the same regiment of the Church of God, which both God blesseth (as they cannot here deny, and confess to be such a christian and happy regiment) that unchristianly, and also unhappily they resist the same, and are themselves the causers of their own afflictions. And since they can grant thus much: God grant they would better advise themselves, and yield unto this so happy and Christian regiment of the Church so blessed of God, lest they strive too far against God's blessings, and against their own consciences and confession. Whereas, if they would yield, which have begun this unhappy civil war amongst us: they might not only be partakers of this blessing of God, & christian happy regiment: but it should yet be more happy and Christianlike, and both they and we also, more blessed of God. For then indeed, we that are brethren at variance, should be so reconciled, that after a most sure and holy union of both our forces, we should courageously set upon the common adversary, which now (we being at this variance) uniteth all his forces to set upon us. But, what be the afflictions that our brethren complain they are subject unto, yea, The afflictions whereof our brethren complain. almost unto all the afflictions that can come unto a church blessed of God with such a Christian and happy regiment: As to the profane scoffing of the Hammonits', as at a wall which a fox should destroy: to the conspiracies of the Arabies, & those of As●hod: to the false charges of sedition, contempt of all good laws and proceed, like to that of Sanballat: yea to the Prophets themselves, undermining, nay reviling, displacing, and grievously afflicting the godly & learned ministry, and so consequently, plaguing the church, etc. Is this our brothers certain, peaceable, and reasonable way to reconcile brethren at variance, and can they think of no way else, then thus at the first dash, to call their brethren scoffing Hammonits', conspiring Arabies, and those of Asshod: givers of false charges like that of Sanballat: and to liken them to the false Prophets, and to the plaguers of the church of God? This (me thinketh) is but a sorry way, to reconcile brethren at variance. If, not rather, such a heap of so spiteful reproaches, as here they cast on us, were the readiest way (if we were never so much united) to separate us, and to inflamed the civil war between us: especially being so untrue, and so heinous slanders as these are. For, what worse can they say on the very Papists, which (they say) are both their and our common adversaries? and what other were these Hammonits' & Arabies for all their dissembling, etc. ●. And i● we be such, how are we brethren? were these brethren to the jews? or would they reconcile themselves unto them, as our brethren héer● say, they are now devising a peaceable & reasonable way, that we might unite our forces? with what conscience can they do or go about this, if w● were such? & if we be not such, with what consciences can they burden us, with so false and grievous slanders? Our Brothers unbrotherly slanders or make they it no matter of conscience, so they may win credit and pity, with the common people, they car● not by what shameful infamies so ever, so that they make us odious? This dealing is not brotherlike, nor the way to reconcile brethren at variance. God be merciful to us both, & lay not this unto our brothers charges. Can they not proceed on the matter, if they have aught against us, with out such villainous reproaches? if we should reply in such foul-mouthed language, what a hearing were this? indeed we tell them plainly that they build not well: Our brothers and our building. but both hinder and overthrow their brethren's building: yea, they contrary and hinder their own building. And most fain● would we have them leave this strange manner of building: but not utterly to leave all manner of building: but to join with us whom they confess to be their brethren, & that we build on the rock also, and for all material parts and substance of the building, they say, they agree with us. And we builded, and builded well, before they began, or were able to lay a stone, or temper mortar to this building. Thus did not any of these Hammonits', Arabies, or those of Asshod, or Sanballat: who being no ●rethren minded not the the building should go forward at all, but clean to overthrow it, Our brothers nearer imitation of those Hammonits', &c. for all that they pretended building with them. And if we might liken any aliens from the common weal of Israel, to these our brethren in this doing: Do not they themselves play the like parts? For whereas we (before they came in and troubled us) were building of the Church, as well as we could, they mock at our building, as at a wall, that a fox could destroy. Yea, and I would wish our brethren take good heed, that they may not be justly charged with some spice of sedition (for they may rightly be challenged for contempt of good laws and proceedings) though we burden them not like to that (accusation) of Sanballat. For he burdened the jews wrongfully, and as the jews were free (in building the temple) from those accusations, wherewith he falsely charged them, of sedition, and contempt of good laws, because they had sufficient authority of the Prince so to do: in like manner have we the Prince's establishment, Who are liker to under miners, for this our manner of building, which our brethren impugn. And therefore they ought to think better hereof: lest they be justly charged with that, wherewith the jews were falsely burdened Whether we or our brethren imitate those false Prophets, that discouraged the Prince Nehemias' from proceeding in his former and lawful building of the temple: we are sorry that our brethren should rip it up, they draw so near that evil practice. Undermining we use not, neither (God be praised) need we use it: we go simply and plainly to work. Undermining is more proper to them, that when the walls are builded, would cast them down again: as our brethren by all policies endeavour, to overturn all the regiment that we have builded. As for theirs which they have not builded, and are but yet laying the plotforme of it, we may well stop it, but properly, we cannot be said to undermine it. Reviling is not our practice, Reuylinge. would God our brethren used it no more than we do: reconcilement might be made much the sooner. But (Leonem ex unguibus) this very Preface doth foretell, what we shall expect in the Learned discourse, Some of them indeed have been displaced, but by their own demerits and importunity, The displacinge of our brethren. and with grief to those that have been driven to displace them: neither can it be otherwise, except we should yield unto them in the matter, and authorize them against ourselves. Their grievous afflicting we have already answered. They are displaced with as much forbearance, lenity, and as much labouring to win them, as may be. Other affliction (except upon great occasions given further by themselves) they suffer none. Neither do we deny some among them (although not many) to be learned: Our Brothers Learning & godliness. yea (in some respects) some among them to be godly also. Yet neither their learning (at leastwise, that they have here showed) is answerable to their vaunt of A learned discourse. But their godliness (by their leave) in this dealing may be much amended. If our brethren be so godly & learned a ministry: where learned they this point of godliness, not only to wrest all these examples (contrary to their consciences, and the apparent places) against us their brethren: & to revile us as these enemies of the church of God: but to hale against us these testimonies also of the Prophets, The priests mourning. that we afflict and plague the Church with that plague whereby the Priests may mourn? What? and would they so feign bring us in the compass of such plaguers, that they will now acknowledge themselves to be included in the name of Priests? which name (although néedlesly) they shun so much, as though it signified a sacrificer. But indeed, if any make the Priests and ministers of the church to ●ourne, these doings of our brethren are no small cause thereof: and if ●hey impute the cause of the mourning, to the lack of the people's offering: who go more about to decrease that little, which is employed to the ●riests and Ministers maintenance, than our brethren do? Although (God ●e praised for it) we have not yet been subject to that dreadful spiritual fa●ine, which the Prophet threatened, Amos, 8.11.12. & 13. The famine prophesied of: Amos. 8 11.12. & 13 Behold the days ●ome (saith the Lord God) that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of ●read, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the word of the Lord. And th●y shall wander from sea to sea, and from the North even to the East, shall they run to & fro, to seek the word of the Lord, and sh●ll not find it. In that day s●all the far virgins, and the young men perish for thirst. This was a fearful threat indeed, How we are rather glutted then famished with G●ds word. from the which GOD most graciously hath preserved us, and hath given us such abundant measure of this spiritual food of his holy word, that I am afraid, we are rather glutted, and become so wanton and disdainful, that if we cannot have it delivered unto us, in such manner as our own lusts desire it, and at these and those persons hands only: (which is a sign of no great Famine) that we may rather fear, least for this unthankfulness, and all our other abuses of this food, it sha●l be taken clean from us. And if we have had any scarcity in some places, by any person's default: Our brothers contentions make the word the searser. Let our brethren also take heed here-unto, that they have not much more augmented the cause, by these unnecessary contentions, both driving away others, and making many to suspect the food itself: and by withdrawing themselves (through their contempt of the Laws established) from delivering this food unto the people. But we are rather contented, to repel these apparent slanders from ourselves, than to exasperate our Brethren, by laying the same before their own faces, to see how here they blemish themselves, in seeking thus to deface and discredit us. But since they say they do this, for the reconciling of us being Brethren at variance, let us construe it to the best. Better are the wounds of a friend, than the kisses of a flatterer. God grant that those means which they have here devised, or any other, may prove indeed such a certain peaceable and reasonable way following, that we may leave this striving with ourselves, and unite our forces, for a courageous setting upon the common adversary. Which is, that whereas both by books already written, and by treatises lately and now published, Preface. it may appear we seek that which at the least in the judgement of all true Christians, The way that our brethren se●ke of reconcilement hath no small probability (as we judge, necessity) of truth out of the Scriptures: it may please her most excellent Majesty and their honours to appoint on both sides, the best learned, most godly and moderate men to debate all differences of weight between them and us. So that first upon sufficient consideration, the Questions to be debated be without all ambiguity set down, the reasons of both sides without all outgoings, shortly and plainly delivered in writing each to other, that after upon sufficient examination, the reasons of both be continually confirmed and resolved, till either by the evidence of truth one party yield unto the other: or the folly and madness of those which gainsay it, do in equal judgement become manifest, in regard of the contradictions and absurdities whereto they shall be driven, by the force of God's word. It may appear (we grant) that our brethren have both already writ●en books, & now lately published treatises: but with what authority they could so do, that is another question, The inconvenience of publishing books without authority. if it be lawful authority to do it, both against law and authority, we may shortly have other, upon like ensample, set out worse matters, yea, never so ill doctrine, or matters never so much against the state. For although they pretend their books and treatises to be never so good: yet ought they not to be published, but by good means also: lest, if the good means be neglected, ill things in like manner may be published. But by what ill means soever they set out their books and treatises: yet for the matter of them, it may (say they) appear, we seek that, which at the least in the judgement of all true Christians, hath no small probability (as we judge necessity) of truth out of the Scriptures. Fancy might make a man bowlt bran, and think it is flower. And even so do our brethren imagine in this necessity. But when we shall come to the examining of these books and treatises, The things that our brethren seek for have no necessity of truth out of the Scriptures. yea even of this their learned discourse, compiled in the name of all the faithful ministers, and of all their desires, and of all that (they say) they seek for: we shall find necessity of truth out of the Scriptures, in no one thing of all their positions in controversy, except they understand it so out of the Scriptures, that is to say, clean without all scriptures, or any necessary consequence of scriptures. And although probability ought not to carry away the matter, yet upon better survey thereof, we shall find not so much as any good probability, that is grounded on the Scriptures, but only on the mere interpretations and sayings of some the chiefest persons in estimation on their side: if at the least they agree with them, and are not carried away by their own fancies, as in the perusing of this learned discourse shall (God willing) appear. In the mean season, see here how peremptory our brethren are in their own judgement. That which they seek for, is of no probability, but (as we judge necessity) say they, & yet they confess, that in the judgement of all true Christians, it is but of probability, (though say they,) it hath no small probability. So that they grant at the least hereby, that many, if not all, true Christians judge, that, that which they seek for hath no necessity of truth out of the Scriptures, but hold themselves contented only with probability. For be it small or not small, it is but probability of truth out of the Scriptures, that they ground themselves upon: & yet think this hindereth not, but that they still be all true Christians. So that ●hey count them no true Christians, No good probability of truth out of the scriptures. in whose judgement the things that our brethren seek for, have not (at the least) great probability of truth out of the Scriptures. But if they can allow them to be all true Christians, in whose judgement these things stand but on the uncertainty of probability: I trust we shall not lose our Christendom ever a whit the more ●or this, but be true Christians, (yea, their selves have granted us even in ●his Preface, that we are their brethren, and that we agree in the substance of religion with them: and therefore of necessity if they be true Christians we be true Christians also) and yet we openly and constantly enough, that the most and greatest of the things that they seek for, have not at the least any probability of truth out of the Scriptures in our judgements: yea, in my judgement, not one of them all any good probability, but, we all confess they have no necessity. This therefore was too unadvisedly and too peremptorily spoken, and upon too great a confidence in their cause, as to hazard the truth of our Christianity, for not judging these things to be at least probable. But let the necessity or probability be tried, in the debating and weighing of them: let us now see how they would have them debated and weighed. It may please (say they) her most excellent Majesty and their honours, to appoint on both sides the best learned, Preface. most godly and moderate men to debate all differences of weight between them and us. This is a good beginning, that they will yield to her most excellent Majesty and their honours, Bridges yet at the least thus much, if they would stand to this: How far forth they yield authority to her Majesty. but when it shall come to the debating, weighing, or determining: they give her Majesty and their honours no authority at al. Yea, they have their selves already debated, weighed, judged, determined, and prescribed these things, and that, for necessity, in their judgements, before they come to this conference, as shall also appear by these their learned discourses: and is it likely they will yield, and revoke this their principles, set forth in print, and divulged to all the world, by our reasoning afterward with them, howsoever by reasoning we should evict them? Had it not been better, not to have vaunted thus before hand on such necessity and prescription? But they say, The best learned, most godly and moderate men on both sides should be appointed, to debate all differences of weight between them and us. For their parts they so glory both of their learning and godliness, The learning, godliness & moderation of the debaters that they give this book two titles: in the one, for godliness and moderateness: A declaration of the desires of the faithful ministers: (not prescribing, but moderately desiring): in the other, for their learning: A learned discourse of Ecclesiastical government. Thus have they set forth themselves for these virtues. But (thanks be to God) that they grant yet some of our side, to be also both learned, godly and moderate men. What the learning is of many (God be praised) on our side, let the learned judge. Moderation is more easily discerned: as the Apostle saith, Phil. 4.5. Let your moderate (or patiented) mind be known to all men. But since our brethren grant they can be godly to, and yet dissent from all these things that our brethren seek for: it argueth, that they are not of such necessity, but that men may be learned, moderate and godly to, though not only they have not these things that our Brethren seek for, but that also they be of a contrary opinion. And if this may be so among the learned: I see not why it may not be so likewise among the unlearned, and so among us all in general. Our learning, our modesty, our godliness, is no whit prejudiced, by the want or refusal of these things that our brethren seek for. And if it be no prejudice to these three virtues: no more is it prejudice to any other, and so, these things that our brethren seek for may be altogether as well spared as received, nor have any necessity at all in them. But now, since they on their side (which likewise we deny not in them, If the debaters should be moderate men, than should our brethren use more moderation in their terms & not be so peremptory in their dealing. but so far forth congratulate the same unto them) shall have both learned, godly and moderate men also: yet would we gladly understand this, whether this shallbe counted a piece of their moderation, to use such broad language as hath passed already, even in the giving this advice? nay would God it might cease here. but all this learned discourse is pestered with such, and with more immoderate speeches, against the poor ministers, against all the Bishops, and against all us their brethren: yea, against the Prince, and all the whole state of the Church. Me thinketh if we should have moderate men on their side also, that we might make good exception against all these, that call themselves here, all the faithful ministers, as not moderate men. But upon hope of their better moderation, on this moderate admonition, our request unto them is: that at leastwise for the time of this debating, they would lay aside all this so peremptory urging of necessity, with all these and such other undecent terms, and violent demeanour in this conference. Well now, when her Majesty and their honours, shall have agreed upon the men, how shall they proceed in handling the matter? So that, first (say they) upon sufficient consideration, the questions to be debated, be without all ambiguity set down. This first point (so far as it stretcheth) is right good reason, and we hold well with it, that the questions, to be debated, should be set down upon sufficient consideration had of them: and then, The debating of the questions & the allowing of them being sufficiently considered to be matters requisite to be debated upon, to be set down without all ambiguity. But hereupon ariseth another question, and (me thinketh) no less to be also sufficiently considered, who shall have this sufficient consideration of the questions that are to be set down, whether they be fit questions, or no? And who shall cut off all ambiguities, that the questions may be clear and plain? What, shall any of the parties themselves? or both the parties that must debate and dispute upon them? Or shall her Majesty and their honours that appointed the parties, appoint the Questions? Or some other learned, godly and moderate men (but also appointed by them) to be the moderators of the disputation between them? If now such moderators shallbe agreed upon also, to allow of the questions that shallbe set down: how shall they begin to proceed in reasoning? The reasons (say they) of both sides without all out-goeings shortly and plainly delivered in writing each to other. The manner of the debating. What? And shall they do it then all by writing? Indeed that is a sure way: for by that means, there shall be less escapes of the party reasoning, and less evasions from his adversary, and less moving the affections of the hearers, with the action of the person, when the reasons are delivered in writing. And the other party so receiving the arguments, shall again with more advisement, and less perturbing, peruse and weigh the force of the reasons, and more shortly and plainly without all outgoings, grant, deny, or distinguish the same. And they again receiving this answer in writing, which the party avoweth to stand unto, may better perceive what they have to confirm or to impugn, and still on both sides (with the less explication of their senses by mouth) go more roundly and resolutely to the argument itself, setting aside all circumstances: till at length the one side be driven to a demur or issue, that all that argument must rely upon, and look for the final sentence and determination of the matter. But what shall we here do? Who shall now determine that issue between them? Shall the foresaid moderators, or any other judges? For their speeches seem to allow none: But that the disputers among themselves, it all determine all the matter, or without any determinations, take it for a clear case, as though it were determined. Who shallbe the determiner. For, say they, That after, upon sufficient examination, the reasons of both be continually confirmed and resolved, till either by the evidence of truth, one part yield unto the other: or the folly and madness of those which gainesai it, do in equal judgement become manifest, in regard of the contradictions and absurdities, whereto they shall be driven by the force of God's word. And might we conceive any assured hope, that if our brethren were by this means convicted, that then they would yield? Or if they or we, had any such madness or folly not to yield, but still to gainsay the evidence of truth, and incur contradictions and absurdities, whereunto they or we should be driven by force of God's word: should none between them and us, have this equal judgement, to make this become manifest? This therefore, were to leave the matter still undetermined, except there were also some appointed, to be in equal judgement, between the parties, the determiners of the matter. As for our parts, we never refused, or (by God's grace) shall refuse any way, that her Majesty and their honours shall think meet, whereby our brethren might be satisfied. But we shall see in this learned discourse, how their selves (except they also be the only determiners of the questions between us, reaching even to the highest point of the Prince's authority) utterly reject both this, and all other ways, for the final determination of them. But now, supposing all will fall out well on their side, they proceed saying. Which way, though it should come naked unto us, cannot well be refused, but being richly attired with all robes and ornaments, Preface. which the scripture giveth unto the synodical assemblies, for such conferences: as namely, that there be much searching of the truth by sufficient reasoning without all by matters, quarrels, evasions, and colours whatsoever: that there be much order, Act. 15.7. when the spirit of every prophet shall be subject unto the spirits of other prophets, and the judgement of all shall be sufficiently heard, 1. Cor. 14.13 32. without stopping of free and sufficient answer, without lordly carrying away of the matter, with no substance of reason; where no authority, pregnancy of wit, plausible persuasion of man's wisdom, shall turn the truth aside, 1. ●or. 2.4. but all shall stand in the evident demonstration of God's spirit. The way which they have before set down, Bridges. although it be not able nor likely, without some moderators and determiners, appointed by her Majesty and their honours, to effect a perfect reconciliation and sure union: yet the matters in controversy, being so in writing on both sides debated, cannot well be said to come naked, in respect of the robes and ornaments of the scripture: The naked trial of the matter. sith the grounds of all their proves, should be taken either out of the express testimonies of the scripture; or out of necessary consequence of the scripture. Except perhaps they mean, by being richly attired with all robes and ornaments, which the scripture giveth unto the synodical assemblies for such conferences, their own interpretations, and rhetorical exornations of the scripture. But, let the scriptures (as they say) be searched out for the true understanding of them, with as much reasoning as shall be thought necessary and sufficient, without all by matters, quarrels, evasions, and colours whatsoever, and so, a God's name, naked or adorned; let the matter be further tried when it shall. But what mean they here, that they add yet further: Our brethren's desire to confer by way of prophesying. That there be much order, when the spirit of every prophet shallbe subject unto the spirits of the other prophets? Would they reduce this synodical conference to the order of prophesying, which they began of late, in the imitation of that order, which S. Paul mentioneth, 1. Cor. 14? For that was not a strict and logical reasoning, nor a delivery of their assertions and answers by writing: but a discoursing at large by mouth: nor so properly any disputing, one against another, as an interpreting, one after an other, or exhorting, instructing, and comforting one another, as the spirit (which at that time wrought miraculously in them) gave them utterance: is this then that conference which our brethren desire? Because they say, they would not be stopped of free and sufficient answer. This is nothing agreeable to the way, whereof they said before, they could think of no way but that, which should be, When the reasons on both sides, without all outgoings, are shortly and plainly delivered in writing each to other. And here contrariwise, they would have the judgement of all sufficiently heard, and the spirit of every Prophet, to be subject to the spirits of the other prophets, and that all shall stand in the evident demonstration of God's spirit. So that under pretence of the demonstration or revelation of God's spirit (as though yet those miraculous revelations and demonstrations of the spirit of God were still, and in these matters, to be expected, and not the manifest eviction of God's word) if once they said that we on our side had not the spirit of God, but only they: either we must yield to them, or else nothing shallbe determined between us. But if the matter shall come to the judgement of the other prophets (supposing all to be prophets in the synod or company, appointed for the conference:) our brethren might perhaps be deceived of their hoped success, without any lordly carrying away of the matter. Neither is it meet (we grant) that the matter should be stopped, without such free and sufficient answer, as is requisite for such a disputation: Lordly carrying away the matter. or with lordly carrying away of the matter with no substance of reason: or by authority, or pregnancy of wit, or plausible persuasion of man's wisdom to turn the truth aside. These speeches are but byowse slanders, glaunsing at the Bishops, and at the synodal assemblies in the convocation house, as though they out-countenanced the matter with such shifts: which is neither charitably nor truly spoken by our brethren. But, who come nearest to these practices, we shall see afterward (God willing) when we come to the treatise of Synods in this learned discourse. Preface. Lastly (say they) that there be peace without all bitterness, revilings, suspicions, charging of men dead and alive: whereby affections are moved, 1. Cor. 14.33 judgement blinded, and men driven as with a mighty stream from the love of the truth. When it cometh thus adorned, we think, that which we labour to procure, Act. 14.16. to be so honourable not only before God, but also before men, that none can judge otherwise of it than we do. Bridge's Turpe est doctori cûm culpa redarguit ipsum. Would God our brethren their selves would leave off these practices, which here they would have to be lest off. Bitterness to be left off. What is more bitter, or bitterness itself, then are the speeches, which even in their entry into this means of reconciliation, they have here used? And all this learned discourse is still besprinkled with this bitterness, with revilings, with suspicions, and with chargings of men both dead and alive. For not only our Bishops, and we that (God be praised) are alive, Charging of men dead and alive. be charged by our brethren: but the charge burdeneth no less all those Bishops and ministers, that first concluded upon the Eccles. Laws now in force. Yea, it includeth the Princes of so godly memory, that with their clergy, and the whole state of the Church and Realm, established the same. But perhaps our brethren here do mean, that we use to defend these Laws with this argument, Moving affections. that such and such most excellent men allowed of them: and of all things they love not to hear of this argument: whereby (they say) affections are moved, judgement blinded, and men driven as with a mighty stream from the love of the truth. Indeed in a false matter it may so do, and hath done much among the papists: and by our brethren's leave, they also are carried too much away with chargings of men dead and alive, and with too much forestabled opinions of such and such men, as to say, calvin being dead, The alleging of the late and ancient writers Beza or Daneus being alive, were of this or that opinion in these things. And therefore, I have also laboured some what the more, to lay before the reader (among all other) especially their opinions: that the reader may better weigh their proves, and see how far they agree or disagree about things. And the like we all do with Swinglius, Peter Martyr, Bullinger, Musculus, etc. With Cranmer, Ridley, Latimer, Hooper, jewel, etc. being dead: besides Gualther, Zanchius, & others being alive. Not to use the opinions or sentences of these most famous men, to carry away the affections and blind the judgements of men, to be driven as with a mighty stream from the love of the truth: God forbidden. Amicus Plato, amicus Socrates: magis amica veritas. But to confirm men better in the truth, as we also allege the holy ancient fathers, Ireneus, Tertullian, Cyprian, Clemens, Alexandrinus, Origene, Eusebius, Epiphanius, basil, Theodoret, chrysostom, Jerome, Ambrose, Augustine, etc. As witnesses only to the truth in doubtful matters, and to hear their judgements and consents in these questions, what was the use or opinion of them in their days. And this do our Brethren themselves, and give us occasion to search these father's better. And this was used to be done, not only in the several treatises of the Fathers, according to the council of Vincentius Lyrinensis, and as Theodoret useth in his dialogues, etc. but also in all the best and most famous Synodical assemblies, and disputations, holden in the ancient counsels, to cite the testimonies of the godly fathers deceased, and of the most famous father's consents that were then living, for their interpretations and judgements of their controversies. Neither ought our Brethren to shun this manner of charging them with men dead or alive. For it is a good (not adorning only of the truth) but finding out of the truth, lightning of the judgement, and moving men's affections, driving them as with a mighty stream to the love of the truth: and when the truth cometh indeed thus adorned, we think that which we also labour to confirm and defend, as they labour to procure the contrary, that none (we do not say) can judge, otherwise than we do▪ but that, they which do judge otherwise then we do in these matters, may have sufficient cause to judge as we do, and to think them to be honourable, not only before men, but before God also. Now, when our Brethren have set down all their devise, how they would have these controversies to be debated: then they enter into the answer of the objections, which they suppose will be objected against them, and say: For if any shall object that the grave authority of Archbishops and Bishops shall receive a check, Preface. whilst they are brought to deal with those whom they judge few, young, unlearned, and not comparable to themselves: or that it is a challenge not much unlike the papists: or lastly, that it shall be prejudicial to the estate of government established: Bridges In good time our Brethren remember among other these three objections. Neither are they of small moment, being rightly set down (as indeed they may be more pithily objected) and require every one of them a sound and sufficient answer. Our brothers presupposal of our objections. It is no small matter, if any shall object but this first and lightest objection of these three: that the grave Authority of Archb. and Bishops, shall receive a check, whilst they are brought to deal with those, The 1. objection of comparison between the Archb. B. & our brethren. whom they judge few, young, unlearned, and not comparable to themselves. Albeit I think, that neither our Archbyshops nor Bishops do judge of these our brethren, that they be so few (as it were better they were) but rather too many; at the least, far more in number than our Archbishops, or all our Bishops are: neither do they judge them to be so young (although many of them indeed be very young, Comparison of age and youth. both in years, in judgement, and in experience of these matters,) but that the ancienter sort of them, might for their age and time have had leisure enough, to have sought out the state and ground of these questions long ago; save that they are too much fore grounded in their own opinions. But in these matters, their youth or age is not called into question. Neither do our Archbishops or Bishops esteem our brethren, at least, many of them, for unlearned: but rather wish that they would not think and vaunt too much of their learning, Comparison of learning. and if they would follow the Apostles counsel, sapere ad sobrietatem: it would better become them. That (when all is done) is the best learning, which findeth out, and submitteth it unto the truth. Neither do the Archbishops and Bishops (as I suppose) judge, that our brethren are not comparable to themselves. Although our brethren may remember, there be three degrees of comparison, Comparison of authority and it might well enough beseem our brethren, so to compare with the Archb. and Bishops, that they would not forget their own callings, nor the dignities of the Archb. and Bishops, which they call here their grave authority: Howbeit, they give that ten, but in a light mockage to them, when as indeed they acknowledge the Archb. or B. not to have any authority at all, but labour by all means, besides their scoff, to be in all respects, (specially of authority) so comparable to them: that they would not only give them a check, as their equals: but as their superiors, even check mate, utterly to foil and overthrow them. Which if they can do, by all their learning, and in such manner as is requisite for the matter: let them not spare it, a God's blessing. And if our Archb. and Bishops, or any other of our party, that otherwise are as ready as any of our brethren, to give account of their hope and faith to any orderly ask the same, shall be by her most excellent Majesty, and by her most honourable Counsel, brought to deal with any of all these our brethren: I dare adventure, that they will not disdain by any lawful and godly means, that can be devised, to deal with them: if our brethren for their part would oblige themselves to stand thereto. As for the second objection, it is of greater moment: The 2. objection of our brothers challenge, to be not unlike the papists challenge. that this our brothers challenge, is not much unlike to the challenge of the Papists. And can our brethren also foresee this, that any may object this unto them, that they make like challenge to our Bishops, as do the Papists? And are they neither afraid, nor ashamed of it, to draw so near the challenge of the common adversary, against their brethren and fathers in God's church? And yet the third objection is the greatest: The 3. objection of prejudice to the estate of government established. that it shallbe prejudicial to the estate of government established: which if it be: see what a hazard they put, not so much the Archbishops and Bishops, and many other persons unto, besides the laws and orders ecclesiastical: as the whole estate of the Church and realm of England, and of all the governors, as well as of the government, and so withal, of all the civil and politic laws established, yea, of her Majesties own estate, government, and sacred person, to be endangered. Which objection how they can sufficiently answer unto: is an answer indeed worth the hearing. For, if now they cannot sufficiently answer these objections, which here their selves beforehand presuppose, will be, or may be objected against them: it had been better for them to have suppressed these objections. Which will be a sore blank to all their learned discourse following, in the judgement of the prudent and godly reader. Let us now therefore see their answer, to the objections. And first in general to them all three they say: It may please their wisdoms, who are to be judges, to consider what we have to answer unto these things: which, if they have the truth of God's word, contain the safest and best way in such cases, & tend to the full quieting of all, and the removing of the plagues which are upon us, and are likely daily further to come, even from the common adversary: we may boldly, yet most humbly upon our knees, require them before God and all his elect Angels, not to cast it away. Bridges What a strange and sleeveless answer have we here, to so direct and important objections? Our brethren's answer to these three objections. I refer it to the judgement, of whosoever shall be judges of this their answer: And I believe it will pose their wisdoms, to judge, and miss n●t, what the meaning is of this our brethren's answer. For first, whom do they mean here in these words: It may please their wisdoms, who are to be judges, to consider what we have to answer unto these things? The ambiguity of this answer. Do they mean the Readers of these their writings? Or do they mean, some to be appointed to be judges of th● controversies, in the foresaid conference and debating? But, when they set down all the order of that conference, they so little mentioned anya judges: that they would have the matter so examined only on both sides, till by the evidence of truth, the one part yield unto the other: or the folly and madness of those which gainsay it, do in equal judgement become manifest. Here is mention indeed of equal judgement, but it appeareth, that they would have the parties only, not any judge or umpiere betwéne the parties, to determine the matter: which is the thing that we think very necessary. But they think the matter would be so clear, that it should need no such judges, nor in the conference they ar● answerers or defendants, but challengers, as here they confess: ● yet her● they speak of those, that are to be judges of their answer unto these things, which I understand, for their answer unto these three objections. And so I like wise make the same request with them, That it may please their wisdoms, who are to be judges (that is to say, as I understand them, the readers of their answer) to consider indeed and to weigh well, what they have to answer unto these things, at leastwise, what they d●● answer unto them. For if they have to answer any thing else: why di● they not here set it down? Except they reserve somewhat for a further answer, which the reader's wisdom, cannot, nor is not to consider, until they show it. In the mean season, the readers or judges wisdoms whosoever, and their own wisdoms too, that made this answer, shall ●nd● themselves work enough, to consider of this their answer, here ma●● unto these things: which if they have the truth of God's word, contain the safest and best way in such cases, etc. See, how they make these things to hang together: they desire the judges wisdom to consider, what they have to answer unto these things. What are these things, that the readers or judges should consider? Are they not here desired to consider of their answer to these their objections, which, themselves say, may be objected against them? Now when they say, on these things, that is, these three objections, which if they have the truth of God's word, etc. Then say I, let their wisdoms consider who are to be judges, what our brethren can answer, that shall be able to confute even these things, that is, these three objection. Except our brethren will take upon them to confute the truth of God's word. Sed magna est veritas & praevalet. But if they shall not mean by this their answer unto these things, their answer unto these three objections: how shall the judges wisdoms be able to know, what they should consider? if our brethren mean by these things, the way of reconciliation that they set down before: how say they here, these things contain the safest and best way in such cases: if they understand by these things which they speak of here, the way itself that before they spoke of ● And if they mean those things that they set down in that way: what mean they here in saying, they will answer unto these things: when themselves set those things down, as means and rules to be observed in the conference, and not as questions, or as objections moved either of us, or yet of themselves, or of any other, to be by them answered at all unto? But the safest and best way (me thinketh) in such cases, as these uncertain speeches are, which tend (neither we, nor (I think) themselves that wrote them, can well tell, whereunto) is to let them alone without a●ye answer, nor to cumber any readers or judges wisdoms in further considering of them, except their selves shallbe able, and will vouchsafe, to tell what they meant by these things, and by these words, that they utter as it were in riddles, so confusedly, that Magis opus est Oedipo, quam judice, to decide them. As for that they add, that they t●nd to the full quieting of all: The quieting of all. whereunto soever these things, and these words also of our brethren t●nd: the full quieting of all is a good thing, so it be a quieting in goodness, and done by good order. Would God our brethren, that ha●● begun these troublesome contentions, would yet now at length submit themselves, to a full quieting of all. But they tell us of one thing, and go about in this discourse the clean contrary. Yea, to make all the whol● estate more out of quiet than we be. The setting out of such discourses a● this is, tendeth so little to any full quiet of all, that it is the very readiest way to disturb all with a soul disquieting. And the removing (say they) of the plagues which are upon us, The removing of the plagues. and are like daily further to come, even from the common adversary. We have no greater plague upon us, than these civil wars that our brethren have begun. And her Majesty & their honours, besides the Archb. & Bishops, and all we to our abilities, with all lenity hitherto, have laboured to remove. Would God our brethren that began this plague, would not continue and increase it. But they prognosticate that there are more plagues that are like daily further to come, even from the common adversary. The more have our brethren to answer, that knowing or fearing this, will not cease plaguing both themselves and us, with these unnecessary contentions. If they would needs have begone them, they should at least have forborn, till we had overpast all the dangers coming from the common adversary. But say they, We may boldly, yet most humbly on our knees require them before GOD, Our brethren's bold and humble request upon their knees. and all his elect Angels, not to cast it away. How do they make this conclusion depend on the premises? And who are they, whom thus boldie, yet most humbly on their knees, they may require them? Is it the Archbishops and Bishops? But neither they require such humility of our brethren: nor our brethren will make any request, in such humble manner to them. Or is it those, of whom before they said, who are to be judges: not telling, who those judges were: whether some appointed by her Majesty, and her most honourable counsel: or the readers: nor whereof they should be judges: whether of the conference: or of these things, to wit of these objections, or of their answer thereunto, or of the controversies in this learned discourse following? And what is it, that they here require of them, not to cast it away? Whereof mean they this? Of the state of the government established: that it should not be cast away? And good reason too: Or do they mean it of the conference: or of the objecting the three objections, or of their answer? But when they s●all tell us plainer their own meaning: then may we better tell them what is our answer. This in the mean season, is all, that they answer here in general to these objections: which done, they proceed to the particulars of them. Wherefore, for the first, let us grant the great difference ●hich they make of years and learning: Preface. yet the speech of Elihu giveth them sufficient answer: joh. 32.7.8. joh. 32.21.22. that this understanding is not tied to such outward respects, but to the revelation of God's spirit: and to accept in such cases the persons of men, or to give titles, is but to provoke God to destroy us. Yea let the memorable examples of Ezechias and the Priests: of the Apostles in their counsels, 2. Chron. 30.1.5.23. ver. Act. 15.23. Gal. 1.1. Act. 11. ●. 2.3.4 etc. Doctor Whitegiftes book, p. 389. of Paul in his Epistles, and even of Peter in yielding to the challenge of some, not so well instructed, move them: who not only not refused the Levites and elders, but accepted the people in some manner, to be heard to speak, and to authorize their determinations and writings. At least, let their own opinion (that in interpreting the scriptures, and delivery of doctrine, we are equal with them,) persuade them, not to refuse those, who if they could strain their consciences, to subscribe to the Archbishop's articles: they would gladly receive them to be the Ambassadors of jesus Christ. The first objection consisted of three points: that our brethren wer● but few, Bridges. young, & unlearned, to be accounted comparable to the Archbishops and Bishops, To this they say: wherefore for the first, Our brothers answer to the first object. in yielding for years & learning. let us grant the great difference they make of years and learning. This is well done of our brethren (if they mean as they say) that they would yield to the Archbishops and Bishops, in these two things, and for the most part of these our brethren, they yield but in the things, that otherwise are most apparent. Their exception of the revelation of God's spirit. Yet (say they) the speech of Elihu giveth them sufficient answer that this understanding is not tied to such outward respects, but to the revelation of God's spirit. I grant, Our Reply. the speech of Elihu giveth sufficient answer for the respect of years, to all them that rely thereon. But our Archbishops nor bishop neither we, do measure the truth of the matter, by the age of the men. Neither we ascribe it to the title of age, or dignity: but acknowledge that which Elihu saith in the same chapter verse 9 Great men are not always wise, neither doth the aged always understand judgement: and yet they, & all the world doth know that wisdom in youth is but the séeldomer example: as Elihu said before ver. 6. I am young in years, and ye are ancient, and therefore I doubted and was afraid to show you my opinion: For I said, the days shall speak, and the multitude of years shall teach wisdom. And in many places, the young are willed to reverence their ancients, and to learn wisdom of them, so that they be wise and reverend persons. Notwithstanding if any younger can make demonstration of the revelation of God's spirit, not revealed unto the elder: therein we confess, both Archbishops and bishops, and all, are to hearken and yield unto those younger. Young Samuel is to be preferred before old Helie and all the Priests: and young Daniel before all the elders of Israel: and hereof Christ also gave example even in his childhood. And S. Paul gave this precept, that none should despise Timothy for his youth: and yet was Timothy an elder in his office, yea an Archbishop (as God willing shallbe sufficiently showed in the debating of this learned discourse. But as our Archbishops & Bishops must not, and (I hope) do not reject any of our brethren, for their younger years: so must these our younger brethren take no less, (if not much more heed), that to supply their defect in years, they presume not (on pretext of Elihu) to father any of their own, or other never so excellent men's devices, on the revelation of God's spirit, except they can make apparent proof thereof. For, so, both they in pretending it, and we in believing it, might run into a great danger, as did many ancient Heretics, and as do the common adversaries to us both, besides the Anabaptistes: which when they can not prove their assertions, by clear and invincible testimonies of the Scripture, they always run to this, that they have it by revelation of God's spirit. But though our Archbishops, and bishop vaunt not of any special revelation of God's spirit: yet I trust that in this matter, as S. Paul said of his own judgement, 1. Cor 7.40. And I think also th●t I have the spirit of God: so they with good testimony of conscience may say also, that although all have not like measure: yet they are not destitute of Gods holy spirit. Which how far he hath warranted unto them in his word, for the ground of their function: I refer to the examining of this learned discourse. Our brothers examples. The memorable examples that our brethren here allege, relieve them nothing. Yea▪ let the memorable examples (say they) of Ezechias and the Priests: of the Apostles in their counsels, of Paul in his Epistles, and even of Peter in yielding to the challenge of some, not so well instructed move them, who not only refused the Levites and Elders, but accepted the people in some manner to speak, and to authorize their determinations and writings. For proof hereof in the example of Ezechias, Ez●chias. the● quote, 2. Chro. 30.1.5.23. vers. In the 1. verse saith the text: And Ezechias sent to all Israel and judah, and also wrote letters to Ephraim and Manasseh, that they should come to the house of the Lord at jerusalem, to keep the passover unto the L. God of Israel. What, is here any thing for proof of any Priests, Levites, or pastoral Elders in office, but younger in years, or in learning inferior, to have any controversies revealed by the spirit of God unto them, that were not revealed unto the Bishops, Priests and Levites, which in learning and age were their ancients? For, if they bring not their examples to this point, they allege them amiss, for instances to answer the two former parts of the first objection, for the difference of years and learning, between our brethren on the one party, and the Archb. and Bishops on the other. Likewise in the 5. verse, And they decreed to make a proclamation through out all Israel from Beer-sheba even to Dan, th●t they should come, and keeps the passover unto the L. God of Israel at jerusalem, for they had not done it ● great time, as it is written. Likewise the 23. And the whole assembly took Counsel to keep it other seven days: so they kept it seven days with joy. Let the reader or any whosoever judge, (and judge upright) whether this be a fit example for thi● matter. It is a memorable example indeed of an other matter, whic● maketh clean against these our Brethren, that deny the Prince's authority in Eccl. matters, as is also to be seen in this learned discourse. An● if this be a good example, for the ordering & establishing of these controversies: then hath her Majesty already well followed this example of Ezechias, and if it be a memorable example, would God our Brethren would remember better, to follow those Priests and Levites that obeye● Ezechias orders and commandments, in those Eccl. matters that h●● commanded them. Their nèxt memorable example is, of the Apostles in their Counsels, ●or the which they quote Act. 15. ver. 23. wherein the salutation of their letters is set down; And they wrote letters unto them after this manner. The Apostles and Elders. Act. 15. The Apostles and the Elders, the brethren, unto the brethren, which are of the Gentiles in Antiochia, and in Syria, and in Silicia, send greeting. What is here again for the present purpose? Indeed, here is a conference & debating holden of the Apostles and the elders assembled, and in these letters (as some interpret it) the people's name is also used: though other refer the word brethren, only to the Apostles and elders before mentioned. But, be-it understood for the people: yet had not the people any thing at all to do in the debating, conferring, disputing, or determining of those controversies, as shall (God willing) appear in this learned discourse: for this example is often alleged: I refer the Reader to the answer. But to the point we now stand on, what was done in that conference, wherein the younger elders, and less learned, prevailed against the elder and better learned? Yea, did not james the Bishop of that Church of jerusalem determine all that controversy? If our brethren therefore would submit themselves to this memorable example, they would leave off their contentions against their Bishops, & never plead for their youth and difference of learning, by this memorable example. As for that they add● of Paul in his Epistles, namely the place here only quoted, Gal. 1. ver. 1. is likewise altogether impertinent to the purpose. Paul an Apostle not of men, neither by man, but by jesus Christ, and God the father, S. Paul. Gal. 1. ●. which hath raised him from the dead. It should rather seem, that either they mean the 16. or 17. verses of that first Chapter: or the first, and so down to the fift, of the 2. chapter. But of those we shall see (God willing) also sufficiently treated, in the answer to this learned discourse. And if our brethren can prove themselves to have the like warrant for their assertions, that S. Paul had: they should come somewhat nearer to the purpose, in respect of S. Paul's iunioritie. For he was younger or later at least, in the time of his calling▪ then any of the Apostles: but in learning, or in dignity, or in office, no whit inferior: nor received any of those things from them: neither came he to jerusalem, to confer with them, and he saith, They did communicate nothing with him, 2. Gal. 6. But our Brethren bring this for an example of conferring, and they have received their ministery of our Bishops, whom now they contend withal. And even of Peter (say they) in yielding to the challenge of some not so well instructed: where-unto they quote, Act. 11. ver. 1.2.3. & 4. etc. in which verses are these words: Now the Apostles and the brethren that were in Indea, heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God: and when Peter was come up to jerusalem, they of the circumcision contended against him, saying: Thou goest in to men uncircumcised, and hast eaten with them: then Peter began, and expounded the thing in order to them saying: etc. Is here any thing that maketh for our brethren: or rather, is not this flat against them? They say well herein, that they which challenged Peter, were not so well instructed. What? and do they liken themselves to these men not so well instructed, that yet did thus presume to contend against Peter? and indeed, so our brethréns do against our Bishops. But it should seem, that our brethren also are not so well instructed, in that they would instruct us, or have our Bishops, or any other to be moved by this example. What? and did Peter yield to these contentious men? How can our brethren say this, even for very shame? Doth not the text shew● the clean contrary? If they had looked further, from the 4. verse down to the 18. they might have read Peter's memorable oration, made before them so effectuously, that Luke concludeth all that matter thus: verse 18. And when they heard these things, they held their peace, & glorified God saying: then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life. Whether now doth Peter yield to them, or they to Peter? But whereto do our brethren now on these examples, come in with these words? who not only, not refused the Levites and Elders, but accepted the people in some manner to be heard to speak, and authorize their determinations and writings. To whom do they apply these words thus confusedly spoken? Do they mean Ezechias, of whom they spoke before, that he did not refuse the Levites, 2. Chron. 30. and that the Apostles refused not the Elders Act. 15. and that Peter accepted the people in some manner, to be heard to speak, and to authorize their determinations and writings? It is a world to see, how our brethren love to clutter up these things together, one to hold up an other. Were they afraid, lest, if the conclusions of these examples should be sorted by themselves, we should see, that not one of them fitteth their turn? Indeed, Ezechias did not refuse the Levites: for in the Chapter before, Ezechias dealing with the priests and Levites. verse 4. etc. it is said: And he brought in the Priests and the Levites, and gathered them into the east street, and said unto them: hear me ye levites, sanctify now yourselves, and sanctify the house of the Lord God of your fathers, and carry forth the filthiness out of the sanctuary: for our fathers have trespassed and done evil in the eyes of the Lord our God, and have forsaken him, and turned away their faces from the tabernacle of the Lord, and turned their backs, they have also shut the doors of the porch, and quenched the Lamps, and have neither burnt incense, nor offered burnt offerings in the sanctuary unto the God of Israel. Wherefore the wrath of the Lord hath been on judah and jerusalem, and he hath made them a scattering, a desolation, and an hissing, as ye see with your eyes: for our fathers are fallen by the sword, and our sons, and our daughters, and our wives are in captivity for the same cause. I now purpose to make a covenant with the Lord God of Israel, that he may-turne away his wrath from us. Now (my sons) be not deceived, for the Lord hath chosen you to stand before him, to serve him, and to be his ministers, and to burn incense. Then the Levites arose, Mahath, etc. and they gathered their brethren, and sanctified themselves, and came, according to the commandment of the King, and by the words of the Lord, for to cleanse the house of the Lord, and the priests went into the inner parts of the house of the Lord, to cleanse it, etc. Here indeed the King refuseth not the Levites but calleth them unto him, and maketh unto them this memorable oration, and those, that otherwise in their offices were his fathers, he calleth his sons, in respect of his supreme authority over them, himself being but a young man: and they again speak, verse 18. And they went in, to Ezechiah the king and said, we have cleansed all the house of the Lord, etc. but here is nothing wherein they appoint or charge the King, but all still of the kings commandments unto them. Verse. 20. And Hezechias the king rose early, and gathered the Princes of the city, and went up to the house of the Lord: and they brought seven bullocks. etc. And he commanded the Priests the sons of Aaron to offer them on the altar of the Lord, etc. Then they brought the he Goats for the sin offering before the King, etc. For the king had commanded for all Israel the burnt offering and the sin offering. And he appointed also the Levites in the house of the Lord with Cymbals, with Viols, & with haps, according to the commandment of David, and Gad the king's seer, etc. And Hezechiah commanded to offer the burnt offering upon the altar, etc. verse. 30. And Hezechias the king and the princes commanded the Levites, to praise the Lord with the words of David and Asaph the seer: so they prayed with joy, and they bowed themselves and worshipped. And Hezechias spoke and said: Now ye have consecrated yourselves to the Lord, come near, and bring the sacrifices and offerings of praise into the house of the Lord, and the congregation brought sacrifices, etc. Here the King still commandeth both the Priests and Levites, and the people, and they all obeyed. But the Levites are commended, vers. 34. To be more upright in hart, to sanctify themselves, than were the Priests. As for the 30 chapter which our brethren cite, after the foresaid first verse, wherein the King writeth to all Israel and judah: It followeth in the second, etc. And the king and his princes, and all the congregation had taken council in jerusalem, to keep the passover in the second month. For they could not keep it at this time, because there were not priests enough sanctified, neither was the people gathered to jerusalem. And the thing pleased the King, and all the congregation: and they decreed to make proclamation throughout all Israel, etc. So the Posts went out with letters, by commission from the King and his Princes, throughout all Israel, & with the commandment of the King: saying, Ye children of Israel, turn again unto the Lord God of Abraham, Isaac, etc. And at this sacrifice the King prayed for the people, saying: verse, 18, etc. The good Lord be merciful towards him, that prepareth his whole heart to seek the Lord God, the God of his fathers, though he be not cleansed according to thepurification of the sanctuary, and the Lord heard Hezekiah, and healed the people. And verse, 22. Hezechiah spak● comfortably to the Levites that had good knowledge to sing unto the Lord, etc. And in the chapter following, verse, 2. Hezechiah appointed the courses of the Priests and Levites, for the burnt offerings and peace offerings, to minister and give thanks, and to praise in the gates of the tents of the Lord And verse. 4. He commanded the people that dwelled in jerusalem, to give part to the Priests and Levites, that they might be encouraged in the law of the Lord. And when the commandment was spread: the children of Israel brought abundance of fruits, etc. And when Hezekiah and the Princes came and saw the heaps, they blessed the Lord and his people Israel. And Hezechiah questioned with the Priests concerning the heaps. And Azariah the chief priest of the house of Sadoch, answered him and said: Since the people began to bring offerings, we have eaten and have been satisfied, and there is left abundance. For the Lord hath blest his people, and the abundance that is left. And Hezechiah commanded to prepare chambers in the house of the Lord, etc. And jehiel, etc. were overseers, by the appointment of Cononi●h and Shimer his brother, and by the commandment of Hezechiah the king, and of Azariah the chief of the house of God, etc. And thus did Hezechiah throughout all juda, and did well and uprightly and truly before the Lord his God. The example of Hezechias and the Levites, con futeth our brethren. Thus have we seen both in the chapter quoted by our brethren, and the chapter going before, and the chapter following, how the King directed all those Ecclesiastical matters, commanded, ordered, and governed both the Levites and the Priests. But what, is any thing here to our brethren's purpose? Did the Levites debate any controversies with the King and Princes, or with the high Priest before the King: And the king, the princes, or the high priest, yield therein unto the Levites? Or not rather, they yield unto the king, and to the princes, and to the high priest, in those matters? If now this be so memorable an example, why do not our brethren, if they will be like the Levites, yield to her Majesty, her counsel, and her Bishops? Except they will be rather herein like the king, his princes, and the high priest: then like these Levites? As for the elders in the assembly and conference, Act. 15. They also yielded unto the Apostles: not the Apostles unto them. Although the Apostles refused not the elders: no more do our Bishops refuse our brethren, or any other ecclesiastical persons, The example also of the apostles and elders. Act. 15. is clean against them. that are lawfully appointed and called to the convocations, or to any other ecclesiastical assembly or conference Neither do they deny the accepting even of the people in some manner to be heard to speak. But whereto do our brethren mention here the people, in this debating? This is again clean contrârie to their own● rules, as we shall see in this learned discourse. Would they have the people also to be debaters, or to be judges of these controversies? And to overrule the Bishops and clergy in the determination of them? But they have yet one example more: At least (say they) let ●●eir own opinion, that in interpreting the scriptures, and delivery of doctrine, we are equal with them, persuade them. And hereto they quote this marginal note, and Whitegifts book, pag. 389. If the Archbishop that now is, doth grant this: it is the greater sign of his reverent modesty. Neither do an●e of our Bishops, or any of us deny, the ability of many of our brethren to be able to interpret the scriptures, & in the delivery of the doctrine thereof, to be equal either with the Bishops, Our brothers gifts in interpreting the scriptures not denied. or with any other. For it is not the access of the Bishop's dignity, that maketh the person a better interpreter, than he was before he was called to the dignity: it sufficeth, if being in the dignity, he employ himself in his former faithfulness. And would God our brethren also would restrain their emulation to this comparison, to be equal or better, in interpreting and in the delivery of the scripture, than the Bishops, as Jerome contended with Augustine. And though Augustine were a Bishop, Jerome but a Priest, which Jerome confesseth, and yet ever sharply threatened the conflict with Augustine, if he were provoked thereunto: Nevertheless Augustine reverently answereth, Quanquam, etc. For although, according to the terms of honour which the use of the Church hath now obtained, the office of a Bishop be greater than the office of a Priest (or elder:) notwithstanding Augustin is in many things less than Jerome, yea, correction is not to be fled from or disdained, though it come from any that is the lesser. And in this behalf of interpreting the scripture, Though diverse doctors in learning excelled, yet in government they were inferior. Cyprian honoured Tertullian, and diverse Bishops specially Alexander & Theoctistus reverenced Origen. And yet these men, for all their gifts in interpreting the Scriptures, and delivery of doctrine (being far superior to the most part of the Bishops) did not therefore encroach further into any superiority or equality of authority and dignity with the Bishops. Let our brethren interpret the Scriptures, and deliver the doctrine sincerely, and therein excel the Bishops: as they may easily do, both by cause of the Bishop's great age, and great employing in the government and jurisdiction of the Church. As Augustine modestly confesseth of himself unto Jerome, saying, Nam neque in me, etc. For I neither see in myself so much knowledge of the divine scriptures: yea, or that now there can be, as I see there is in you. And if I have any faculty in this matter, I employ it (as I may) to the people of God. But to apply myself more diligently to my studies, then for the furniture of the things that the people hear, I cannot by any means, for the Ecclesiastical business. So that héerin the inferior (as these our brethren) may have more opportunity in interpreting and delivery of the Scripture. And I warrant then, the Bishops will not refuse them ever a whit, for their so doing, but help encourage, and defend them. Which although any Bishop fore-slowed, or envied to do: yet ought not any of our brethren, having such equal gifts with the Bishops, in the interpreting of the scriptures, and delivery of doctrine, and withal, being lawfully called by the Bishops into the ministry, to exauthorate, and withdraw themselves from the ministry, for these controversies of equal government with the Bishops. But see how captiously our brethren deal, in citing the testimony ofthe Arch.: for where he saith: It is not to be denied but that there is an equality of all ministers of God's word, quoad ministerium, touching the ministry: Our brothers haling of the Archbishop's words. for they have all like power to preach the word, to minister the sacraments: that is to say, the word preached, or the sacraments ministered, is as effectual in one (in respect of the ministry) as it is in an other. But, quoad ordinem & politiam, touching order and government, there hath always been, and must be, degrees and superiority amongst them. These words do our brethren draw to this objection that they are not comparable in learning to the Archbishops and Bishops: at least (say they) let their own opinion, that in interpreting the Scriptures, & delivery of doctrine, we are equal with them, persuade them. But who seethe not that these words of the Archbishop, do not infer an equality of the gifts in the ministers, as having these gifts equally: but an equality of their ministry, in the ability to have them: and do distinguish● only, between the power, of order, and of jurisdiction? And therefore this is, but haled, to answer the objection of this comparison, between the learning of the Archbishops and Bishops: and the learning of our brethren in the interpreting the scriptures, and delivery of doctrine to be equal. But our brethren say, Who, if they could strain their consciences, to subscribe to the Archbishop's articles: they would gladly receive them, to be the Ambassadors of jesus Christ. Our brothers intricat speeches. These words again are somewhat intricate, so that we might miss our brethren's meaning, while they neither plainly express, who they are that would gladly receive, nor whom, nor what: neither yet to whom these words, to be the Ambassadors of jesus Christ, are referred: whether to themselves, or to the Archbishops and Bishops. But I conjecture their meaning to be this: that if these our brethren could strain their consciences to subscribe to the Archbishops articles, they would gladly receive those articles, that they might thereby have liberty to preach, and so to be the Ambassadors of jesus Christ. If our brothers here mean by the Archbishops articles, the articles where-upon it was by the Archbishops and bishops of both provinces, Our brothers refusal to subscribe to the Arch. articles. & the whole Clergy, in the convocation holden at London etc. 1562. Put forth by the Queen's authority: some of which articles our brethren afterward in this learned discourse, pag. 135. do roughly challenge for diverse gross, and palpable errors: how truly or falsely, and with what g●●d conscience they burden them therewith, I reserve to the examination of the proper place. But because they seem not so much to mean those articles: (for then, they should strain their consciences apparently to far, in calling those articles the Archbishops articles, which were the articles, not only of Archbishops, but also of the bishops and of the whole Clergy, and set forth by her majesties authority): therefore I rather take it, that our brethren mean by the Archbishops articles, The Articles where-unto all such as are admitted to preach, read, cathechyse, The articles minister the sacraments or execute any other Eccl. function, do agree and consent, & testify the same by the subscription of their hands. viz. 1. That her Majesty under God hath, and aught to have the sovereignty and rule over all manner of persons, within her realms, 1. Article of the supremacy. dominions, and countries, of what state either (Ecclesiastical or temporal) soever they be: and that none other foreign power, prelate, state, or potentate, hath, or aught to h●ue, any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence, or authority Ecclesiastical or spiritual: within her majesties said realms: dominions, or countries. 2. That the book of common prayer and of ordering bishop Priests & Deacons, containeth in it nothing contrary to the word of God, the 2. article of the communion book. & that the same may lawfully be used: And that I myself who do subscribe, will use the form of the said book prescribed in public prayer, and administration of the Sacraments; and none other. 3. That I allow the book of Articles of religion agreed upon by the Arch. and Bi. of both provinces, and the whole Clergy: The 3. Arti. of the book of articles, Ano. 1562. in the convocation holden at London in the year of our L. God 1562. & set forth by her majesties authority: and do believe all the articles therein contained to be agreeable to the word of God. In witness where-of I have subscribed my name. If now these articles, be the articles whereof our brethren say: If they would strain their consciences to subscribe to the Arch. articles, they would gladly receive them to be the Ambassadors of jesus Christ: These forée articles, indeed, the Archbishop hath set down, whereof the third comprehendeth the articles set out 1562. But what mattet is there of any of all these 3. articles, that our brethren without straining of their consciences, may not subscribe unto. First, will they not subscribe unto the foremost of these 3. articles which is the sum and content of An act restoring to the crown the ancient jurisdiction over the state Eccl. & spiritual: and abolishing all foreign power repugnant to the same. Anno 1. Eliz. cap. 1. But I think our brethren will not deny to subscribe to this article. As concerning the second article, for the book of common prayer, & of ordering Bishops, Priests and Deacons, these two points are 〈◊〉 wise enacted and authorized by like authority. The one, in an Act for the uniformity of common prayer and service in the church, and the administration of the Sacraments. Anno Eliza. 1. cap. 2. The other, An act declaring the manner of making and consecrating the Archbishops & Bishops of this realm, to be good lawful and perfect: comprising therein also, the ordering and consecrating of Priests, ministers of Gods holy word, and Sacraments; and of Deacons. Anno Elizab. 8. cap. 1. To all which enactings and authorizing by these our high courts of Parliament, The inconveniences of refusing to subscribe to the ●se ●se●● articles. (we being the true church of God, and our brethren subjects in our state) although they ought to have, no small respect, lest they strain their consciences, in refusing to subscribe thereto, and with all, in renouncing their charge and office of the Embassy of jesus Christ, being so urgent & important a function: Yet, if they could show any greater, or but equivalent reasons, (whereas here they show none at all), for their refusal of subscribing to these Articles: then might their refusal carry at least some show of probability. But till they shall so do: I see not, but that, while they pretend the straining of their consciences, if they should receive this article: they strain their consciences, a great deal more, (if they do it indeed on conscience) in that they refuse their subscription. Hath the whole corporation of the realm (trow ye) and all the church of England, and all the states thereof, no conscience, or no knowledge what they did? Or did they (contrary to their knowledge) strain their consciences, in the enacting and establishing these things, which contein● all, that is comprised in this article? Yea, and all things contained in the third article also, concerning the book of Articles, agreed upon by the Archbishops and Bishops, of both provinces, and the whole Clergy: in the convocation holden at London 1562. and set forth by her majesties authority, and also expressly ratified and commanded to be subscribed unto, and openly read and assented unto, Anno Elizab xi●. ca 12. What a prejudice than is this refusal of these our brethren? what a slander? what a touch to the consciences of all these estates and person 〈◊〉 when our brethren refuse, (& that of pretence on conscience), to subscribe to all these things, which upon so mature deliberation both her Ma. & all the estrates of the realm, Eccl. & Temp. have lawfully decreed, established and authorised? If our brethren have any parts among these, either represented or included: I see not how they also have not so far forth authorized that, which here they refuse to subscribe unto. For, if they seclude themselves, from being any parts authorising the acts, authorized in Parliament & convocation: they do not only seclude themselves from us their brethren (which I hope are as faithful ministers as they, & have as g●od consciences also (but from the whole body of the Realm & church of Eng. the have most clearly (in all these acts aforesaid) enacted and authorised, all the points contained in these 3. art. & therefore, they may indeed be better called in my opinion, The clergies' subscription in K. Ed. time. the art. of the whole church & realm of Eng. than the Arch. articles. And when such points as are contained in any of these art. were thus by Act of Parlia. enacted likewise, in the reign of K. Ed. 6. of blessed memory: did the godly & reverend Preachers & ministers refuse to subscribe to that, which the whole church & realm had so decreed & authorised? No, the form of their free & plain subscription, is apparent in these words Liber qui nuper, etc. The book which is of late set forth, by the authority of the King, and of the Parl. of the Church of Engl. appointing a manner and form of praying & administering the Sacraments in the church of England. Likewise also, that book set forth by the same authority, of the ordination of the ministers of the church, are godly, & repugn in nothing to the wholesome doctrine of the Gospel, but they well agree, and they do chiefly further the same, in very many things. Therefore they are of all the faithful members of the Church of Eng. and most of all, of the ministers of the word, with all readiness of minds, and thanksgiving, to be received, to be approved, and to be commended unto the people of God. Thus did the godly, learned preachers, & faithful ministers them, subscribe more expressly & further then is now required of these our brethren, because we would bear with our brethren the more, sith they pretend such scruple and straining of their consciences. But I advise them in the fear of God, How dangerous our brethren's pretence is of straining conscience. to beware of such pretences on conscience. With what conscience can they now not look back, but turn back from the plough of God, whereunto they have been lawfully called, & have already laid to their hand, & now cast it quite up into the hedge, and clean forsake it? yea. disclaim the most honour. Embassy of jesus C. & utterly suppress the declaring the matter of their message, because they cannot be suffered to declare it after their manner. And yet cry out of such poor ministers, as would feign preach if they could, & these can well enough if they would: but except they may as they lift, they will not. Are these the parts of good & faithful Embas. and especially Ambassadors of jesus Christ? Do they not fear to strain their consciences, in these dealings, and pretend fear of straining their conscience in subscribing to these articles? but what strains of conscience make they to spare no reproaches, be they never so untrue, against their brethren, no, not sparing the Prince, and all in authority Eccl. or Politic under her Ma. & against all the state of the church, as is most apparent in diverse of their books, & in this lear. dis. as (God willing) we shall see at large. And without authority or licence, to publish abroad in print, and scatter abroad throughout the realm, contrary to all laws & orders, their treatises so pestered with slanders reproaches, & suspicions: & to pretend (for the reformation which they devise) prescription of god's word, practise of ancient churches, & testimonies of holy & yet cannot prove either any clear scripture, or practise of any ancient church, or clear testimony of any holy Father: as, (by the grace of God) shall manifestly appear, by the diligent search thereof, in the examining of this learned discourse: how greatly then have our brethren strained their consciences in these things? Or rather do they not (as Christ said) swallow up a Camel and strain a gnat? such doings beseem not the ambassadors of jesus Christ. The third point in their first objection is of their fewness. Preface. As for the fewness (say they) it may be, if the ignorant ministers, the variety of other which subscribe: some doing it with this limitation, and some with that: some holding their former judgement, as not gainsaid by their subscription, some lamenting their slip in that behalf, were deducted: the number of the one would not so greatly suremount the other. We do not object their fewness to them, as any prejudice unto the matter; Bridges. if the points which they contended for, were material and necessary. Comparison of number for fewness or multitude Neither do we object fewness in respect of Archbishops and bishops, but in respect of the consent of all the other of their brethren ministers, that have agreed upon these articles, from whom it might better become our brethren not to dissent: especially by making such a schism in this our Church of Christ, as they do. But they say, the number of the one, would not so greatly surmount the other, if the ignorant ministers were deducted. Of the ignorant ministers, Our brothers exceptions from our number. Of ignorant ministers. we shall afterward have their large discourse. But let them deduct them from this number, as indeed they are not reckoned. There is none chosen into the convocation house, that is not thought and known to be sufficiently learned: howsoever our brethren in conceit of their own learning do despise them. As for the other learned Pastors in the realm, besides that they gave their compromise to those, whom they chose (upon confidence of their learning and sincere judgement) to agree upon the articles, and to give their suffrages in their names, have either all of them, or the most part of them, given also their especial assent & subscription thereunto. But besides these, Of subscribers with limitation. they say there is, the variety of other which subscribe (to be deducted:) some doing it with this limitation, and some with that. If there be a variety of such subscribers: it is a great sign of n●rigour, nor straining of their consciences, but of all courtesy showed unto them, and of relenting (so much as may be) extended to our brethren, in permitting them with such variety of limitation. Howbeit, for all this number, the variety of their limitation containing no contradiction to the matter that they subscribe unto, they may also be well accounted in our number. But they say, there are yet more to be deducted, some holding their former judgement as not gainsaid by their subscription. If their former judgement accorded therewith, they may well so hold it, not to be gainsaid by their subscription. But if they subscribe to one thing, & their former judgement hold the contrary: Of Dissemblers. except they altar and correct their former judgement: let them look to it, how they dissemble: & can then some of these our brethren and faithful ministers strain their consciences on that fashion? Lastly, say they, there are to be deducted, some lamenting their slip in that behalf. Indeed, this is a foul slip of any our brethren, to subscribe contrary to their former judgement, Of secret lamenters of their open subscribing. except that in their latter judgement, upon better advisement, finding the defect of their former judgement, they amend it: but if they subscribe against the●r conscience, & lament it secretly to themselves, or to other their brethren, and not renounce it to the open state: they have to answer for their great and triple sin. First, for the weakness, ignorance and error of their judgement, that aught to be strong, skilful, & sound in judgement: namely, such as withal upbraid ignorance unto others: and also, for that contrary to their judgement, they subscribe to that which their selves condemn: and lastly, that they think all is so salved with their close lamenting of their fact, & yet not renouncing of their subscription: so that, while we plainly and simply make reckoning of them, to have subscribed bona fide, and to have said and written as they think, & to think as they have written & said: Our brethren come now in with a new knack, (new to us, & unlooked for at any of our brethren's hands, though it were practised of old by Arius, & the Priscillianistes: The practice of Arius. & the Priscillianistes. except that the dissembling Papists and Anabaptists, do revive it,) and tell us we must deduct out of our number, some such of our brethren, as hold their judgement not gainsaid by their subscription, and some such as lament their slip in that behalf. When as, who these should be, we can take no notice, except they openly reclaimed their subscription. I am sorry to hear it, that there should be any sums of such dissembling brethren, as can thus hold with the Hare, and run with the Hound, besides these our open recusant brethren. But I trust there are not many such dissemblers, or rather none, if it were well examined: and that this is but our brethren's threaping more kindness than needeth upon them, to win some from us, or to make a show unto us, that our number is not so great, as we account of, for so they conclude: that if these were deducted, the number of the one would not so greatly surmount the other. Nevertheless, for all these deductions, either open or underhand: this shall not much increase their number, nor decrease ours. Neither have they any cause to boast of such dissemblers As for us, though we are sorry for them, yet can we well spare both them, and other ignorant out of our number: and yet (God be praised for it) still surmount our brethren. Albeit we vaunt not of number (as do the common adversaries to us both) though the greater our number be, the more is our joy, and our brethren should be the more ashamed of their separation. But the number was not the chiefest thing that was objected. But let us now see, what our brethren say to the other objections. As for the challenge of the Papists, knit up with the consideration of the estate, Preface. the difference may be considered in the matter & manner. Concerning the matter, they make it in the substance of religion, which hath in diverse assemblies abroad & at home been disputed, resolved, & now publicly maintained for our true & holy faith. We in matters concerning the government of Christ of great moment indeed, yet never thus handled, nor urging the alteration, but perfection of the state of the church, and further good of the commonwealth, whilst by this means amongst many other things of great importance, the ignorant ministry, and by it Popery, and by Popery, rebellion should be avoided, which by the other are most manifestly bred and nourished. Concerning the manner, they call it to a sudden and tumultuous reasoning, where the readiest wit, the best memory, the most filled speech shall carry away the truth: at least, marvelously move the ungrounded hearers. We require that where both sides may upon mature and sufficient deliberation be heard without any of these shows, and the matter delivered unto her Majesty and their Honours, and whomsoever they shall choose to receive and examine the Allegations of both sides: so that it need not be communicated unto the people, until the manifest light of truth, appear first unto them. Bridges. This answer of our brethren, howsoever it may seem to carry a show of perspicuity and plain dealing, Our brothers answer to the 2. later ob. under show of perspicuity, is very intricate. because they distinguish it by matter and manner, and by (they and we), thus do they, and thus do we: Yet, seeing that the points to be answered, consist of these 2. diverse objections: the one, that this our brethren's challenge of us, is a challenge not much unlike the Papists challenge: and the other, that this form of reformation (which they would have) shall be prejudicial, to the estate of government established: which estate of government established is differing from the estate of government established among the Papists, and the overthrow thereof: these objections therefore, being so different, should not (me thinketh, I speak it under correction) have been thus knit up together, albeit with such an answer of distinction of matter and manner: except our brethren had cleared themselves for the matter and manner. First in the one, against the Papists: and then, they had also cleared themselves, for that matter & manner of the objection against us their brethren Protestants: and showed still with all plainly and distinctly▪ whom they always mean by this word they, saying, They make it, etc. and they call it etc. Whether they understand 〈◊〉 Papists, differing both from our brethren and from us: or they vnderst●●● us their brethren protestants, differing from themselves: Or else, in these dark speeches, under pretence of brevity, they may offer us their brethren Protestants too great an injury: and the Papists, (our common adversaries) too great advantage. Besides that, in this answer, they huddle and knit up a great many things together, which to so weighty objections, as of their agreeing with the Papists, and their disagreeing from us in challenging an estate of government established, would have required a larger, or (at least) a plainer answer: than thus to have these so different objections of different professors, to be knit up together in such a knot, like the knot of Gordias, that except it should be loosed by Alexander, it would hardly be untied by us, but that one quirk or an other may remain. But to assay it: and first for the matter. Concerning the matter, they (say our brethren) meaning as I take it by this word, they, the Papists (for so was the objection, Our brothers distinction of matter and manner. that it is a challenge not much unlike the Papists) they make it (that is to say) they make the matter of their challenge in the substance of Religion which (challenge of matter in the substance of Religion) hath in diverse assemblies abroad and at home, been disputed, resolved, and now publicly maintained, for our true and holy faith. And by whom hath this been disputed, resolved, and no we publicly maintained for our true and holy faith? Hath it not been chiefly done, by us their brethren Protestants? But go to then: herein (they say) we disagree not, Our Brothers & our agreement in the Substance of Religion. for challenge of matter in substance of Religion, wherein we both agree, and both of us differ alike from the Papists. But it followeth, We in matters concerning the Government of Christ, etc. And who again are here this we? Forsooth not we, all the Protestants against the Papists our common adversaries: but we, that is to say, the faithful Ministers, and learned discoursers, are against our brethren Protestants, in matters concerning the government of Christ: though not in matters concerning the substance of Religion. And hereupon our brethren conclude, that their challenge of us, is much unlike the Papists challenge. This I take to be the meaning of their words, and I am glad yet, Our difference concerning government. that they confess our agreement for the substance of Religion. And since they agree with us therein, it is less reason that they should dissent from us in the government: at leastwise, so peremptorily, that their challenge of us in that behalf, should be not much unlike the Papists, being otherwise in the substance of Religion, so much unlike them. But they say, the difference is in matters concerning the government of Christ, of great moment indeed, yet never thus handled? What they mean by handling thus these matters of government: whether they mean that they were never so notably handled before, as they now handle them in this learned discourse, or as they set down a way to handle the debating of them: that, let themselves discuss. But that they be the government of Christ (the matter or manner of government which they desire) as though Christ did use that government, or did appoint that government, or that indeed it is of such moment asthey prescribe: that is but only here avouched by them, and denied by us: the proof (God willing) will appear in the considering of this learned discourse. Not urging (say they) the alteration but perfection of the estate, and further good of the common wealth. This seemeth to be referred to the 3. objection, that it shall be prejudicial to the estate of government established. But our brethren think, that it shall so little be prejudicial to the estate of government established, O●r brothers urging th● alteration of The state. that it shall tend to the great benefit of it: and how? not urging (say they) the alteration, but perfection of the estate of the Church, and further good of the commonwealth. But who may not plainly perceive that this urging is the urging of an alteration, and the alteration of the estate, & that both of the Church & of the commonwealth? if (as they say) they urge not the alteration: why let they it not alone as it is? or if they so seek the perfection of the estate of the Church, and further good of the commonwealth, that they will not alter the estate there-of: then let that stand as it doth, as the estate of the Bishops, and other officers in the Church, especially the estate and authority of the Prince, both in the church, and in the commonwealth. And not to take all these away, as here they do in this learned discourse. For, this is both the alteration, & the endangering (if not the overthrow) at leastwise, the making both the Church and commonwealth worse than they are. But worse or better, how do not their words imply an alteration? For when they pretends the urging only of the perfection of the Church, and further good of the commonwealth: what mean they else, but that the Church is in an unperfect estate, & that the commonwealth also is not in so good an estate as they urge to bring it unto? And how, is not this a plain urging of the alteration both of the Church, and also of the commonwealth? These words therefore, are either contradictory to themselves: or else, they would & they would not. Or they would, & they dare not, for fear or shame, plainly utter what they urge, because they touch matters of moment indeed, (as they say) even the alteration of the estate, matters too high both for them, and for us, to meddle withal, namely to alter, which perteynet● to persons of estate. But now, how would this alteration that indeed is urged, become the perfection of the church's estate, & further good of the commonwealth? Forsooth say they, whilst by this means amongst many other things of great importance, the ignorant ministry, & by it Popery, & by Popery, rebellion should be avoided, which by the other are most manifestly bred and nourished. These purposes (I confess) are very good, that Ignorance in the Ministry, Popery & rebellion may be avoided: so that, the avoiding of these things, be done, by good and lawful means also. But what is this that is here said: which by the other, are most manifestly bred & nourished? Do they mean, that the ignorant ministery, Popery, and Rebellion, are most manifestly bred and nourished by the estate of the Church of Eng, and the government thereof established. What a most manifest untrue, and uncharitable challenge of our Churches & commonwealths estate is this? Yea, (save that for my part, Our brethren's pretence of removing Ignonoraunce, Popery, & Rebellion. I hope better o● our brethren) some (and those good Protestants) would not stick to say, that this challenge were now not only, not much un-like the Papists: but that it smelled somewhat strongly, of breeding & nourishing the third of these evils. And other would (at least) say, it were a false accusation of their poor brethren, & a foul slander of the estate of the Church, and government established. But I hope they will construe their words to some gentler meaning: sith it is most manifest to the contrary, that the estate of the church of England, & government established, do neither most manifestly, or manifestly, or any whit at all wittingly or directly, breed or nourish any of these three evils: either Ignorance in the ministry, or Popery, or Reblelion in any persons: but punish them in whomsoever they manifestly appear. Albeit for the ignorant ministery, not perhaps in such manner of punishment, as our brethren would have them punished. Yea, our brethren's former confession itself, doth not a little discharge the estate of the Church & government established from these crimes, in saying, that Our true and holy faith hath in diverse assemblies abroad & at home been disputed, resolved, & now publicly maintained. Which cannot be taken for their doing only, but much more for ours, by far odds than theirs For so much as we are the public maintainers thereof, & not they, whose government hath yet no public maintenance amongst us. Yea, they refuse the public ministry of the word & sacraments. And yet if they had that alteration of the estate of the Church, and commonwealth (whose perfection and further good they pretend) whether it would come to such perfection, or such further good, as to avoid these three evils, of an ignorant ministry, of Popery, & of Rebellion or no; and not rather breed and nourish them: at least wise, if not directly, yet by occasion, more than they now are bred & nourished: or, whether it would be the best & most manifest means to avoid them, more than they be, or may be now avoided.: thereby (I may say unto you) lieth a question. For as our brethren told us before, of some among them, that did this and that: So some among us, that wish well to our brethren, think that this alteration of theirs, would breed and nourish as great (if not greater) ignorance, then is already even in the Preachers themselves: & that it would cut of a great part, Whether this alteration would not be occasion of more ignortnce in the ministry. of the study & profession of all good letters, both in divinity & humanity, especially seeing the example & boldness of diverse: some pretending only the study of the canonical scriptures: some pretending the revelation of God's spirit, without study so to suggest unto them at the same instant, that they need not to premeditat what they should speak, before they come unto the pulpit. Some, under pretence of turning the most part of teaching and exhorting, into conceptions of long prayers. Some, in distinguishing too precisely the office of a Teacher, from the office of a Pastor: cutting off thereby the on half of a Doctor's office, excluding all exhortation, reprehension, consolation, & all application from his doctrine: and the most of them such as their-selves could not deny, in the first objection, but said: Let us grant the great difference which they make of years & learning, between the Archbishops, the bishop and them: and yet would these not only overthrow their estate of government, but make every one of themselves to be equal to them: besides the setting up in every congregation a Seniory of Ecclesiastical governors, chosen out of all sorts & estates of men, Noble men, Gentlemen, merchants, yeomen, artificers, husbandmen, etc. which ought to have the hearing, examination, and determining of all matters pertaining to discipline and government of that congregation, as they tell us in this Learned discourse. pag. 84. And besides the Deacons, excluded from all preparing themselves to the study of the Pastoral ministry. These things, and a number such like, (many that love our brethrendo fear,) would shortly breed and nourish, a greater ignorance in the ministry, than now there is: especially, seeing the boldness of many both Ministers and others, either manifestly known to be ignorant of the pitch of these controversies, or but superficially flourished over, are the hottest sticklers in these broils, or the greatest favourites of this desired and urged alteration: & yet some of them (if they were well opposed) while there is nothing in their mouths, more than discipline, discipline: they cannot tell their selves, what discipline is, & would be full weighed of it, if they had it: or if they were but a little sharply displed, but even with that discipline that is already in force, by the government of the church established. The fear of more breeding Pop. by this alteration. Now as Ignorance breedeth and nourisheth Popery, or other errors & superstitions: so again they fear, that this alteration by so many manifest occasions, breeding and nourishing ignorance: either it might as manifestly breed and nourish Popery, even by that reason whereby they suppose to avoid Popery most of all, and that is by the erection of their Consistories. Unto which if the people, or the Seniors, or the cheefeste in the congregation were inclined: they might do much more hurt, than now they are able to do. Or if it bred not Popery: it might breed and nourish as great errors, pride, and oppressions, as Popery hath done, if not a great deal worse. And as upon ignorance and popery, the third followed, that is to say, an inclination to rebellion: so it may be feared, that his alteration being thus asmuch subject to the two, former evils, it would not be free from danger of the thrd: This alteration more inclinable to sedition. especially the people's intermeddling in the government, being so much enlarged: except some greater vigilancy be had, then as yet by our brethren is fore-séen, or then, in the estate of government already established is to be feared. For of this government established, we have seen already the experience, and therefore being orderly looked unto, if any such occasion (as GOD forbidden) should happen, it might the sooner be repressed, as, God be praised, it hath been. But if this urged alteration should be put in practice, not only the Papists might sooner take occasion of new tumults, as it many times falleth out in alterations, especially of the form of government established: but also it is not a little to be feared, that our brethren disagreeing from us, and not agreeing among themselves, might in these licentious and factious days, break forth into more contentions and pertakinges, then that the particular Seniories of every congregation, or the Provincial Synods, were able to compose. Whilst our brethren withal, in this Learned discourse, reject and deride, uniformity in Ceremonial constitutions, pag. 120. refuse and exclude the Prince's authority, in the decision of such matters, pag. 117.141. etc. The Papists in the mean season being the less looked unto, and the more strengthened, & encouraged to blow the coals, & to make a blast on every sparkle, when they get any advantage by such occasions of our disagreements: which whole matter, it might breed and nourish, to the preparation of Rebellion: many that are no evil-willers unto these our brethren, do greatly fear the sequel, if this urged alteration should take place. Neither may it be said of them as David said of the wicked: Trepidaverunt, ubi non erat timor: For they fear God, and wish aswell both to the estate of the church and common wealth of this our Realm, as any of our brethren do, and are as far from Popery as they are, God be praised for it. But whatsoever they fear or conjecture to and fro, of the event of these 3. evils, Ignorance in the minist. Popery, & Rebellion: I for my part would fain know what our brethren mean by these words, that lie hovering in the midst of this sentence, Amongst many other things of great importance: what those other things be, being many & of great importance: as though they were more to be avoided then all these 3. and yet are nameless nor dare show their faces. I fear me, lest in this dark cloud, there is hid some great tempest, and dangerous thunderclaps, if it were their time to break forth Sed aliquid latet, quod non patet: and therefore let them go as they came for me, I will rather follow Pythagoras' counsel, Noli fodere ignem opertum: it is shrewd waking the sleeping Dog. For the view but even of these 3. evils, is already (me thinketh) more then enough. We can foresee little perfection of the estate of the Church, or good of the commonwealth to arise by the urging this alteration. And thus much to their answer of the matter, now to the manner. The two foresaid objections were these: The one, that this our brethren's challenge, is not much unlike the Papists: the other, that it shall be prejudicial to the estate of government, established. To this again they answer. Our brothers answer for the manner. Concerning the manner, they call it to a sudden and tumultuous reasoning: where the readiest wit, the best memory, the most filled speech, shall carry away the truth, at least, marvelously move the ungrounded hearers. Who, are these they, that do on this wise? If the Papists be meant: they use indeed, such & worse practices in their tumultuous reasoning syea in their most solemn counsels, that they call general. But if by this (they) our brethren mean us their brethren Protestants: Who call the matter to the manner of a tumultuous reasoning, we, or they? as it appeareth hereby, that we shun not the reasoning with them of these matters: so if they complain of any injury offered unto any of them in the manner of reasoning, they should have done plainly to have showed; who hath called them to reason in any such sudden, tumultuous, or disordered manner. I have rather heard the contrary, that they their-selves have oftentimes, and not long agone, called the matter to such reasonings. But belike, they failed in their hoped success of such sudden reasonings. (which notwithstanding themselves have provoked) when they should be driven to the strict and logical order of disputing: and therefore they call this a sudden and tumultouse reasoning. As for us. we use no tumults, or tumultuous reasoning, neither (God be praised) need to use any, for defence of the estate of government established: they commonly startle & raise tumults, that find themselves grieved, and would make alteration of the state of a government that is established. But I marvel they complain of these things: where the readiest wit, the best memory, the most filled speech, shall carry away the truth, at least marvelously move the ungrounded hearers▪ For even by these things especially (wherein also they glory not a little) and not by any grounded matter, or any substantial proves, our brethren carry away from the truth of these points, so many as they do. But belike, they have found in reasoning themselves over-matched in these ornaments of wit, memory, and speech also. Which three things (we confess) are advantages of no small force, a ready wit, a good memory and a filled speech, to set forth and persuade the matter, The ornaments of wit, memory and utterance. when they are joined with the wissdome and fear of God, with a sincere zeal and fervency of God's truth, & with an humble & moderate spirit, cutting the word of God aright, as best may serve to his glory, to that hearers edifying, & their dutiful obedience to their superiors. For our dram of discretion & of these virtues, is more worth in reasoning of these controversies, than all the pregnancy or readiness of wit, than all the promptness or fidelity of memory, than all the rolling of the tongue, or filled speech with the smoothest and most eloquent rhetoric in the world, should● be compared thereunto. Well, may ungrounded hearers that desire still to hear of Novelties with the Athenians, and the unstable hearts of newfangled heads, and itching ears, of those men or women which are ever learning (as saith the Apostle 2. Tim. 3.7.) and are never able to come to the knowledge of the truth, be eastly carried away from the truth, by such persuasions. But (thanks be given to God) we use no such practices, but plainly speak the words of truth and soberness, and are ready (when we shall at any time be called there-unto) to render an answer, to every one that asketh a reason of the hope that is in us, or of any thing pertaining to our vocations, without tumults: as becometh both faithful Christians, and obedient subjects to our prince and superiors, in defence of the government established. But we (say our brethren meaning for themselves and excluding us) we require that where both sides may upon mature and sufficient deliberation, be heard without any of these shows, and the matter delivered unto her Majesty, their honours, and whosoever they shall choose, to receive and examine the allegations of both sides, so that it need not to be communicated unto the people, until the manifest light of the truth first appear unto them. This then is the manner that our brethren set down, whereby they would urge the alteration, The manner of reasoning that our brethren set down. and (as the objection saith) be prejudicial to the estate of government established. But let the prejudice thereof fall out as it should: if our brethren would indeed content themselves with this manner of trial. Neither do we, nor (I hope) shall we at any time (being lawfully called there-unto) refuse this manner. Yea, even according to the prescription of this manner, for the principal points there-of, have we already proceeded long ago. Where the estate of the government before established in popery: and the estate of the government now established under the Gospel, hath on both sides upon mature and sufficient deliberation, been heard, without any of these shows, if any were used, either of the one side, or the other. And the matter also hath been delivered to her Majesty, and to their honours, or to whomsoever, that were chosen or appointed by her Majesty and them, to receive and examine the allegations of both sides: and so was this estate of government by her Ma. and their honours, yea, by all the estates of the realm, determined, decreed, approved, ratified, confirmed, practised, maintained, continued, and by all these foresaid means and manner established. And this was done also, partly in the time of the most renownie● Prince King Henry the eight: The most part of these matters, have been already decided by this manner. and again better, in the reign of the mo●● godly Prince, King Edward the sixth. But chiefly in the beginning, and some parts thereof, in some other Synods and Parliaments, besides other more particular conferences, & deliberations, since the happy reign of our most gracious sovereign Lady Queen Elizabeth. And yet all this will not now satisfy our brethren, but they will have the matter fetched again about, as though it were fresh to begin, or had never yet by so good a manner and means as these, been hitherto disputed, examined, or deliberated upon. But would once more, serve their turn? No, nor I think one hundred or thousand times more, except it were concluded in all points, even as they themselves would have it. But, how they would agree amō● themselves, and when, and how long that agreement would hold: God h● knoweth. For my part, I see little hope of reconciliation in the matter, by this manner which they here set down: God forgive me, if I think amiss. Neither do I speak it of evil will unto them, Whether our brethren would stā●e to this manner. to whom I wish in Christ as to myself: nor, for that I would shun the conference in such manner, (if I poor soul were worthy to be called among other thereunto) but only to show, that in very deed, this is but a mere pretence, to countenance the matter, howsoever their intent (I grant) be good & zealous, in the alteration of the estate of government established. But if they intent indeed such a manner of deliberation as they have here declared: who shall determine all the matter? Her Majesty is named and their Honours, and whosoever they shall choose. What is here assigned to her Ma. & their honours. But whereto are they named? Or whereto shall they choose any? Forsooth, to receive and examine the allegations on both sides. What mean they hereby? would they have her Majesty or them, to be scrutators and noters of the voices, who giveth on this side, who on that, and so to examine which side hath more voices? or, mean they by receiving and examining the allegations; to take, to mark, and examine their reasons, & yet neither to determine any thing at all of them, nor to ratify that, which the appointed judges shall determine? But how then shall the manifest light of the truth first appear unto them, except they shall so far forth determine of the matter, that either on this or on th●● side the truth consisteth? But when the matter is thus determined: what shall now be done▪ it shall then be communicated to the people. And what now shall the people do? shall they determine again on the matter, after her Majesty, their honours, or others whosoever by her Majesty, The communicating thereof to the people. and under her Ma. by their honours assigned or chosen, shall have once determined of the matters, and communicated the same unto the people: Shall they undo all that hath been done, if they mislike it, or cannot agree upon it? whereto then served all this manner of their doing? No: her Majesty only, in this manner, or their Honours, assigned by her Majesty: or they, whosoever are chosen by her Majesty and them: must be, not only the receivers and examiners of both sides: but also the judges and determiners, as to whom the light of the truth shall first appear: and then it must be committed to the people, to know only what they must obey and stick unto, without any further gainsaying, and there an end. This is the manner (as I take it) that here our brethren desire, of their disputation. If now it be thus: hath not her Ma. upon mature deliberation of the allegations on both sides, and that not by herself, but with their Honours, and by them whom she with their honours hath chosen, determined (on the approbation) of the matter: and divulged her and their determination, or approbation to the people already? and where are our brethren then? Will they desire to have it yet once again examined better, because perhaps all these learned discoursers have not been called to any such disputation, conference, or deliberation. But what now if her Ma. their honours, and those that are by her Ma. and their honours chosen, These matters already determined & ratified. shall thus determine or approve and ratify again, that which is already determined? will our brethren then, for ever hereafter, stand any more to her Ma. and their determination, than now they do? If they will: why stand they not now to that her Majesty hath already established, and to her constant avowing still of the same? Nay rather, why have they clean already forsaken (in this their learned discourse following) all this devise both for manner & matter. where-of they make all this so glorious pretence, and show, in this their Preface there-unto? For, if they would indeed, that the matter should not be communicated unto the people, until the manifest light of truth first appear unto them: whom then mean they here, that it should first appear unto? Must it not first appear to them that are chosen by her Ma & their honours, to receive & examine the allegations on both sides? & what good manner than is this, for themselves before hand, to break this manner, by clapping out this learned discourse, & other so many treatises abroad in print, and so peremptorily before hand, to determine upon all the points in controversy between us, & to communicate them unto the people, before the manifest light of the truth appear, either unto her Ma. their Ho. or to any whosoever they shall choose, to receive & examine the allegations of both sides, & consequently to determine of the same ●are our brethren free from their own prescribed manner? to set out such books unto the people, both contrary to the laws, & contrary to that light of the truth, that hath already appeared to her Majesty, and to her deputies determination. Yea, contrary also to the authority that h●ere in this manner is given to her Majesty, denying in this learned discourse, pag. 141. that her Majesty hath any other authority in these matters, then to make civil laws, to bind the people to the confession of true faith, and to the right administering and receiving of the sacraments, and to all Ecclesiastical orders, that they being instructed by the word of God, through the ministry of the preaching of the same (which preaching cometh, after all the matter is established, and which preaching, is made also before the people) shall understand to be profitable for the edifying of the Church of Christ, etc. So that for all their godly pretence here in the Preface, of delivering the matter to her Majesty, their Honours, and whosoever they shall choose, to receive and examine the allegations on both sides: so that it need not be communicated unto the people, till the manifest light of truth appear first unto them: yet, when it cometh to the matter indeed: this was spoken but for manners sake. For, the learned discourse, maketh no delivery of it unto the Prince, till it come by the Pastor preached in the pulpit, and so the people hear it as soon as the Prince: and then the Prince understanding it out of the pulpit, must obey it: and make civil laws only to maintain and to punish with bodily punishment the offenders. Neither doth our brethren's quirk here help the matter, in that they say not, so that it should not be communicated to the people, until, etc. but they say, so that it need not: they say well therein that, it need not, & why need it not? All that was granted to her Ma. and their H. was but only for manners sake, and resolves to nothing. Forsooth, indeed because it should not. Neither could it be communicated unto the people, before it were first communicated to her Ma. or to her deputies, by the manner & order here prescribed. For els●, what mean these words, & the matter delivered unto her Ma, etc. so th●t our brethren themselves have so broken this manner, that in a manner it is no more manner at all, then was the matter. And in this respect, our brethren have prettily knit up together their answer to these 2. objections, by the matter, and the manner: For, both matter and manner cometh all to one effect. And whereto serveth all this manner, but to try the matter? and in matter, concerning the substance of religion, we differed not. Wherefore must then this manner be observed? Forsooth, not for any matter of the substance of Religion, but, say they, concerning the government of Christ: The moment of the government pretended. of great moment indeed. Nay indeed (brethren) is it not, of any great moment indeed, to urge, & necessarily oblige all times and places, no, nor any time or place, as to the perfection of the estate of the church. For then, it were not only a manner, but a matter, & that v●ry material concerning the substance of religion: wherein our brethren c●●fesse that they agree with us, and dissent only in the government. But where will our brethren show this government, which they pretend to be the government of Christ (that is to say, the government prescribed by Christ) to be the perpetual, or to be the best, or to be any ordinary government at all of his Church? It is not yet showed, (that I can perceive) by any other of our brethren, nor by this their learned discourse. And if this could be showed, it were matter indeed even concerning the substance of religion, and a very religious point to stand upon. But since it is confessed, that all this ado about government is not of the matter concerning the substance of Religion: dare our brethren adventure so far, to urge, that (had it been a government of Christ, and that of great moment indeed in his time on the earth, and yet not of the substance of Religion) as to alter the government established for such a matter, or rather not for a matter, but a manner of government not established? Yea, for this (be-it matter or manner of government) so to shake our whole estate of government established, that in their government which they would establish, her Majesty (which now hath a supreme government, by the clear word of God, and after all mature deliberation, by all our own consents, laws, and acts, in all our assemblies, synods, counsels, and parliaments, disputed, resolved, determined, enacted, maintained, continued, and by all these good means established) shall now have her majesties authority called again in question, and a new examined, yea, so abased and set down, nay rather clean set by, and put out? For, what title soever of her most excellent Majesty, or bare term of supreme authority, is not denied, (although I hope, our brethren do it of no ill meaning, but only are overshot there-in, and when they perceive it, will reclaim it) yet the very thing that is here so much desired & urged, is even as Solomon foresaw, more than his good and simple mother Bethsabee did, who thought no hurt unto her son, but meant and wished all well, when she required so instantly of him, 3. Reg. 11. I desire of thee a small request, say me not nay: and the King said unto her, Ask on my mother, for I will not say thee nay: then said she, let Abysag the Sunamite be given to Adoniah thy brother to wife. But King Solomon answered and said unto his mother: and why dost thou ask Abysag the Sunamite for Adoniah? ask for him the kingdom also. verily, verily, which is Christ's own asseveration, Our brothers desires prejudicial to her majesties chiefest authority. and therefore not rashly to be used, nor uncharitably, I believe, and (me thinks) I foresee, that although these desires of our brethren stretch not, to prejudice her majesties life and person, which the dogged deadly enemies do seek (the Lord still defend her Majesty from them:) and yet I think, that many of them seek it not so much, for any malice to her person, as in a blind malicious zeal against her authority, which if her Majesty would give over, many of them would perhaps give over their malice also, and acknowledge her their Sovereign Lady, as they did Queen Marie her majesties sister: yet this thing which these our brethren, though with as good meaning (I dare say for them) and with as loving hearts, as Bethsabee bore to her son Solomon, both think and wish unto her Majesty, as to their own selves: but whatsoever they think, wish, or mean never so well, like loving subjects: not only her Majesty, In whom (God be praised) the wisdom (as it were) of Solomon shineth, but almost every man (not affectioned that way) may see, that her Majesty, to these her children, (as Solomon to his mother) may reply and say: Why do you ask this thing? Ask, (if not the kingdom and all,) yet, even the best and chiefest part, duty, and authority of the kingdom. And that these desires of our brethren, do so nearly touch her Majesty, and every Christian Princes government established, and supreme authority: I refer myself to this learned discourse, where it shall (God willing) most plainly appear, what is taken away, and what is left to all Christian Princes, & so to her Majesty in this government. Now upon this satisfaction (as our brethren conceive) to this last objection, they conclude this preface, saying: And if this so safe and reasonable an offer can not be liked, in respect of the last objected consideration, Preface. we think it impossible, but the persons which desire a way so sound, peaceable & dutiful, shall recover this favour, that with safety of their consciences, they shall exercise their ministery with that liberty, which is meet for those, who shall be tied in all things to have especial regard to the peace of the Church, and public orders. Wherefore most Christian reader, when thou shalt by these few, take knowledge of these things: Pray unto God for us, and as thy place is, solicit and further so just a cause, to this end only, that Christ's kingdom may be perfectly established, the consciences of all the godly quieted, and the happy regiment of her Majesty honoured, with much joy, peace, and quietness at home. What safe & reasonable offer have our brethren here made, or what answer have they given, Bridges. or what means have they devised (besides the other objections) to satisfy even but the last objected consideration? Our brothers 3. objection not satisfied of prejudice to the state established. doth not the objection stand still, that it shallbe prejudicial to the estate of government established? when their desires principally are, that, not only the authority of the Bishops, & the most part of all the Laws & orders eccl. established, but also, all the acts of Parliament thereon: yea, her majesties own authority, & principal part thereof, concerning eccl. matters, must be reversed, canceled, abrogated, & dissolved, and a new authority in all these things set up? Who may not see (except he will blindfold himself with too muc● affection) that this is, and cannot otherwise be, but to the prejudice of the estate of government that already is established? As for the bishops acceptation of any offer by our brethren, that to her Ma. & their Honours shallbe thought safe and reasonable, I dare undertake it, they shall at all times be most ready to accept the same: so that our brethren would for ever hereafter, stand to the final determination of the trial. As for the offer, that here they make, is neither safe nor reasonable, nor satisfieth the consideration of the last objection. And therefore, except better proviso be had for the safeguard of the Princes supreme authority: it can not (as I take it) well be liked. But if this offer cannot be liked: then say our brethren, we think it impossible, but the persons, which desire a way so sound, peaceable, and dutiful, shall recover this favour, that with safety of their consciences, they shall exercise their ministery with that liberty, etc. As I said before, so I say again, this way which our brethren have here set down, is neither sound, peaceable, nor dutiful. It is so unsound, that (as we have seen) for many parts thereof, their very words have so uncertain a sound, that we can not sound out the sense thereof. And how can the same be peaceable: except there were such moderators and determinors, as might with full authority decide and determine all the controversies? For if all should take upon them to fall a prophesying, when they should fall rather to disputing: & all the hearers, & actors in the controversies, should (as in prophesying) take upon them to be the judges: how would not this, in these controversies, breed greater contentions & confusions, than ever S. Paul reprehended among the Corinthians? Neither is it dutiful, when they call into these questions, even the Princes chief authority. Besides the intemperate speeches against their brethren, which we have heard even at their very first motion of this conference. And now since that this way (as is here set down) is so unsound, so unpeaceable, so undutiful: do our brethren think it is impossible, but that the persons that desire this way, & make all these troubles, Our brothers confident opinion of recovering favour and exercise of their ministery. shall recover this favour (which they have lost) that with safety of their consciences, they shall exercise their ministry, their consciences being thus affected as they are? would God, they would so enter into the due examining of their consciences, wherefore they should have lost this favour which they now think they shall recover? Yea, wherefore should they not more look herein to duty than to favour, for the exercise of their ministry? if they be indeed (as they say) faithful ministers, who made them ministers? did not our Bishops? and if our B. be not Bishops: how could they make any ministers? How our brethren became ministers. and if their ordaining of them were not a true ordaining: then are they no true ministers. And if they be true & lawful ministers: how go they about to make their ministery, to be no true & lawful ministery, of whom their selves have all the ministery that they have? Would God this would sink into their consciences: they would then never be the causes of their own disfavour or restraint from the exercise of their ministery, for the oppugning of their ministery that made them ministers. Which if they exercise not: the default is not in the Bishops that made them ministers: for they made them of favour, and to the end● that they should exercise their ministery. So that the fault of their disfavour, and not exercise, is principally in their own selves. And yet if they will perform indeed, that which in words here they offer: they may both with recovery of favour, exercise their ministery still, and might still so have done, without loss of favour, if they would exercise their ministery with that liberty, which is meet for those which shall be tied in all things, Our brothers offer to be tied to have special regard: to the peace of the church and public orders. to have especial regard to the peace of the Church and public orders. In what bond will they be tied to this: That her Majesty, their honours, and the Bishops, may be assured hereof? Or will they promise this on the word of a faithful minister, that they will exercise their ministery no otherwise? But, why then do they it not? For, there is no other thing required of them, and it is their duty so to do it. But what especial regard of the peace of the Church & public orders (if they had liberty to exercise their ministry according to their consciences) is it likely that our brethren would have? when as they were restrained only for the abuse hereof: & being restrained, do thus disturbs the peace of the Church, & the public orders of the same? Yea, all their especial regard and drift, is against the public orders. And if now they should thus be with favour allowed, to exercise their ministry according to their consciences: what would our brethren then spare to do against these public orders? I marvel therefore how they can thus confidently say, it is impossible, but that they shall exercise their ministery, etc. Whereas, it is both against all sense and reason, yea, plain impossible to be granted to them, without we would with all, grant unto them all their desires, and devices in these controversies. The epilog of the preface exhorting to prayer for these things. For the residue of this conclusion, we say in part with our brethren also: Wherefore most Christian reader, when thou shalt by these few, take knowledge of these things, which are contained in this preface, and in this Learned discourse, pray unto God for us: and as thy place is, (and so far forth as accordeth with thy duty therein) solicit and further so just a cause (as that the peace of the Church, the public orders & government established be not prejudiced) to this end only, that Christ's kingdom may be perfectly established, the consciences of all the godly quieted, & the happy regiment of her Ma. honoured, with much peace, joy, and quietness, (both) at home, among us: and that it may overflow, to th● relief, comfort and good example, of other parts of Christ's Church, that are distressed in foreign countries. To the which effects (good Christian Reader) call upon God our heavenly Father, in the name of his son ou● Saviour Christ, for the illumining of his holy spirit: that thy judgement being not forestalled in these matters, and yet, being desirous to see the truth, and to search out the bottom of these doubts: thou mayest be able to discern the spirits aright, to resolve and stay thyself, on the very ground of truth in all these questions. And so a God's name enter now, into the perusal and considering of this learned discourse. The first book of this defence against the learned discourse of Ecclesiastical government. The argument of the first Book. THE first book is of the principles of this learned discourses platform of the Church's government; of their partition thereof, into a tetrarchy of 4. estates: Doctors, Pastors, Governors, and Deacons: and of their necessity and perpetuity: of the persuasion to leave our own Estate, and embrace the Estate of our neighbours: and of their putting back the treatise of the Christian Princes supreme Government, in Eccl. causes: and their reasons, why they will not first treat there-on, until they have before assigned unto all and every of these 4. Estates, all their places, with their several and joint offices and authorities: wherein is showed, not only what danger, and injury is offered unto Christian Princes: but also, with what unworthy contumelies and slanders, they are rejected to the end of this Learned discourse. A learned discourse of Ecclesiastical government, proved by the word of God. The title of our brothers book. Page. 1. THis is the Title commendatory of this book, besides the other title which they set before it: A brief, or plain declaration concerning the desires of all those faithful ministers, The vaunt of learning in the discourse. etc. But because this later title liked them better: our brethren take the former part of this title, & prefix over every leaf of all their treatise this commendation, A learned discourse of eccl. government. I refer the judgement of the learning to the learned. Me thinketh our brethren should have done better, to let the discourse commend itself, whether it be learned or unlearned: vino vendibili non ●pus haedera. But what soever the reader can judge of learning: let him still have his aim to this point, that is here avouched, The proof by the word of God. but not likewise set up over every leaf, proved by the word of God. For, beit learned or unlearned, prove that: & we yield. And if our brethren prove it not by the word of God: then we crave of them, that they will cease these contentious discourses, and not stand so much upon their learning. But both their learned discoursing of Eccl. government, and their proving the same by the word of God shall appear (God willing) to the Reader, by the discoursing. The learned discourse. Page. 1. The Church of God is the house of God, & therefore aught to be directed in all things, according to the order prescribed by the householder himself: which order is not to be learned elsewhere, but in his holy word. The first of these principles or propositions, is the very word of the holy Ghost uttered by Paul: The second followeth necessarily of the first. 1. Tim. ●. 15. The third is a manifest truth, believed of all them, that acknowledge the scripture of God, The definition of the Church. to be a perfect rule of all our life, and able to make the man of God perfect, prepared to all good works. 2. Tim. 3.17. On these three principles, our brethren lay their ground of all their learned discourse. Bridges. Which being rightly understood, and building well upon them, Three principles or propositions, whereon all this learned discourse is grounded. First, that the Church is God's house. are very good principles, or rather propositions, as they term them. Of this first, is said enough already: concerning David's comparing himself to the stone in the corner of this mystical houses building. And most gladly we admit this our brethren's testimony for the same, as the very word of the holy Ghost uttered by Paul: and that this house of God, which is the Church of the living God, (is) the pillar and ground of truth: Because it always upholdeth and maintaineth the truth, both in this matter of eccl. government, and in all other, so far as is necessary to salvation. Albeit, Christ in principal, properly and absolutely, is the only ground and foundation of this house. 1. Tim. 3.17. And here by the way, sith by this testimony of S. Paul, The Church the pillar of ●he truth. the Church, which is the house of God, is thus the pillar and ground of the truth: If this government that our brethren urge be so necessary, and of so great moment to the house or church of God: then is it likely, the the Church of God, though it hath not always and in all places, yet for the most part of time & places, or at leastwise, in some ages and places, had this government maintained, & kept it, or strived for it; or else belike it was not thought so necessary. 2. that all things should be directed by the householders prescribed order. The second principle (they say) followeth necessarily of the first. And so it doth, which second was this: and therefore (this Church or house of God) ought to be directed in all things, according to the order prescribed by the householder himself. Which principle is true within the bounds thereof, that is to say, in all things that he hath prescribed. But if he have not prescribed all things appertaining to the external government of his Church or house: How far this rule holdeth. then are those things which are not prescribed by the householder himself, not to be so urged, as that they ought necessarily, this way or that way to be always directed. The Apostle Hebr. 8. verse. 5. saith out of Exod. 25. verse 40. Moses was warned by God, when he was about to finish the Tabernacle: See said he, Hebr. 8.5. that thou make all things according to the pattern, showed to thee in the mount. But the Apostle proceeding in the ninth Chapter, Hebr. 9.11. verse 11. applying this first Tabernacle to the second, which he calleth a greater and more perfect Tabernacle, not made with hands, that is, not of this building, (meaning the natural body of Christ) referreth not this to the mystical body, which is the Church or house of God, and much less to the external form of regiment in all matters ecclesiastical, or belonging to the Church's government. No, not when before, chap. 3. verse 1. Hebr. 3.1. etc. he speaketh both of Christ himself, and of his house or Church also. Therefore (sayeth he) holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly vocation, consider the Apostle and high Priest of our profession Christ jesus: who was faithful to him that hath appointe● him, even as Moses was in all his house. For this man was counted worthy of more glory th●n Moses, in as much as he that hath builded the house, hath more honour than the house. For every house is builded of some man, and he that hath built all things, is God. Now Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a witness of the things which should be spoken after: but Christ is as the son over his own house, whose house we are, if we hold fast the confidence, and the rejoicing of the hope, unto the end. Here again, we see that this faithfulness in all his house, (as Moses was faithful,) is not to be reckoned, as though he went about to show us, that all points of the external regiment of the house or Church of Christ, have a prescribed order, by which they ought to be directed in all things: but that in the inward and spiritual regiment thereof, we should acknowledge jesus Christ the son of God to be the Lord and owner of this house, and to consider him, as the Apostle and high Priest of our profession, that is, of our Christian faith and religion, and to confirm our faith in him, that we are his house or Church, if we hold fast (not this or that external form of Ecclesiastical government) but the confidence and rejoicing of hope unto the end. And thus far forth, and not further, we admit this second principle or proposition. And this is necessary to be observed, The captious setting down of the 2. principle. because this principle is here set down in such captious order, as insinuating, that Christ had prescribed an order in all things, in his house or Church: according to the prescription whereof, all things ought to be directed. In which sense it is no principle, but a question between us, which w● deny, and our brethren affirm: but as yet they have not proved it. The third (say they) is a manifest truth, believed of all them, that acknowledge the Scripture of God, The 3. principle. That the scripture teacheth all the Church's government. The caption of this third principle. to be a perpetual rule of all our life, and able to make the man of God perfect, prepared to all good works. Here again, another caption is to be taken heed of, in this their third principle: which order is not to be learned elsewhere, but in his holy word. For if they mean it of the order that in his holy word he hath prescribed: true it is, that order is not to be learned any where else, as any necessary prescription: otherwise then as an exposition of the same order, for our more clear and fuller learning thereof. And so (always keeping the foundation) the godly fathers and expositors may build there-on: and the godly governors of the Church, may beautify and adorn the same: so that all be done to God's glory, and to the true edifying of the Church. And so, this third proposition is a manifest truth believed of all them, that acknowledge the scripture of God, to be a perfect rule of all our life, and able to make the man of God perfect, prepared to all good works. But it followeth not hereupon, that all general or particular orders in the external government of the Church, are not elsewhere to be learned, but in God's holy word: except they mean by God's holy word, such as are inclusively comprehended, and not expressly specified in his holy word. For, they their selves have not all their orders expressly mentioned, and in all things prescribed in God's holy word. For example, their own communion book, entitled: The form of Common prayers, The form of common prayer by our brethren prescribed. administration of the Sacraments, etc. They dare not avow, that all things therein contained, have not been learned elsewhere, but in his holy word, and are there to be found either in plain words, or necessary implication: but because they think, that they are not contrary: they dare avouch thus far, to call them, Agreeable to God's word. And yet, as though the agreeableness also might be called in question: they add hereto, And the use of the reformed Churches. And as their own book of Common prayers useth all these helps, to save all upright, for fear they might be challenged in this point: even so, this book which our brethren commend unto us, to be, A learned discourse of Ecclesiastical government, proved by the word of God: we shall find in the discourse thereof, that the learned discoursers learned not all the orders prescribed there-in, agreeable to God's word though not prescribed. out of God's holy word: but somewhat elsewhere. Except they will likewise say, it is agreeable, or not contrary to God's holy word. Wherein also, we shall (God willing) see how they fail. But if that answer may thus serve them: I see not why, it may not as well serve us, if we have no other government established, but such as is agreeable and not contrary to the holy word of God, although it be not in his holy word expressly prescribed. Neither doth this text of S. Paul. 2. Tim. 3.17. any more infringe every order in the church's government, that it may not be learned elsewhere, but in Gods holy word: than it doth infringe every other order in the civil policy, or administration of every man's moral behaviour: that their orders also are not to be learned elsewhere, but in Gods holy word. Because, thi● is a manifest truth, believed of all them that acknowledge the scripture of God, to be a perfect rule of all our life, and able to make the man of God perfect, prepared to all good works. But it sufficeth for such orders as are not prescribed, nor specified as things necessary to salvation, both in life and manners, to level all such orders (be they ecclesiastical, civil, or moral) according to the analogy of those, that are specified & prescribed: and to receive them, either as folded up or unfolded, in those general specifications & prescriptions: and so to esteem them in their degrees, as necessary or expedient to edification, for order, comeliness, or obedience sake, although they be none of those things, that directly appertain unto the necessity of our salvation, or to any absolute necessity of our obedience. And thus far (as I, under correction, take it) are these three principles, albeit indeed no principles, because we see they are thus intricate, ambiguous, captious, and so questionable (but propositions, are the fit name for the two later) to be admitted, and no farther. This foundation being surely laid, The learned discourse. Page. 2. against which the gates of hell cannot prevail: we ought diligently and reverently to search the holy scriptures, that we may find, what order our saviour Christ, our only householder, hath set forth in them: by which he would have his church or household to be directed in all things, appertaining to the eternal salvation of us men, his unprofitable servants. What ministers are appointed in the church. Here our brethren draw their three former propositions to an head or issue: what order is prescribed in the holy scriptures. But whereas they make these three foresaid propositions, Bridges. to be the foundation of all their building of this house of God: The issue of these three principles. (the reverence reserved to so learned discoursers) me thinketh they should have laid a more sure foundation, whether it be of this house of God's church, or of their platform of building this their ecclesiastical government. Our brothers foundation, and the foundation that For (as we may easily perceive, by view of these three propositions) they are not all of them so sure and plain principles, as our brethren would bear us in hand, they are. But this is apparent, that they are not that foundation, against which Christ saith) that the gates of hell shall not prevail. That foundation was surely laid indeed: for it was Christ himself, upon whom (by faith in him) all the house of the church is builded: as the Apostle saith: No m●n can lay any other foundation, then that that is laid, which is jesus Christ. Seeing that therefore, our brethren make all their foundation, where upon their plotforme of government shall arise, to consist on these three foresaid propositions: I doubt, lest, the surelier they think that they lay their building on it, this foundation will not bear it, being so sandy, lose, and hollow: except their building be of very slight timber, & light stuff. Nevertheless, the drift whereunto they drive all these three propositions, is well to be liked, to search the scriptures, as Christ willeth, john. 5.39. For they testify of him. But although a man build on that foundation, which is only jesus Christ: yet (saith S. Paul. 1. Cor. 13.11, etc. ●▪ Cor. 13.11. Let every man take heed how he buildeth upon it. For if any man build upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, timber, hay, stubble: every man's work shallbe made manifest. For the day shall declare it, because it shallbe revealed by the fire, and the fire shall try every man's work, of what sort it is. If any man's work that he hath built upon, abide, he shall receive wages: if any man's work burn, he shall lose, but he shallbe safe himself: nevertheless, yet as it were by the fire. And who are these that build thus, albeit, on Christ? May we not well (among all other interpretations) compare them unto these builders, It sufficeth not to build on Christ, but also to take heed how we b●ild on him. which being neither Heathen, nor Heretics, nor erroneous Papists (for, all those build besides the foundation Christ,) But these building and grounding themselves (so far as reacheth to the ground and foundation) all on Christ, notwithstanding, they contend (as the Corinthians did) about matters, that were not so necessary, but less edifying: of the which, although some of them were goo● gifts of GOD, meet for the state and time then present, (being well used) but not to be urged so peremptorily, that even a building and platform, should be made and prescribed unto all churches, and to all times and states, of those things: these men (although otherwise, they lay all their foundation only on jesus Christ) yet when the fire of God's spirit and holy word, shall come indeed to try them, this fire will consume and burn up (as straw, or stubble, yea be it timber also) all these curious and contentious plotformes, that these our ze●lous brethren have framed, and endeavoured to set up, on jesus Christ, the rock and foundation of all the building. But not so, but that they their selves (by the grace of God) shall never the less be saved, though these devices of theirs, for all they build them on Christ, yet because they are not so necessary to edifying (as they conceive of them) shall perish in the trial. And as this is true of our brethren's building, so likewise of ours, or o● any others, if we should make any building on Christ, of the outward order of ecclesiastical government, otherwise then as S. Paul the wise master builder doth: not to urge them as matters of salvation, or as though the perfection of religion lay in them: nor yet to give leave to every private congregation, to dispose of them, as they list: but so to urge and retain them, as orders necessary, not of the building itself, but of the ornaments of the building, of which orders he giveth his general rule, 1. Cor. 14.40. Let all things be done honestly and by order, as we shall (God willing) see further in this discourse thereon. And such orders he seemeth also to include, 1. Cor. 11.34. Other things will I set in order when I come. But these orders are neither of the substance of the building: nor be all of them expressed in the holy scriptures, though some of them be: nor all that are expressed, are prescribed to all ages & churches, nor are things of necessity to salvation. Albeit, they be not thereupon, to be unorderly plucked up or contemned, being orderly set down & established. But, that we ought diligently and reverently to search the holy scriptures, that we may find what order our Saviour Christ, our only householder, hath set forth in them, by which he would have his house or church, to be directed in all things, appertaining to the eternal salvation of us men, his unprofitable servants: This is most true, we ought so to do, and to do the same with great diligence, and no less reverence: Diligence and reverence in searching the scriptures. lest perhaps, of never so good and zealous a meaning, we should overbusy ourselves contentiouslie, for things not necessarily pertaining to the eternal salvation of us men his unprofitable servants, when we find any thing mentioned in the holy scriptures: and not diligently and reverently searching, and considering the same, streightwaies urge it, to be a general order, or an absolute rule, that our Saviour Christ, Urging of things read in the scripture, as necessary to salvation, that are not necessary. our only (chief) householder, hath set forth in them: by the which he would have his house or church to be directed, as in things pertaining to the eternal salvation of us men his unprofitable servants. This were indeed an improfitable service, and an undiligent and unreverent searching of the holy scripture. For so, Per ignorationem Elenchi, not knowing the ground of the matter, which we searched for, we might (in a zeal not according to knowledge) run (and lead other with us) into many and dangerous inconveniences, and so, become not only unprofitable, but hurtful servants too. And if these our brethren, the learned discoursers, did always search the holy scriptures, with this diligence and reverence (as both they and we, and all aught to do) they should find, that in their urging of this their ecclesiastical government, as appertaining to salvation, they offer to great an injury, both to all us their brethren, & to the most ages, and peoples (if not to all God's church) besides themselves. For, albeit they could find some parts thereof set forth by our saviour Christ in the holy scriptures: (which how they search and prove, this discourse will show) yet, for all their form here prescribed, to be set forth by our saviour Christ, or by his apostles, in the holy scriptures, by which he would have his church directed in all things, and that, as appertaining to the salvation of us men, Our brothers to hard a censure of t●e greatest pa●te of Christ's church. his unprofitable servants: They shall never find this, search while they will. Yea, in saying this, they pronounce to hard a censure, upon all the house and church of Christ, where this ecclesiastical government hath not been observed. Which (if it had pertained to the salvation of man) should not only have been unprofitable, but cast away and condemned servants to, and so, no lively stones of his house, or parts of his true church at all. For it booteth not that other of our brethren think to help the matter, in likening our church to a man living, but yet maimed: or to a house standing, but yet ruinated. For, if it necessarily be appertaining to the salvation of us men: then cannot we men without it be partakers of salvation. But none are of the true church of God, but are partakers of salvation. For the true church is only of the elected: and therefore either all that have not had (since Christ's time) this prescribed form of government, were not the church of Christ at all, Our brethren herein are of Harrisons opinion against cartwright. or else, this prescribed form of government, is not necessarily appertaining to the salvation of us men. And if not necessary, then unnecessary to our salvation. And then, we shall maintain our government (I trust) in peace, honesty, and godliness, (by the grace of God) well-inough, yea, without any deforming: and much more, without any maiming of the church of Christ (as Cartwrighte saith) and much more, without being no true church at all (as Harrison saith) although we want it. But now let us see, with what diligence and reverence our brethren have searched the holy scriptures, The learned discourse. Page. 2. and what they have found in them for this their building. Now we find in the scriptures, that our saviour Christ ascending into heaven, was not unmindful of his church on earth: but ordained an holy ministery of men, to the building up of the body of Christ, in unity of faith and knowledge. Eph●s. 4.11. 1. Cor. 12.28. Bridges This for a beginning is well searched out, and a good beginning maketh a good ending. This is searched, found, and quoted by our brethren, Ephes. 4.11, and 1. Cor. 12.28. But they find here, that was not lost, nor is doubted of, Th● gif●● & offices mēt●one●, or called in question between us. For, we confess, as freely as they, (that our saviour Christ ascending into heaven, was not unmindful of his church on earth: Ephes. 4.11. but ordained an holy ministery of men. But what that holy ministery of men was, the apostle himself showeth in the same place, Ephes 4. ver. 11. He therefore gave some to be Apostles, and some Prophet●, and some Evangelists, and some Pastors and teachers. This place declareth, that our saviour Christ was neither unmindful, nor unbountifull to his church on earth. Notwithstanding, the most part of the gifts here reckoned up, are ceased many hundred years agone: and either there remaineth of this, but one, Pastor and teacher. understanding pastor and teacher for one office, as the apostle dividing the other, setteth down this together jointly, since the office of Pastor chiefly consisteth in teaching, (and so do the most interpreters expound it) or there remaineth but two ordinary functions at the most, here mentioned: if we should divide them as these our brethren do: but of that afterward. Now only to the present purpose, for the which our brethren here allege this place, the Apostle here citeth it not for any orders of ecclesiastical government, concerning external discipline or jurisdiction, in what prescribed manner it should be observed, directed, set forth, and perpetually continued in Christ's church: yea, the chiefest part of those governors, The Apostles neither words nor scope set down a perpetual form of external government in th● church. which the Apostle setteth down, is altered, by taking away the three principal named persons, Apostles, Prophets, and Evangelists. But S. Paul speaking there, of their diverse gifts and functions: to what purpose do our brethren say, Christ gave them? To the building up (say they) of the body of Christ in the unity of faith and knowledge. What is this to the matter that we now search to find in the scriptures, that is to say, for some orders prescribed and set forth, concerning the external form of ecclesiastical government for the church, to be directed by, in all things? Can we find this, in this testimony of the scripture? If we can: let us search the place better, and not curtal it thus, as they do. He therefore (saith the Apostle) gave some to be apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers: for the gathering together of the saints, for the work of the ministery, and for the edification of the body of Christ, till we all meet together in the unity of faith, and knowledge of the son of God, unto a perfect man, and unto the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ, that we hence forth be no more children, wavering, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the deceit of men, and with craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive. But let us follow the truth in love, and in all things grow up into him, which is the head (that is Christ) by whom all the body being coupled and knit together by every joint, for the furniture thereof, according to the effectual power, which is in the measure of every part, receiveth increase of the body, unto the edifying of itself in love. This is all that S. Paul in this place speaketh, of these gifts, and of this building, and of the order and ends thereof. So that, here he referreth all to unity in doctrine of faith, and to holy conversation of life, and not to the external orders of the churches ecclesiastical government. Albeit we must not think here upon, that because this government is not here mentioned among the gifts, which our Saviour Christ gave to his church on earth, when he ascended into heaven: He was unmindful of his church: or that S. Paul was unmindful of his gifts: or that the church having not had this now desired government, for so many hundredth years, should have been so long time unmindful or destitute of the same, if it had been any matter wherein the perfection of the church consisted: or the want thereof had been any impediment to those ends, that the Apostle here citeth. But we may rather think the contrary, that it was no such important matter, and therefore not necessary to be minded. Well, yet if it be not in the one place here quoted, it may be in the other. Let us therefore likewise see the other, 1. Cor. 12.28. 1. Cor. 12.28. And there indeed are governors mentioned in express terms. For where S. Paul had said, Verse, 27. Now are ye the body of Christ, and members for your part: it followeth. And God hath ordained some in the church: as first Apostles, s●condlie Prophet, thirdly Teachers; then, them that do miracles: after that, the gifts of healing, helpers, governors, diversities of tongues. Here are gifts reckoned up, Apostles and Prophets mentioned before: and here among other, are governors named: Governors. but what kind of governors? Or whether with any ordinary form and order of government, Neither in this place the example sets down any perpetual order of the churches external government. for the church always to be directed by, any more than by any other of the residue here mentioned? (except Teachers, which are always necessary for the instruction o● doctrine, and documents of life:) this place helpeth to our brethren's purpose, no more than did the other. Neither was the purpose of S. Paul héerin, directed to any such bent, but to exhort the Corinthians unto edifying in unity and love, and not to distract themselves in faction, about these gifts, as he proceedeth saying: Are all Apostles? Are all Prophets? Ar● all Teachers? Are all workers of miracles? Have all the gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? But desire yo● the best gifts, and I will yet show you a more excellent way. And so h● entereth into a learned discourse indeed, chap. 13. Not of this our brethren● plotforme of ecclesiastical government, The examples sco●e. as tending to the perfection of the church: But of the excellency of love or charity, above all th● gifts and offices that he had named: and maketh this the way to tend unto the perfection of the church, concluding thus: And now abideth faith, hope, and love, these three: but the chiefest of these is love. Thi● was the full drift of S. Paul in this place, concerning the mystical bodi● of Christ, which is his church or house, and that the building up thereof: even, where he speaketh of Governors, and of the way tending to perfection, & where he citeth many gifts and offices: and yet can we n●t here find this platform of ecclesiastical government, which our brothers' desire & seek for, (now in the beginning of this learned discourse, and afterwards again and again) in these place●. And yet, had there been then in the church of Christ, any such plotforme, S. Paul had in this place, notable occasion to have treated thereof. But here is no mention of it, or of any perpetual form at all prescribed of ecclesiast. government, save only of Teaching: except they will include that in governing. So that finding nothing hitherto to satisfy their desires, in searching these two testimonies of the scripture: let us now proceed, to search further with them for this matter. We find also, that as the offices, are diverse of this ministery: The learned discourse. Page. 2. and 3. so they are not general unto all the church, but as order and necessity require, for executing of their office, distributed and limited unto certain places or particular churches, according to the division of regions, cities and towns. For we read that Paul and Barnabas, ordained at Derbie, Lystra, Iconium, and Antiochia, &c: elders by election in every church, with prayer and fasting, and so commended them to the Lord, in whom they believed. Also Paul left Titus in the Isle of Creta, that he should ordain Elders in every city, as he had appointed. What our brethren did find in the two foresaid testimonies of the scripture, we have already seen, that is to say, Bridges. they have found out in them, for the confirmation of the question between us, what more, what less, mere nothing. Here they tell us they find also, that the diverse offices of this ministery are not general unto all the church. But they find also this so doubtfully, that we can scarce tell how to find also what it is, that they say here, they have found. For, The confusedness of our brothers word●. what mean they by these words: that as the offices are diverse, so are they not general unto all the church? Whether mean they, not general unto all the church, in respect of all the persons, of whom the church consisteth, that is to say, not general or common to all men? Or, mean they it, in respect of the time: that is to say, they are not general or perpetual to all the continuance of the church to the world's end? And if they do so: why do they then allege these places for them? Scythe they can neither find by them, all the offices of eccl. government that they desire: nor those places do distinguish, which diverse offices of this ministery are general or perpetual, and which are not. Or, mean they general, in respect of all places, wheresoever the church is throughout all the world dispersed? And although this last sense, seemeth to draw nearest to the coherence of their words following: but as order and necessity require, for executing of their office, distributed and limited unto corteine places or particular churches, according to the divisions of regions, cities and towns: yet ●re these words (me thinks) as dark, or darker than the other. And ●●ill (〈◊〉 correction) I wish, they had (for their own sakes) set down their words more plainly. For my part, I gather this of them● that for the executing of any of those diverse offices (not speaking of those that are already ceased, but of those that are ordinary offices, which our brethren also make diverse offices) these cannot execute their offices, but that for order sake, and of very necessity, these offices or officers must be distributed and limited, The distribution of offices in regions, cities, and towns▪ for orders sake, and for very necessity: either unto certain places, or particular churches, where they may govern, feed, or teach the people: and these certain places or particular churches, are to be assigned or appointed unto these diverse offices or officers, according to the divisions of regions, cities and towns: that is to say, some of these diverse offices or officers, to wit, Governors, Pastors, & Teachers, to be distributed and limited; some over regions, other over cities, and other over towns. Is not this their meaning, that these diverse offices should be thus distinguished and limited, and that for order sake: yea, that very necessity doth require it, for the better executing of their offices? If this be not their meaning: I cannot see, what better construction to make of their words And the very examples which here they find also, do directly confirm this sense. For although in the one, Act. 14.23: they tell us, that Paul and Barnabas ordained elders by election. Which example we shall afterwards (God willing) see more fully & oftener than once discoursed: yet neither followeth it, that those presbyters, priests o● elders, must be understood of a signory, that are governors and not teachers, to be elected or ordained in every church: and our brethren themselves before, spoke only of an holy ministery, which words are usually restrained, unto the divine ministers of the word & sacraments. Neither followeth it, that although the churches had elected them (which cannot necessarily be gathered on that text) whom they knew fittest to be ordained: that therefore they had any thing at all to do in the ordaining or making of them. For, the text is plain, that Paul and Barnabas did ordain them, and not, the churches with Paul and Barnabas did ordain them. Paul and Barnabasses orde●ning elders. As for their other example, Tit. 1.5. doth most apparently confirm the same, and clean overthroweth the ecclesiastical government, that their selves desire. For first, what ecclesiastical office Tit●● had, Titus' limited to the region of Creta. the very subscription of S. Paul's epistle unto him, doth declare: To Titus the first elected bishop of the church of the Cretenses. Which subscription, what it inferreth, we shall (God willing) have further occasi●● to note again hereafter. In the mean season, it accordeth to our brothers saying, that he had by S. Paul's assignment, for the executing of 〈◊〉 episcopal office, Titus' office and authority in his limited region. the whole Isle and people of the Cretians, as his province or region, distributed and limited unto him. And our brethren further confess: Also Paul left Titus in the isle of Creta, that he should ordain Elders in every city, as he had appointed. And not only so: but as appeareth by Saint Paul's own words: For this cause, The gifts, etc. left I thee in Creta, that thou shouldest redress the things that remain, and shouldest ordain presbyters (priests or Elders) in every city, as I appointed thee. What these Presbyters, Priests, or Elders were, lest we should understand them to be Consistories, of governing only and not teaching presbyters, priests, or elders: He proceedeth, saying: what office the elders had that Titus ordained. If any be unreprovable, the husband of one wife, having faithful children, which are not slandered of riot, neither are disobedient. For a Bishop must be unreprovable, as God's steward: and so forth, as by the description of the properties there required, doth appear: especially the last, that he may be able to exhort with wholesome doctrine, and improve them that gainesaye it. Whereby we may plainly see, that he meaneth only the Bishops and Presbyters, Priests or Elders of the word. Here, of these Bishops and Presbyters, Priests or Elders, S. Paul giveth to Titus the authority or jurisdiction to be their ordinary, or the ordainer of them, in their Episcopal and presbyteral office, without any mention at all, of any others election of them, besides himself, to appoint and ordain such, as he should see, to be sufficiently qualified for those offices. And that he should thus do in every city in Creta, which Island at that time, had many and famous Cities. To conclude, he giveth him charge, and so withal, authority, that he should there continue to redress those things that were remaining to be done, Which, what things they were (some orders, perhaps, of ecclesiastical government, meet for their state): yet, because they are not specified: no prescribed order of this or that ecclesiastical government, The proof in Titus of Episcopal and archiepiscopal jurisdiction. can be inferred on those general words. Nevertheless, they prove, that he had authority, and that a continuing authority, to redress such ecclesiastical matters, as were amiss, or not yet established among them. So that, here is a manifest jurisdiction Episcopal, yea, archiepiscopal, not only over Pastors and Teachers, being elders in every particular church: but also over Bishops having authority over whole cities: Titus being above them all, throughout the whole I'll, as a Regionall or Provincial Bishop, which we usually call by the ancient term, Metropolitan or Archbishop. And all this doth here by the way (before we come to the proper treatise thereof) their own example, which they have here found out, most manifestly prove, directly against the ecclesiastical government that they seek for. From these places, our brethren return unto the testimonies, that they cited before, prefixing one more, Rom. 12. unto them. Concerning the diverse offices of the ministery, The learned discourse. Page. 3. we are taught by Saint Paul, Rom. 12.6. also, 1. Cor. 12.28. and Ephes. 4.11. Where we read that God hath ordained in the ministery of his Church th●se several offices: namely, Apostles, Evangelists, Prophets, Pastors, Doctors, Governors and Deacons: also men endued with the gifts of healing, of powers or miracles, and of diverse tongues. Bridges. Concerning the divers offices of the ministery, our brethren searched before, but they could find nothing for their desired Ecclesiastical government. And yet here the places which before were only cited in the margin, are now ascited and promoted into the Learned discourse itself: (belike) on hope of some better matter. Howbeit, they say nothing. They do here but muster on a plump, come forth for a show, and so pass by in a confused order, and not in their places, as the Apostle setteth them down And, a number are left out, that are also mentione● in these chapters here cited, even almost as many as be here name●. For besides these, the Apostle, Rom. 12. verse. 6. reckoneth up diverse other gifts. Seeing then (saith he) that we have gifts, which are diverse, according to the grace that is given unto us: The diverse gifts mentioned in these places. whether we have prophecy, let us prophesy, according to the proportion of faith: or an office, let us waire on the office: or he that teacheth, on teaching: or he that exhorteth, on exhortation: be that distributeth, let him do it with simplicity: he that ruleth, with diligence: he th●● showeth mercy, with cheerfulness. Here are seven gifts by the Apostle mentioned. And 1. Cor. 12. beginning at the eight verse, he saith: Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same spirit: and there are diversities of administrations, but the same Lord: and there are diversities of operations, but GOD is the same, which worketh all in all. But the manifestation of the spirit, is given to every man to profit withal: for to one is given, by the spirit, the word of wisdom: and to another the word of knowledge, by the same spirit●, and to another, is given faith, by the same spirit: and to another, the gifts of healing, by the same spirit: and to another, the operation of gr●●● works: and to another, prophesy: and to another, the discerning of spirits, and to another diversities of tongues, and unto another the interpretation of tongues. Here again are nine gifts reckoned up, of the which eight were not before Rom. 12. as diverse gifts named. And in the place already cit●● and viewed, 1. Corin. 12. ver. 28. are also eight or nine reckoned: of the which, two or three were not before specified. And Ephes. 4. verse. 1●. Likewise cited before and perused, are four named: or if they distinguish Pastor from Teacher, and so make them five: yet remain there more, then as many more again, as our brethren have here reckoned, besi●●● those that are not in these, but in other places mentioned. But whereto ar● our brethren, or should we need to be, so curious, in the enumeration of these diverse gifts or offices? Doth it any whit further our brethren's form of Ecclesiastical government? Or rather, doth it not in many points confute it, as by God's grace we shall afterward see? Or do they think, that as there were so many diverse gifts or offices, that they were all of them: or all those persons that were of some one office, of like measure in these gifts: or of like authority in that office? or that, although they were diverse gifts or officers, one man might not have diverse of them, all at one time without confusion? But those points are debated afterward. In the mean season, all this hitherto proveth nothing, for the building of their platform. But it showeth muche-how unconsideratelie they heap up these things, without all order, put in and put out, making perpetual or temporary, to serve for ever, or to serve for a time, what soever serveth their turn and humour: and all to lay a modill of such building, as whereon all this new devised tetrarchy might be erected. Which thing how they do: let us see now their proceeding further. Of these offices, some were temporal, serving only for the first planting and foundation of the church among the Heathen: The learned discourse. Page. 3.4, 5 & 6 some are perpetual, pertaining to the nourishing and building up of the church for ever. Of the former sort were Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, men endued with the graces of powers, of healings and of diverse tongues. Of the later kind are Doctors, Pastors, Governors, and Deacons. The Apostles were ordained by God, and sent forth immediately by Christ, having a general commission to spread the Gospel over all the world: which when they had accomplished, Matt. 28.19 Mark. 16.25 that office ceased. Such were the twelve Apostles, Paul and Barnabas, etc. And for this cause the Apostles appointed Mathias, in the place of judas, according to the scriptures: permitting nevertheless, Acts. 1.25. the election unto God, by casting of Lots, that the number might be full, for the first planting of the Church. But when Herode had slain james the brother of john with the sword, Acts. 1●. ●● they chose no man to succeed in his place, because they had no warrant of God's word: but the Holie-ghoste, as he saw it was expedient for the church, afterward separated Paul and Barnabas which lived at Antioch, Acts. 13.2. as Prophets and Teachers to the work, whereto he called them. The Prophets were such as were endued, with a singular gift of Revelation in the interpretation of the scriptures, and applying them to the present use of the church: of whom some also did foreshow of things to come▪ as Agabus. Also, there were in every city that prophesied to S. Paul, as he passed by them, that bonds and afflictions were prepared for him at jerusalem. This office being in the number of them that were ordained for beautifying the Gospel, in the first publishing thereof, it ceased with that singular and extraordinary gift, to be an ordinary function of the church. The Evangelists were such as were stirred up of GOD, to assist the Apostles in their ministery of general charge, Acts. 8.5. in planting the same by their preaching, Act. 8.14. but inferior in dignity to the Apostles. Such was Philip that first preached the Gospel in Samaria: whither Peter and john were sent by the Apostles, to confer unto them, by prayer and imposition of hands, the visible graces of the holy-ghost, which Philip did not. Act. 21.8. The same Philip in Acts. 21. verse. 8. is called an Evangelist. So was Timothy, 2. Timoth. 4.5. such was Titus, ●. Tim. ●. 5. Silas, and many other. This office also, with the order of the Apostles, is expired, and hath no place. Likewise as we do plainly see, that the gifts of healing, of powers or miracles, and of diverse tongues, have long since ceased to be in the church: so the offices of them which were grounded upon these gifts, must also cease and be determined. Therefore the Papists do vainly retain the name and office of exorcists, when they cannot cast out devils: and extreme unction, when they cannot cure diseases: & to speak with strange tongues, which they have not by inspiration, and that without any interpretation, which S. Paul expressly forbiddeth. It is requisite and draweth nearer to the purpose, to know, what was temporal in these gifts, Bridges and what perpetual: what is ceased, expired, What gifts and offices were temporal, what perpetual. determined, and hath no place, and what remaineth: for fear, we should offend either way: urging that to be temporal which is perpetual, or that to be perpetual which was but temporal. For the error of this, breedeth most of all these troubles between us. Wherein our brethren do both ways greatly mistake these gifts. For first, where they say: Some were temporal, serving only for the first planting and foundation of the church among the Heathen: (and of this former sort, they reckon up the Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, men endued with graces of powers, of healings:) and so they enter into their particular proves, of the ceasing of these functions: I think they may better bethink themselves, that all these gifts and offices, which their selves have here named, did not so cease, but that they have since the first planting and foundation of the church among the Heathen, continued longer time among the Christians. Yea, some of them, have for a great part of the time, continued even till our own times, & yet continue. As the operation of great works. Or if they mean thereby miracles, which were not ordinary, no not in that extraordinary time: and as the hypocrites had them also, so might and had diverse of the Papists, and yet their cause never the better. And the like may we say of the gift of speaking with tongues, which have not been by study before learned, as Anthony, &c: and diverse also both of the ancient fathers, and some among the Papists, and some among us, have not been destitute of the gift of prophesy, and much more may I say this, for the gift of healing: for none of these gifts or graces given then, or since, or yet, to men, infer the gift & grace of God's election, adoption, or be of necessity to salvation. But, were there no other gifts and offices then, in the primitive church, but these six, by our brethren here reckoned, besides the four, which they make standards and remainers? Look on the places before cited, and there we shall find a great many more, More ordinary gifts than our brethren mention. of which the most part have ever been, and yet are, even as much, or far more ordinary gifts or offices, than these four, which they say are perpetual. S. Paul (as is aforesaid) distinguishing these gifts, saith, Rom. 12.6. Seeing then that we have gifts which are diverse, according to the grace that is given unto us, whether we have prophecy, let us prophesy, according to the proportion of faith: or an office, let us wait on the office: or he that teacheth on teaching: or be that exhorteth on exhortation he that distributeth, let him do it with simplicity: he that ruleth, with diligence: he that showeth mercy with cheerfulness. Here also are other gifts and offices reckoned up, besides these four of Doctors, Pastors, Governors and Deacons. If he mean by office, some particular function, which is ceased: that would be showed: or else it may remain and be still perpetual. If he mean by teaching, Doctor, by exhorting, Pastor: by distributing Deacon. by ruling, one of those not teaching presbyters, priests, or elders, which our brethren call Governors▪ yet that which before the Apostle called an office, and that which followeth of showing mercy, are particularly specified and distinguished from these four, Doctor, Pastor, Governor, and Deacon. In what place then shall we reckon those two: either as temporal, or as perpetual? if temporal: then is there more ceased, than those six. If perpetual: then more than these four do remain Likewise, Saint Paul (as is aforesaid) 1. Cor. 12. saith. There are diversities of gifts, etc. For to one is given, by the spirit, the word of wisdom: and to another the word of knowledge by the same spirit: and to another is given faith by the same spirit: and to another the operation of great works: and to another other prophesy: and to another the discerning of spirits: and to another the diversities of t●onges: and to another the interpretation of tongues. All these the Apostle here setteth down, as gifts or offices, distinguished one from another. What now shall we say to the gift or office, of them▪ that had the word of wisdom given unto them? Was that a temporal gift or office, serving only for the first planting and foundation of the church among the Heathen? If they say the abundant measure of it was temporal: that may be granted: and yet the gift and office still remain. And so likewise, of the next gift or office, in them that have the gift of knowledge or learning. For these are distinguished here the one from the other, (as we commonly say: The greatest clerk ar● not always the wisest men,) and these our brethren, as they profecie all-over this their book, A learned discourse, do so believe, that they hau● the spirit of knowledge: otherwise they would not commend this treatise unto us by such a Title: so that, I perceive this gift also is not yet ceased, but that it may be joined to those (their four) remainders. And what shall we say, to that the Apostle calleth here the gift of Faith: making it also a distinct office from the residue? If we say, he meaneth the faith of miracles: then are those two gifts following, of healing and of the operation of great works, not to be understood of the gift of miracles. So that, either the one or the other, séem● to be perpetual. And what shall we say, to the gift or office of discerning spirits? For Saint john, 1. john. 4. verse. 1. saith unto us: Dear beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: for many false Prophets are gone out into the world. Which Epistle, being called Catholic or Universal, serveth to all ages and people of the Church: and the gift of trying or discerning spirits, is yet requisite, if not more needful now, then ever it was. To conclude, for this place: what shall we say for the gift or office, if not of diversities of tongues, yet, of the interpretations of tongues▪ Which gift or office is not only at this day, to be with all thankfulness acknowledged: but GOD which is the author of all goo● gifts, is highly to be praised for it, and many of our good brethren are endued therewith. Moreover, in the place here by our brethren quoted, Saint Paul● distinguisheth the gift or office of helping, from that of healing. And are all these gifts and offices ceased, as temporal, and serving only to the first planting and foundation of the church among the Heathen? Nay rather, do not the most of them remain still in the church among the faithful, for the continual building, confirmation, and establishing of them? I grant, th●● remain in another sort, then as they were first given in the primi●●●e church: and for the most times since, they have been given perhaps in an other manner, and in less abundance or measure of them. But that is not the question: but whether all these gifts and offices, besides the four, of Doctors, Pastors, Governors, and Deacons, (as they divide them,) have been expired, & ceased to be in the church, since the first planting and foundation thereof among the Heathen. For this is our brethren's conclusion: Likewise, as we do plainly see, that the gifts of healing, of powers or miracles, and of diverse tongues, have long since ceased to be in the church: so the offices of them, which were grounded upon these gifts, must also cease and be determined. And shall not we then conclude on the contrary, that the gifts yet in part remaining, the offices must in part remain also? I speak not this, to confirm the Papists, of whom our brethren (I grant) do well conclude, in saying: Therefore the Papists do vainly retain the name of exorcists, when they cannot cast out devils: and extreme unction, when they cannot cure diseases: and to speak with strange tongues, which they have not by inspiration, and that without any interpretation, which Saint Paul expressly forbiddeth. This dealing of the Papists was mere ridiculous and impious, proceeding from a blind zeal, and preposterous imitation of that which they had not. And yet whether they had it, or not, would needs make ordinary offices and imitations of them. Howbeit, how faulty soever they were therein: yet belie not (as they say) the devil. Their fault was not, that they spoke with strange tongues, which they had not by inspiration: for if they had not had them by inspiration, and yet had they understood them, and the people which heard them, had understood them also: then had this been no fault in them, except in speaking faulty matter. But is this true, that the gift ceasing, the office ceaseth? What then if the gift of ruling, that Saint Paul speaketh of Rom. 12. verse. 8. And the gifts of those Governors, whom he mentioneth, 1. Corinth. 12. verse▪ 28. (understanding the same as our brethren do) have ceased or do cease, or should cease: The gifts of ruling. will they grant that the office of their desired signory, whom they call Rulers or Governors, should cease also, and be expired or determined? And must we upon this presupposal, that there was any such then (which point is afterward fo● to be examined) suppose also that this gift of ruling that any such had, hath so remained ever since? Nay, if it be demanded further, whether either gift or office thereof (understanding the same as they do) have not since that time, even from the first planting and foundation of the church among the Heathen, and from thence even till our time, discontinued? And besides all this: what warrant out of God's word can be showed, more for those rulers or Governors (if they will needs understand thereby their signory, of which neither have we any warrant) that they be more perpetual than the other? Or the other more temporal than these? And that these are of the later kind, as are Doctors, Pastors, and Deacons, pertaining to the nourishing and building up of the church for ever. Our brethren have alleged somewhat for the ceasing of the other: is there any thing alleged here, for the perpetuity of these Seniors: if they run back to their former search of the holy scriptures, to find out what order our Saviour Christ, our only householder, hath set forth in them, by which he would have his household directed in all things, pertaining to the eternal salvation of us men: we find that all those gifts or offices, or the most of them, yea those which they say are ceased, are drawing nearer to matters pertaining to salvation, then is this, of ruling or governing. Neither hath this any further warrant of remaining in the church, than had the other. Now holdeth therefore this argument of our brethren? We find (say they) that there was such a signory, set forth by Christ in the holy scriptures: therefore, that office must needs be one of those that are perpetual, pertaining to the nourishing and building up of the church for ever. What reason d●● they here allege for it? Nay, no reason, but this: Either it is of the one sort, or of the other, temporal, or perpetual: but, it is not of the one, to wit, temporal: Ergo, it is of the other sort, that is, perpetual. This reason is good, if the parts of it were as good. But how do our brethren prove, it is not of the former sort, that is to say, temporal? Of the former sort, that is to say, temporal, and which are ceased, there are but six reckoned by our brethren, Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, men endued with the graces of powers, of healings, and of diverse tongues: but the gift of ruling or governing is none of these: and therefore it must needs be of the other kind, and so, perpetual. And how do our brethren prove there are but six of the former or temporal sort? What if we can prove by their own place here cited, that there were more? And what if they all ceased not? And why may not this gift or office o● those kind of rulers or governors, go among the number of that former sort with the six, which they call temporal, and make up the seventh, or rather the seuenté●nth, if they will accounted them all in that former sort? Surely, except we make this our fourth Principle to our former three or rather this our first and last, our unquestionable maximie, against the which there is no disputing▪ because (as ipse dixit) these our brethren the learned discoursers have coursed it over, and overruled it, and so it is become a ruled case: here is else, nothing in the world to prove it. And upon this they conclude, saying: There remaineth therefore of these before rehearsed, The learned discourse. Page. 7. & 8 only in the Church, these Eccl. offices instituted of God: namely, Pastors, Doctors, Governors, & Deacons: by which the Church of God, may (according to his word) be directed in all matters, which are commonly called Ecclesiastical. And therefore, as it is unlawful, so it is unneedful for men, following the devices of their own brain, without the warrant of God's word, to institute and ordain any other offices or kinds of ministery besides these, appointed and approved by God himself, What offices remains in the church. exercised in the primitive and pure Church, until the mystery of iniquity working a way for Antichristes pride & presumption, changed God's ordinance, and brought in all kind of false doctrine & confusion: and now again, restored in all rightly reformed Churches, with such daily increase, and glory of the kingdom of Christ, and suppression of the tyranny of Satan, that the only experience hereof, might be a sufficient persuasion to us to leave this disordered state of ours, wherein we have so long laboured with so little profit: and to embrace that most beautiful order of eccl. regiment, which God so manifestly doth bless and prosper in our neighbour's hands. We have heard what invincible proves (as our brethren imagine) they have found, and brought forth out of the holy scriptures, Bridges to infer the grounds of their desired Ecclesiastical government. Now upon these grounds and proves (such as they are) they resolutely proceed to the final conclusion and determinate sentence of this matter, by whom all Ecclesiastical matters shall be directed, saying: There remaineth therefore of these before rehearsed, only in the Church, these eccl. offices, instituted of God; namely, Pastors, Doctors, Governors and Deacons: by which the Church of God may according to his word be directed in all matters which are commonly called ecclesiastical. Our Brothers Terrarchie, of 4. Persons. & their dissent from those our other brethren, which make a Pentarchy of 5. or a Tritarchie of 3. In this peremptory conclusion, the direction of all eccl. matters, is here to be only governed by four kind of persons. Howbeit, the fruitful Sermon, upon 1. Cor. 12. printed also 1584. by Rob. waldgrave the printer of this learned discourse, maketh five ordinary and perpetual offices: Doctors, Pastors, Deacons, Rulers, and Attenders on the poor. But here by these our brethren (the Learned discoursers,) is erected a tetrarchy, or Quadriviratus, that is to say, a Catergovernment. And if (as diverse expound it) Pastors, & Teachers, be coincident in one office and person, as the text itself, Ephes. 4.11. jointly setteth them together and not disiunctively, which it doth in the other offices there mentioned: and as the Scottish book (taken from the English Church in Geneva) seemeth to make no necessity of having Doctors, distinct from Pastors, saying: Although we are not ignorant, that the scripture maketh mention of a fourth kind of ministers, left unto the Church of Christ, which also are very profitable, where time and place do permit: and so accounting no further on Doctors, set down but three: so that by them, it is but a Tritarchie, or Triumuiratus, as that kind of government was called, when Lepidus, Anthony, and Augustus parted the Roman government among them three, into a Triple regiment. If it fall not out alike, that as two then, made the third a cifer, and the one of those two did eat up the other, and all resolved into a Monarchy: so in the end, Monarchy and all being turned out, a fourth stepped in, and set up a Triple crown for all. But what this tetrarchy heer● erected will resolve into, in every particular Congregation, and that in all and every Ecclesiastical matter that is to be directed, and what they will comprehend under the name of Ecclesiastical matter: is discoursed afterward. But if this tetrarchy be not instituted of God himself, nor according to the warrant of God's word, A greater mystery in contending for this Catergovernment of these 4. cornered Persons, than the contention was before against the 4. cornered caps. ordained, appointed, nor approved so to be: as we have hitherto seen no such institution, appointing, ordaining nor approving: then am I afraid (I burden none, but I fear it shrewdelie, if I have not mist the mark) that there is a mystery, which our well meaning brethren see not, and therefore fear not: even mysterium iniquitatis, that lieth hidden in this partition of governing and directing all matters. I wish the best, and therefore if I fear the worst: I hope I am the easier to be pardoned. Now, although this conclusion of Quartering, Fivefolding, or trypling of this government, seemeth at the first not to infer any precise necessity: yet by the Correllative, which of consequence they make to fall out on this conclusion, that other offices in the direction and government of all Ecclesiastical matters, are not only unneedful but unlawful: The necessity that they make of this tetrarchy. What is their resolution other than this? not as they mollified it before, that by these four or three kinds of offices, (as other contract them, and our brethren here enlarge them, other stretch them further into five) the Church of God may be directed in all matters which are commonly called Ecclesiastical: But, the Church of God must be directed by none other. howbeit this consequence, doth not absolutely so set it down, saying: And therefore, it is not only unneedful, but also unlawful, for men, etc. to institute and ordain any other offices or kinds of ministery besides these: But sailing as it were with a side wind, seeming rather to run upon the needless, then, the lawless point, they rather seem to insinuate it, then to enforce it, that it is unlawful. And in very deed, as they set out the matter, their conclusion seemeth good and true, saying: And therefore as it is unlawful, so it is unneedful for men, following the devices of their own brain, without the warrant of God's word, to institute and ordain any other offices or kinds of ministery, besides these appointed and approved by God himself, exercised in the primitive and pure Church, etc. For, mens following the devices of their own brain, Mens following the devices of their own brain. without the warrant of God's word, in any matter of importance, is a great offence. Yea, be-it in never so mean a matter, have it no warrant at all, neither expressed nor contained, either in specialty or generality in God's word: It is not so unneedful as unlawful, and a presumptuous rashness, when men are so headstrong and selfewéening, that they will follow no good Counsel, but the devices of their own brain. And therefore, for our brethren to apply this, to all those that follow the government established, were no less unlawful than unneedful. Yea, how may not this (my Masters) light on yourselves? For what warrant have you either expressed or included, for all the things contained in this your platform? yea, No warrant of this tetrarchy in God's word. for the institution and the ordaining of all these offices and kinds of ministery, and the perpetuity of them in this four quartered government? Will you allege that such offices are mentioned in God's word? Take heed ye mistake not, but that they were indeed such offices. But were this a sufficient proof, that they were instituted and ordained to be offices or kinds of ministery, appointed and approved by God himself: Can you show this warrant also? And yet if you could do all this: how would this suf●●se, except withal ye show us a warrant for the perpetuity, of all and only these four offices or kinds of ministery? You are not ignorant what a warrant is: and I warrant you, and dare give you there-on your (quietus est,) that, as you have not yet found it, so ye shall never be able (with all the learned discoursing in the world) to find this warrant. For, think ye (if ye were able to find thus much) that the warrant hereof doth go n● further than here ye say, appointed and approved by God himself? so were all the offices and kinds of ministery of the Mosaical and Templarie Priesthood: and yet they were but temporal, and are ceased. Yea, so were the offices and kinds of ministery of the Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, men endued with the graces, of powers, Tetrarchy. of healings, and of diverse tongues: and yet yourselves c●●●fesse that all these are ceased, expired, determined, and have no place. And therefore, if ye can show this warrant of God's word, for the tetrarchy perpetually remaining of these eccl. offices instituted of God● namely, Pastors, Doctors, Governors, and Deacons: by which the Church of God, may (according to his word) be directed in all matters, which are commonly called eccl. show how God appointed and approved it, be-it, by himself, or by his Apostles, to be perpetually exercised in his Church: and then forthwith we yield. And if ye can not do this: then see (good brethren) how this your own conclusion here, reboundeth on your own selves: Therefore as it is unlawful, so it is unneedful for men, following the devices of their own brain, without the warrant of God's word, to institute and ordain any other offices or kinds of ministery, besides (not only as you say) these appointed and approved by God himself: but those that are appointed and approved either by God himself, or by his Apostles, to be perpetually exercised in his Church. But our brethren (belike) perceiving, that they had not said enough for the proof of these offices or kinds of ministery: they Endorse their conclusion (for the more strength) with this addition: exercised in the primitive and pure Church. The exercise of the primitive church. Here is now set down (as they conceive) ● sufficient and full warrant, for all these offices or kinds of ministery, appointed and approved of God himself: But where, or how, no place is here alleged, either in text or margin. For I would feign see that place set down, that we might have the full view thereof, whether it were s● or no indeed, and in what manner it were of God himself appointed and approved. But if that fail: lo the practice, exercised in the primitive and pure Church. I think so indeed, if ever it were appointed and approved by God himself at all. But so were the Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, men endued with the graces, of powers, of healings, and of diverse tongues. Yea, but exercised in the primitive and pure church until the mystery of iniquity working a way for Antichristes pride and presumption, The bringing in of all kind of false doctrine. changed God's ordinance, and brought in all kind of false doctrine and confusion. Nay, who there (Master's mine,) not so. For than it had been exercised without interruption even until this day. For all kind of false doctrine was not brought in, by many hundred years, (after your own reckoning) that this office or kind of Governors (if ever there w●r● any such office as you would now erect) was ceased. And Satan hath always been sowing new kinds of false doctrine, and I doubt w●●ther all his kinds of false doctrine be yet brought in, or no. But if ye said: it was exercised in the primitue and pure Church, until the mystery of iniquity began to work a way to Antichrists pride and presumption: although neither this be true, for all these four offices and kinds of ministery in such manner as you urge them: yet in saying so, you should better limit yourselves within the bounds, that you chiefly stand on. The beginning of the mystery of iniquity. But when (trow you) that mystery of iniquity began to work. Was it not begun, when S. Paul, said, 2. Thess. 2.7. The mystery of iniquity doth already work? Was it not begun, when S. john said, 1. john 2.18. Babes, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many Antichristes, whereby we know that it is the last time? But what inferreth this, (had there been then such a signory of Governors) that this office should remain in the Church perpetually? For, in the primitive and pure Church, were the Apostles: must we therefore perpetually have Apostles? Nay (say they) it was not only exercised in the primitive Church, The pure Church. which may be called the time while the Apostles lived: but also in the pure Church. Not very pure I wisse in some points, within short while after the Apostles times. But what time assign ye to the exercise thereof? Date some time. Until the mystery of iniquity working a way, for Antichristes pride and presumption, changed God's ordinance. This is an uncertain limitation. But what is this? Was God's ordinance changed then, in so necessary and perpetual an office? And how was this office changed? Was it taken clean away from the Church, so that the Church was altogether without it? It hath had Pastors, Teachers, and Deacons: (such as they were, good or bad) always hitherto, and never wanted as yet, until this hour. And was this signory of Governors appointed to remain as long as they, and have all they held out perpetually: and hath only this signory failed? But still would I feign know, When God's ordinance was changed. some more certain guess of the time, when this change happened. For here are neither Archbishops nor Bishops named, but only these 4. Eccl. offices, Pastors, Doctors, Governors, and Deacons, by which (they say) the Church of God may, (according to his word) be directed in all matters, etc. And was there no exercise of Archbishops nor Bishops in the primitive and pure Church? Or do they include Archb. and Bishops in any of these terms, because they are Governors of the Church, and are Pastors, and Teachers, and such as have been Deacons too? As S. Ambrose comprehendeth in the name of Bishops (as we shall afterward, God willing, see) all the inferior Eccl. offices. And our brethren, where they should grant that all Bishops are Pastors, grant that all Pastors are Bishops, though their chief drift be against our Bishops: but they impugn not only the office, but the very name and all of the Archbishops, and make them to be other offices, or kinds of ministery besides these (that they say) are appointed and approved of God himself, exercised in the primitive and pure Church: and therefore the instituting and ordaining of them, to be but men's following the devices of their own brain: and to be, as unlawful, so unneedful, and the changing of God's ordinance. But, if Bishops and Archbishops made this change: then was that ordinance changed, even in the primitive and pure Church. For even then was Titus made an Archbishop, and had many other Bishops under his government, as we have seen partly already, for the order in Crete appointed by Saint Paul, whose act was (no doubt) approved by God himself, and the archiepiscopal jurisdiction, exercised by Titus: And was this devised of Saint Paul or Titus, following the devices of their own brains, as a needless and unlawful thing? as a thing done without, and besides the warrant of God's word? Or ha● he not good warrant from God to institute and ordain other offices or kinds of ministery, than these four? So that this conclusion of our brethren: (There remaineth therefore of these before rehearsed, only in the Church, these Ecclesiastical offices instituted of God: namely, Pastors, Archb. & B. ●boue all these Te●rarkes. Doctors, Governors, and Deacons: by which the Church of God▪ may (according to his word) be directed in all matters, etc.) is nothing so nor so. For here (ye see) is another office appointed over all these offices neither is it unlawful nor unneedful, nor the institution or ordinance of men, following the devices of their own brain, or without the warrant of God's word, or not appointed and approved by God himself, or not exercised in the primitive and pure Church, or any change of God's ordinance, or any working a way to Antichristes pride and presumption, that the Bishops and Archbishops were brought in, and that this tetrarchy was dissolved, if indeed ther● had been any such Quadripartite or four quartered government. As for the office or kind of ministery of Bishops or Archbishops, though it be not (in the substance thereof) any other office or kind o● ministery, different from the office of Pastor or Teacher: (for notwithstanding it follow not, that every Pastor or Teacher be a Bishop, (as our brethren say,) or an Archbishop: yet every Bishop or Archbishop is in his office and kind of ministery a Pastor and Teacher) nevertheless sith he is their maintainer or ordinary, as we term it, and the overseer even as well of them, as of the people, accorto the divisions of Regions, Cities, and Towns, distributed and limited to his government: he is in dignity of an other office and kind of ministery, different from them. And shall we now dare to say, that this office of Bishop 〈◊〉 Archbishop doth work a way to Antichristes pride and presumption? Nay rather, it was the readiest way, to restrain and repress it, Archb. if it had been always kept accordingly: that Bishops, The office of Archb. & B. the readiest way to repress Antichrists pride and tyranny in their Cities and Dioceses; archbishops in their Provinces and Regions distributed and limited unto them, as Creta was by Saint Paul to Titus (reserving to Christian Princes, as their Sovereigns their Supreme government) should (according to God's word) direct in their Consistories, Synods and Councils, all matters which are commonly called Ecclesiastical. This was, and is, (in my judgement) even the best way, that could be devised (and I like my judgement the better, because of this appointment and approbation of Saint Paul) to have stopped the way to Antichristes pride and presumption. Which way of Saint Paul, when one Archbishop afterward, under a name and pretence of S. Peter, to have an higher office than all these Bishops or archbishops had, The breach of the Arch. and B. offices & authorities was the readiest way to Antichristes pride and tyranny. yea, to have an universal Bishopric over all, and to represent jesus Christ the head-shep-hearde and chief Bishop of our souls, above all other Bishops and archbishops, which were distributed and limited in Regions, Cities and Towns, took upon him, as though he only had a supreme and general office or kind of ministery without any limitation of Town, City, or Region, but reaching over all the universal Church, yea, over all the whole world: this breach of these Bishops and Archbishop's office and ministery, was the working of the way to Antichristes pride and presumption: and not the institution and ordaining, nor the distributing & limiting of this Episcopal or archiepiscopal office or kind of ministery. For else, why might they not as well say, that Christ's universal Bishopric or archbishopric, did work a way to Antichristes pride and presumption, because Antichrist pretendeth, usurpeth & abuseth, that office and kind of ministery, which is due and proper only to Christ? Christ (1. Pet. 2. vers. 7. & 8.) is called a stone, and the head of the corner, and a stone of offence. If Christ then had not been the stone: they had not stumbled at him. Nay, then; If there were no Christ: there could be no antichrist. If there had been no Archbishop: the Pope had not been the Archbishop of Rome, nor had wrought the way to his pride and presumption. And so, if there were no use, there were no abuse of any thing. Shall we lay therefore the fault on the right or institution, because by indirect means an abuse, or pretence, or usurpation falleth out, or is brought in? What then may not work the way of what ye will? but if ye mark it well: this argument maketh clean against you. For, the chiefest way to Antichristes pride and presumption was, to change, to abridge, to pull down, and to encroach upon the office and ministery of Bishops, and Archbishops: and therefore the institution and maintenance of them, was one of the greatest impediments, that antichrist had. And till he brought all their lawful offices and ministries under his pride and presumption, he could never work that mystery of iniquity that he hath done. So long as the Archbishop of Carthage kept him short in Africa, and detected his forgeries to encroach upon them: and likewise of the other Archbishoprickes: he could not work his mystery of iniquity ●mong them. Yea, the little Archbishop of Ravenna under his nose, held● him long tackling. And if this pretended signory of Governors, be as directly contrary to the right institution of Bishops and Archbishops, as Antichristes mystery of iniquity and his intolerable pride and presumption is: then, either is this institution of Bishops and Archbishops in medio, and either of them ab extremo in extremum, The Archb. office a better stop against antichrist, then th●se Tetrarkes'. as the mediocrity of justice between minus and nimium: or else, this signory of Governors is nearer this mystery of iniquity, to work the way to Antichristes pride and presumption. For, let the Bishops and Archbishops hold entirely their institution: and they may better keep out Antichristes pride and presumption, then can these seniors: who may more easily give occasion to the settin● up a 1000 petite-Antichristes full of pride and presumption too: then 〈◊〉 able to pull down or to restrain, the pride and presumption of that on● great antichrist. Neither hath the office of Bishop or Archbishop, brought in all kind of false doctrine, The evil officers & not the office of Archb. & B. brought in false doctrine. or any one kind, except indirectly by the officers, not by the office. And so not only Nestorius, and some few others that wer● Archbishops, but a number more, as Arius, Pelagius, Eutiches, etc. that were Presbyters, Priests, or Elders and Doctors, brought in false doctrine. Yea, Nicholas also (as it is said) one of the first 7. Deacons. And should any rightly thereupon charge these offices, to bring in false doctrine, because some such officers did bring it in? There was false doctrine brought in, in the primitive Church: and shall we burden the primitive Church therewith? Thus indeed do the Papists burden both v● and our brethren: and so here our brethren burden us. And shall we th●● burden them again? For, (set aside all partiality) who may not easi●●● see, that this Eccl. kind of government which they so much desire (whi●● the Governors are not learned men) would of the twain give readie● occasion, than our government established, not only to more new devices of their own brains, concerning government: but also, if any ne● kin●e of false doctrine arise, to maintain the same, and to make mor● factions about it, notwithstanding all the assistance of their lesser and greater Synods. Yea, would to God all kind of doctrine brought in by our brethren, The state of the refor. Churches. by occasion of these their controversies for the alteration of government, were so true and sound, as I with it were: which as occasion (God willing) shall serve I will further declare: hoping yet that with some gentle constructions (whereof I would be right glad) all may be construed to the best: and that perceiving their errors, they will say with Augustin 〈◊〉 rare possum, H●reticus esse nolo. I may hap to err: I purpose not to be an Heretic, that is, obstinately to maintain an error. But whereas they say, all kind of false doctrine and confusion, howsoever they may escape either all or some kind of false doctrine: this desired government is a great deal more prone to confusion, than is the government established. Now after these defacings of the offices and ministry in the government established amongst us: The Tetrarchy commended. they recommend their desired government of this tetrarchy unto us, saying: And now again, restored in all rightly reformed Churches, with such daily increase and glory of the kingdom of Christ, and suppression of the kingdom of Anti-Christe, that the only experience hereof, might be a sufficient persuasion to us to leave this disordered state of ours, wherein we have so long laboured, with so little profit: and to embrace that most beautiful order of Ecclesiastical regiment, which God so manifestly doth bless & prosper in our neighbour's hands. Whether that Ecclesiastical Government which was exercised in the Primitive and pure Church, be now again restored: The restoring Eccl. government in the reformed Churches. or some other (in some points perhaps) like to that, may make a quaeri potest, and require a further view. But whether it be restored in all rightly reformed Churches, so that, all reformed Churches are not rightly reform, but wrongfully reform, and so not reform, but deformed: as having driven out one Devil by another, and removed one deformity, and established another: that, might grow to more than to a question: Yea, to an open slander not only of us, but of many true Christian and godly reformed Churches, besides ours. What daily increase it maketh among our neighbours (where they say this is restored) of the kingdom of Christ, The beautiful state of our neighbours reform Churches. and how it setteth forth his glory, more than other reformed churches do: and how it more suppresseth the tyranny of Satan: these things are carried away so smoothly and so solemnly avowed, (as though all were Gospel) that not only we must not deny it, but believe it: nor only yield unto it (as most true) but be moved with such emulation of it, that the only experience might be a sufficient persuasion to us to leave this disordered state of ours, wherein we have so long laboured with so little profit, and to embrace that most beautiful order of Ecclesiastical regiment, which God so manifestly nifestlie doth bless and prosper in our neighbour's hands. The state of the ref. Churches. It is an old saying, fair words make fools feign: and here are very fair words of our neighbour's state, though as fowl of our own. If now for these fair and foul words of our brethren, we will become such fools, to mislike and leave our own, and embrace an others. T●● goodly show of a fairer bone persuaded Aesop's Dog, to leave the go●● bone that he had already in his mouth, and to leap into the water, after the shadow of another. I pray GOD our brethren allure us not with the like bait of some fair shadow, to leave the good state we have of government established. They entice us here with marvelous goodly things, as right reformation, daily increase and glory of the kingdom of Christ: they wilt us to embrace that most beautiful order of Ecclesiastical regiment, which God so manifestly doth bless and prosper in our neighbours hands. This beauty were enough to enamour a man: this prosperity and blessing to set his teeth an edge, and to enflambe the heart of any zealous, and godly meaning man, in the spiritual love of God, for the increase and glory of his kingdom, and the desire to have him bless and prosper our estate. But, is all this true in our neighbours, and is our own state so disordered,, Our brothers defacing of our estate. and so laboursome with so little profit? For, otherwise, as our brethren in their Preface, likened our Prelates and ministers, to foxes and little foxes: so I remember, that once I read a tale of a Fox that had lost his tail, and because other had tails, and he had none: he went about to persuade all his brethren, to leave their tails, for they were but an unnecessary clog and hindrance unto them, trailing in the mire: which if it were away, O how light and nimble should they be. And for example to persuade them the better, he showed them the experience (not in his neighbour) but in himself. But one that know before on what necessity he had lost it: cried out unto him, Brother Fox, brother Fox; leave your fair persuasion. You have lost your own, and therefore you would have us to leave ours to bear you company. But, what do ye tell us here (will our brethren say) a foolish flim flam tale of a fox tail, to dally out so weighty and so holy a matter: while we are earnest in persuading to leave this disordered state of ours, wherein we have so long laboured with so little profit, and to embrace that most beautiful order of Ecclesiastical regiment, which God so manifesttie doth bless and prosper in our neighbour's hands. Indeed brethren if this were as true, as you here go about to persuade it? I would yield gladly, and be soons persuaded. But if this be the mere following the devices of your own brain, and nothing so, neither in us, nor in our neighbours, as you would persuade us: why may not a feigned fable applied to truth, answer a feigned persuasion, grounded on falsehood? If ye be so persuaded yourselves, and think as ye say: it may be, ye think so. Fortis imaginatio in a man's own brain may work wonders: but to persuade another by another's example, & by such an example as is neither necessary, nor fit, nor sufficient; nor true: I may well shake off this fond persuasion, neither comparing our brethren to Dogs or Foxes (as they in bitterness compare us though I may chance get a flap with a Fox tail, (if not worse) for my labour. But I pray you brethren, do ye mean indeed good earnest as ye say, when ye tell us, that the order of Ecclesiastical Government in the Primitive Church is restored? for if it be: The state of the Primitive church's government not restored. then have we new Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, etc. come again. Yea, but (say you) those offices were temporal and are expired: and therefore, are not to be restored. Yea, but (say I) they were the chiefest offices, then, when the order of the Ecclesiastical government in the Primitive Church was most beautiful: and therefore, if they be not restored, in whom the beauty most consisted: then that state of Ecclesiastical regiment, yea, the most beautiful state thereof, is not, nor is to be restored. Yea, but (say you) we restrain most beautiful, to the Offices that were perpetual & to remain for ever. Yea, Reasoning the office of governors but (say I) how prove ye then your senior Governors, to be such, and to have more Privilege of perpetuity, them those better, higher, and more beautiful offices had? and if they were to remain for ever, why did they not so for ever remain, but rather, for ever till now of late, so ceased to be in the Church, expired, and had no place: that they are now at length, even at the last cast of the world to be restored? If ye say the truth of the Gospel was hidden also, and the true professors of it: I grant, it was so, and yet it was always, and remained still for ever, and we can fetch and bring forth, (against the Gospels and our common adversaries) witnesses more or fewer, yet some in all ages. And the like also, we can do for Pastors, teachers, and Deacons, good and bad, in all ages, since the first institution of them. And can you (brethren) do the like for this your pretended governing and not teaching Seniory? if ye can, plead perpetuity: if ye cannot (admitting that it once had been) why crack ye of in others, or seek among us, the restoring of that, which so many hundredth years, hath utterly ceased to be in the Church, is expired and hath had no place? Ceased (say you) de facto, but not de jure. Prove you Ius, and we will quickly let fall our pleay de facto. But till you can find either the right, or the practice of them: or if they were once, where they have been hidden or banished all this while: Or if they died and were buried, till with the gift of of working wonders, ye shall revive and so restore them: what say you to those offices, that were then also, even when Apostles, Prophets, and Evangelists, etc. were alive, and were ordained of the Apostles, and were offices distinguished in dignity from Pastors and Teachers, from Deacons or any other governing Seniors, having authority over them, in the cities or regions limited unto them? and these offices have continued ever since. If now therefore, the regiment of the Primitive church be rightly reform to the original beauty, Arch. & Bi. not to be displaced by restoring the state of the Primit. church. then must Bishops, and Archbishops stand, (for they stood then,) what difference soever our brethren find of standing now. And yet find what difference they can, they shall find, that if those Seniors (imagining there were such as they pretend) be restored: both all they, and the Doctors, and Pastors, and Deacons, and all other Ecclesiastical officers, are all to be under the Ecclesiastical government of Bishops and Archbishops. And if they stand not thus: to displace the superior and the old standard, to restore an inferior, and to set up a new revived, fresh and young Senior: would so greatly blemish the beautiful order of this supposed Ecclesiastical regiment, that, as it is said, at the second building of the Temple. Esra. cap. 3. ver. 12. that many of the Priests and Levites and the chief of the Fathers, ancient men, which had seen the first house, when the foundation of this house was laid, wept with a loud voice: So those that mark the beautiful order of the Ecclesiastical regiment in the Primitive and pure Church indeed: and the most beautiful order of the Ecclesiastical regiment, that our brethren say, the church is now restored unto, (or rather under a name of restoring, Who deface the beauty of the reformed Churches. is not restored at all,) in those things for which they so contend, that they rather hinder the course of the Gospel, and decrease, not increase the kingdom of Christ, deface his glory, make his Church evil spoken of, rend the unity thereof, break the bruised reed, and quench the smoking flax, and yet set all the house on fire, and call this right reforming, and restoring. It would so little move any that seriously considereth it, to embrace the state and order thereof, as most beautiful: that if he did not detest it (with the common adversaries) as most deformed: yet, loved he never so well the church, yea, the more he loved it, it would make his eyes, (not for joy, but for grief of the sight) to water their plants, and his heart throb, yea, bleed, to behold now the most beautiful bride of jesus Christ, how her beauty is vaded, how her ornaments are spoiled, how her body is haled, and almost even pulled in pieces: what by her adversaries, what by our brethren her own children, and all under pretence of reforming and restoring her: all is peace and increase, and glory, and embracing, and beautiful, and blessed, and prospered, for the order, and state of the Church with them: and we that are the Church of God also, our state (for sooth) is a disordered state, we labour long, and we reap little profit by our labour. Well, yet thanks be to God, if our state have such ill luck: that our neighbours have better, The state of our neighbours. and that this most beautiful regiment of the Church is restored, at least among our neighbours. Our neighbours? This is a good hearing, Aliquod bonum propter vicinum bonum: And if they be so near us, let us know them, that we may receive some neighbourly comfort and refreshing by them. Who are these our neighbours, where this state thus happily is restored? Do ye ask, who they are? Even all the Churches that are rightly restored. Nay, for God's sake (my Masters) say not so: for then, name me almost any one reformed Church, that in one point or other, of order offices, discipline, rites and ceremonies, differeth not one from another. And which then among all these, are these our neighbours, which have restored that regiment, and are rightly reform? No reformed Churches but in some points of gover. differ one from another. The Scottish reformed Churches are our nearest neighbours: but is their government and orders, and making officers, and administration of Sacraments, and book of common Prayers, all one with these our Learned discoursers? and with the book of common Prayers by our brethren now lastly set forth? Or rather, is there not, even in the book of common Prayer, by themselves compiled, between the written book, and that, that is printed at Middleborough, and that at London, and that at Scotland, above a hundredth, yea, 200. yea, 300. differences one from an other: and all in a book little bigger than an Almanac, but a matter, Differences even in their book of common prayer. wherein should be greatest agreement of uniformity? Nay, do our brethren here at home agree among themselves in these matters of reformation? Or if all be now agreed, may we set down our rest upon it, and resolve ourselves, that these Learned discourses have here restored, the only, very, true, whole perfect, and right reformation of that most beautiful order of Ecclesiastical regiment, that was appointed and approved by God himself, exercised in the Primitive and pure Church, instituted and ordained to continue for ever? O my Masters, take heed what ye say, lest hereafter ye say, had I witted. Ye know whose saying that is. Well, well: (will perhaps our brethren say) some of our neighbours have it: we name none, least ye should say, we prejudice any good neighbour of ours, as having not rightly reform their Churches. For, though in all points, that most beautiful order of Ecclesiastical regiment be not restored: yet is their state far better than the disordered state of ours, wherein we have so long laboured with so little profit, and contrariwise which GOD so many ways doth bless and prosper in our neighbour's hands, (that if not the most) yet the beautiful order of Ecclesiastical Regiment which they have: Yea, the only experience of the daily increase and glory of the kingdom of Christ, and suppression of the tyranny of Satan, might be a sufficient persuasion for us. Experientia est Magistra Stultorum, as our brethren themselves do● afterwards pag. xlviij. tell us. Our neighbour's experience no necessary pattern to us. When the Ass that carried Salt, falling down in the water, and his salt melting away, g●● up again discharged of his burden: His fellow Ass being laden with spoonges, saw that, and he fell down likewise in the water, to try the like experience. But his spoonges kept him down, his experience drowned him. Non omnia conveniunt omnibus. Experience is not always good upon examples. Legibus non exemplis judicatur. Had our neighbours restored it in very deed: yet are not we bound to follow their example. The demur of this question. No, not the example of the Primitive Church itself, and much less those that follow their example. For, we seek not now what we may do, or what might be a sufficient persuasion unto us, if we would: but whet●er by any law or commandment of Christ, or any of his Apostles, we be tied and bound thereto, yea or no. Thi● is the very point that we demur upon. If God have so prosperously blessed them, that would or have happily imitated, that supposed old order of Ecclesiastical Regiment: God be blessed for it. We rejoice of it, and congratulate with them, which soever of our neighbours they be. But neither they, nor their imitation, pr●scribe unto us, nor their experience would fit us. diverse feet have diverse lasts. The shoe that will serve one, may wring another. Neither yet is our state inferior to theirs, or less blessed and prospered of the Lord, nor hath had less increase & glory of the Lords kingdom, nor is less beautiful: if we look not with an evil eye, and a malcontented mind on our own state (as he saith) Emulation of our neighbour's state. Fertilior seges est alienis semper in aruis, Vicinumque pecus grandius uber habet There groweth always greater store of corn, within my Neighbour's fields: The greater udder of his Cow, more milk unto my Neighbour yields. Our neighbours have this, our neighbours have that: and we want● these things. Fie (brethren) for shame, what need this emulation of our neighbours, and murmuring against our own state? And yet it is not altogether so, neither for them, (the more is the pity, if it otherwise pleased God): Our own ●st●te. Neither for us, (thanks be given to God for it) and for that plentiful measure of the increase and glory of the kingdom o● Christ, in this our reformed Church of England: and for the suppression of the tyranny of Satan and Antichriste, and of his Ministers and confederates. We have great cause highly to magnify God, for the wonderful and gracious works, he hath wrought for us, above all our neighbours round about us: yea, above all the particular Churches near or far dispersed in the world at this day, even in this estate of Ecclesiastical Government established. And all our neighbours, where GOD hath any Church never so much reform, do (I hope) rejoice together with us therefore: yea, not the best of them, but (be it spoken to the glory of God, Our unthankfulness for our estate. and without upbraiding to others) have found no small comfortable benefit at our hands, and do all most thankfully reacknowledge the same, without condemning, reproving, or grudging at our state of Ecclesiastical government established, what other kind of reformation soever in their Ecclesiastical Government they be directed by: Only we ourselves murmur and grudge, condemn and slander, both among ourselves, and to all our neighbours, our own state, which is so evil, that would God (were itaccording to his acceptable good pleasure) the kingdom and glory of Christ, and the suppression of Satan and antichrist (though I had rather wish it did no less) did but half as fast increase and prosper, than (God be glorified for it) in our state it doth. And yet God grant both in ours and in our neighbour's states, and all other parts of God's true Church, (according as we all say in the lords Prayer, Thy kingdom come) these blessings of God, may daily more and more increase and prosper. And so by God's grace it should still do better and better (Maugre Satan and antichrist) if our own brethren would not hinderus: and all reformed Churches should do well enough, notwithstanding we differ from them, and they from us: Yea, though both of us differ from the state of the Primitive and pure Church, not in truth of Faith and unity of Doctrine: But in matter, or manner of Orders, Offices, Rites and Ceremonies, concerning Ecclesiastical regiment, so far as they are not prescribed by any perpetual rule, other then for the time and state, or for order and comeliness. For, the difference of these things is not directly material to salvation, neither aught to break the bond of peace and Christian concord: But they may think and wish well to us, and we in the name of the Lord, think well, and wish good luck to them. Yea, to wish, that they had no better state than we have, on condition they had no worse, The harde-state of our neighbour's Churches. and might always have as good: I think all our neighbours reform Churches would be soon entreated to say, AMEN. For in what hard case (God help them) good neighbours they be, their selves feel or fear it daily: and we hear of it, and cease not daily to pray for them, and, as we may, put to our helping hands unto them. The defacing of our state. Yea, our brethren their-selves (upon better advisement since) in their last supplication made to her gracious Majesty: & to the high Court of Parliament, assembled 1587. pag. 8. do confess it, saying: The Churches of God round about us, go to wrack, in France, Belgia, and a great part of high dutch. I would Scotland had continued in her first love, and that the hands of the builders were strengthened among you. But in conclusion, neither their state or ours (howsoever they stand) are bound to any perpetual form of all the orders and offices, of Ecclesiastical regiment. Theirs may perhaps be better for them, their afflicted state standing as it doth: ours (all things in our established state of Government considered:) is best for us. Away therefore (good brethren) with these disordered terms, O●r brothers disordered speech's of our disordered state. This disordered state of ours: for they are not speeches, beseeming thankful and faithful ministers to God, nor loving and obedient subjects to our Prince and Superiors, so disorderly cast forth on the state of Eccle. regiment. Which toucheth not only Eccl. persons against whom perhaps our brethren will make no scruple of conscience, though their mouths run over, be they never so much their brethren, their Pastors, their betters, their superiors, their Bish, or Arch. to whom their selves peradventure have sworn Canonicam obedientiam. But these disordered speeches of theirs, touch the Magistrate, yea their Sovereign very near, and therefore they are not only disordered, but dangerous speeches. Neither ought our brethren to upbraid our labours, unto us, that we● have so long laboured with so little profit, to discourage the painful labourer in the Lord's vineyard, T●e upbraiding of our labours. and to make our hands weak, because our work prospereth not so fast in our hands, as we would wish it did: And yet it prospereth (God be praised) with more profit, then either we see, or our brethren like. But profit, or not profit, let us still labour, and (thanks be to God) than we labour. All are not so idle loiterers, as afterward, our brethren complain we labour not●: and here they find fault with our labours. But labour we, or loiter we, they must still labour infinding fault: or else they should loiter, for lack of matter in discoursing. But howsoever they esteem of our labours: the labourer (saith the Lord Luc. 10.) is worthy his reward. And as their-selves afterward do note out of S. Paul, 1. Timoth. ●. The elders that rule well, are worthy double honour, especially they which labour in the word and doctrine. But they tell us, that sentence maketh for their governing and not teaching elders: whether it doth so or no: we shall (God willing) at large examine, on their allegation of the same. but admitting it had included any such Elders at that time: were their labours to be honoured that ruled well among them, (and yet perhaps with as little profit)? And is the labourer in the word and doctrine to be despised, and his labour to be left, because we have so long laboured with so little profit? But for all this discouragement of our brethren, let us not be weary of wel-dooing, and commit the event & profit to the Lord, Our comfort of our labours. and hearken rather to the Apostles exhortation, 1. Cor. 16. Therefore my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast, vnmou●able abundant always in the work of the Lord: forasmuch as ye know, that your labour is not in vain in the lord. And this is our comfort, against this persuasion of our brethren, to leave that state of ours, wherein we have so long laboured with so little profit. And yet we hope, we have not all been unprofitable labourers: save in respect of merit toward God, we confess indeed (as Christ willeth us to acknowledge ourselves) That when we have done all we are able to do, we are but unprofitable servants: but not in all respects unprofitable. But if our so long labour have had the less profit, to our more grief: why do not our brethren, look rather to the cause and hindrance of it? for perhaps, it is not so much of the labourer, The cause of our labours hindrance. as of the adversaries that have resisted us. And have we not adversaries enough, of Satan, of antichrist, of his ministers, of the unthankful world, etc. but that our own brethren willbe even almost as bitter against us, as the worst? If therefore we have so long laboured with so little profit: lay the fault where it is. Remove the impediment, and then (God before) let us say with Peter, Luc, 5.5. Though I have laboured all night long, and have taken nothing: nevertheless (Lord) at thy word I will cast forth the net. And then (no doubt) God will bless our labours with more profit. And if our brethren when we beckon to them, will come and help us, we shall enclose such a multitude of Fishes, that our nets shall be full. And if our nets break, let us mend them again uniformly together. And then our state shall be (if it be not,) as beautiful, and far more beautiful, (I do not doubt it,) then any of all our neighbours is. But God bless our neighbours, and make us more thankful, and less contentious and newfangled than we be: and not only more obedient to our Civil Christian Magistrates, but more reverent to the Ecclesiastical governors, as the Apostle, Heb, 13.7. etc. giveth us good counsel. Remember them which have the oversight of you, which have declared unto you the word● of God, whose faith follow, considering what hath been the end of their conversation. jesus Christ yesterday and to day, the same also is for ever. Be not carried about, with diu●rse and strange doctrines. And in the 17. verse, Obey them that have the oversight of you, for they watch for your souls, as they that must give accounts, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you. And if there be any disorder in doing this their duty, the fault being personal, the state is not to be defaced as disordered, but the faults redressed, and the state stand. The Christian prince repelled. But where the inferiors will presume to disobey, yea, to alter th● state of their Superiors, and to set up themselves: will not only set out the Bishops and Archbishops, What would indeed make the state disordered. but the supreme authority of their Sovereign too: If this should be suffered, the state would then indeed become a most disordered state. And would work a worse way to Antichrists pride and presumption, bringing in many strange kinds of false doctrine and confusion, and breed a greater mystery of iniquity: while every particular congregation or signory among them, may thus, following the devices of their own brain, and pretending upon a bar● fact, or order, or office, that they find mentioned in the scriptures (though perhaps clean other wise than they take it) enforce a warrant of God's word for them to follow: Yea, to think the only experience of any of their neighbour's success, in imitation of the like, a sufficient persuasion for them, to leave the state under which they live, and con●meliouslie to revile it, for a disordered state, and to prejudice and alter th● government established, and to bring in a new Quaternion of Governors, by whom only all matters may be directed, which are commonly called Ecclesiastical, without any other superior ouer●ight or government of bishop or Arch. or any supreme authority of the Prince, t● be admitted among them. Ha brethren, mark the mystery of these devices more advisedly, an● (I think) you will say (at leastwise ye may say,) that if our stat● were disordered: these things would not bring it into better order, but set it quite out of all order, and hazard the clean overthrow of the whole state. If the axe were gone, is this the remedy, to hurl the helue after it? howbeit our brethren here, if the helue be not missing, but not orderly set on, would cast both helue, and axe, and all away. Now, lest we might perhaps mistake our brethren's words, and so might be suspected to slander them, in saying they would clean exclu●● with the Bishops and Archbishops superior authority, the supreme authority of the Christian Prince, (and so of her Majesty) from the direction of all Ecclesiastical matters: albeit their words aforesaid are plain● enough, yet this their resolute conclusion, in these words make it manifest. Our brothers conclusion clean excludeth the Prince, and giveth the direction of all Eccl. matters. to their 4. Tetrarck●. There remaineth therefore, of these before rehearsed, only in the Church, these Ecclesiastical offices instituted by God: namely, Pastors, Doctors, Governors, and Deacons: by which the church of God may, according to his word, be directed in all matters, which are commonly called Ecclesiastical. Here is the conclusion of this tetrarchy: the Prince is not at all mentioned, but clean excluded from the direction of all Eccl. matters, and th● direction committed to these 4. only, which particular only, debarre●● both the Prince, and all other besides these 4. The Christian prince excluded. Yet because among these 4. estates, this word Governors might carry such a general sense, as that they might seem not to exclude, but to include the Prince: to show therefore their meaning the plainer, that they intent not to include the Prince at all, in the Quadrant of these 4. kinds & estates of personages, under the ambiguous name of Governors, our brethren proceed, saying, But while we speak of Ecclesiastical government, it may be thought of some, The learned discourse. Page. 8. that we should entreat first of the supreme authority of Christian Princes: where upon it seemeth, that all the regiment of the church dependeth, which is such a mist to dazzle the eyes of ignorant persons, that they think all things in the Ecclesiast. state, aught to be disposed by that only high authority and absolute power of the civil Magistrate. In these words our brethren foreseeing, Bridges. that some just offence might arise héereon, that professing a Learned discourse: The objection why the treatise of the Christian princes supremacy is not first considered. and having dealt thus far in the Government of Ecclesiastical matters, and quartered the same into these 4. Tetrarks, Pastors, Doctors, Governors, and Deacons: and that all Ecclesiastical matters are to be directed only by these 4. the Christian Prince (as, God be praised, is amongst and over all us her most excellent Majesty) is not only all this while not mentioned, but excluded: and so excluded, that whether her majesties estate be prejudiced hereby, is not so much as called first in question: and the Prince's authority being first debated and resolved upon, then to have proceeded to the limiting and deciding of these Tetrarks, several or conjoined Government: Therefore our brethren think it now belike high time to mitigate this offence, and to prevent this objection. And indeed (brethren) it is a good objection, and a point very necessary to have been first, if not decided, yet treated on and better considered, or if not first of all (albeit in good right, even first of all in this matter of Ecclesiastical government) yet at least, or ever ye had proceeded thus far in the treating, determining, and giving full and only authority, to all and every of these 4. Tetrarks. For, ye cannot plead ignorance, that ye thought not thereon before now: That ye were called to a sudden and tumultuous reasoning, where the finest wit, the best memory, the most filled speech, shall carry away the truth: at least, marvelously move the ungrounded hearers: (as in your Preface ye complained.) For, Our brethren foresa●● the object. in their Preface. even there, ye foresaw that it would be objected, and among other things ye mentioned that objection, saying: If any shall object etc. that it shall be prejudicial to the estate of Government established: And do ye now upon mature deliberation, having professed to set forth, A Learned discourse of Ecclesiastical government, and having entered into it, The Christian prince repelled. laid your principles, and distributed all ●he parts and persons that must be Governors of it: (as though ye bethought yourselves), come dropping in with this objection, saying: But while we speak of Ecclesiastical government? As who would say: Good Lord, how have we forgotten ourselves. We speak of Government, and have treated nothing of the Prince, which is the supreme Governor. Well, while it is in memory, and while we are speaking of it, let us say something to that objection, that ourselves partly have already moved, and it is most likely willbe by other objected. let us therefore answer before hand to that objection, while we speak of Ecclesiastical government. The tardy coming of this objection. And it may be, when ye wrote this, that ye thought on some such● like matter. Notwithstanding, this is but my conjecture, peradventure yea, peradventure nay: but I take it, this is not the worst construction. Howbeit to say, while ye are speaking of it, and have already given your resolute sentence on the matter, who have the only government it may be thought your objection and your answer thereunto, cometh very tardy, to help the Prince's title. Except ye will revoke, or suspend your de●nitiue sentence, or except ye have some further warrant, from the experience of their example, that (they say) have a custom, first to give judgement, and put it in execution, and then to enquiure whether the party were guilty, yea or no. But Hyster●n, Proteron, former or later, let it come in question, now a God's name: that we may see, what is left to the Prince, and whether the Princes supreme government be any whit prejudiced, by this conclusion already passed, fo● the direction of all Ecclesiastical matters, to be made only by these foresaid Tetrarcks. But while we speak (say they) of Ecclesiastical Government. N●● sof●e (my good and learned discoursing brethren) since ye have stay●● to speak hereof, all this while: let me crave pardon for a few worde● to stay your speech hereon a little while more. I pray you, what me●● ye by this term here, The Caption of these words, Eccles. government. Ecclesiastical government? And a three lin●● before, ye called it also, Ecclesiastical regiment. For, there may be a great caption in these speeches, which our common adversaries v● against us, in all their writings and invectives, concerning the Princ●● Supremacy. And therefore, you being her majesties true subjects, 〈◊〉 dissenting from the Papists errors: I am loath to have you either ●●tangle yourselves or us, with their captious and slanderous tear●●●, which not only darken the matter, but touch her majesties honour, 〈◊〉 slander her Royal person, and right of her chiefest office very near: 〈◊〉 be it, you do it (I dare say it for you) of an overshott zeal, and not of 〈◊〉 malice, as they do. They slander her Majesty to take upon her an Ecclesiastical regiment or government, as though she took upon her, The Princes supr. government to be an Ecclesiastical person, or to exercise a function or office Ecclesiastical: and to do the actions that appertain to the Regiment Ecclesiastical. The Papists selaunder of her Ma. This is a manifest slander of her Majesty, who neither exerciseth nor claimeth any such Ecclesiastical Government, nor the statute nameth or intendeth anya such Ecclesiastical Government of her Majesty, but only that her Majesty hath the Supreme Government over all persons Ecclesiastical: and is the Supreme Governor of them in all Ecclesiastical causes, The princes supreme government over all Ecc. persons, in all Ecclesi. matters. to oversee and govern the right direction of all the persons and causes Ecclesiastical. So that, where the direction of the consultation, and finding out the causes, the execution and government of the actions, belongeth to the persons: the Supreme government and direction of the causes to be authorized, and the actions by the persons to be put in due execution, principally pertain to her Majesty. And if ye think otherwise of her Majesties, (not Ecclesiastical Government, but) supreme Government, What belongeth to the Eccl. persons, and what to the Prince. in or over Ecclesiastical persons & causes: ye do greatly mistake it. And this may serve also for your third Tetrarke, whom ye call Governors, to whom ye attribute amiss an Ecclesiastical Government. Except ye intent by the word Eccl. any manner of ways pertaining to the Church And thus, the widows of whom the Apostle speaketh 1. Tim. 5.9. Had Eccl. offices also, by which reckoning women with you, might be Ecclesiastical persons, and have an Eccl. government in the church. And so your Ecclesiastical Governors, are notwithstanding popular and plebeian persons, which commonly are called the lay people And by the Scottish Churches, election of them and of the Deacons, where they say: The Friday after, judgement is taken, what persons are elected for elders and Deacons to serve for that year: It should seem. they account them not properly Ecclesiastical persons, but rather like ●ur Sidemen or Churchwardens. But howsoever ye confound these terms in these your Governors, it is not good confounding them in the Prince. And ye see that great captions, slanders, and cavils, may ●rise upon such great personages, by such intricate and doubtful terms. Non bene definite, qui non bene dividit. Speak distinolye and plain, and then we shall better understand your meaning, and either you or we shall quickly be driven to a final conclusion, without all starting holes or evasions. If ye mean by Ecclesiastical government, that her Majesty taketh upon her an Ecclesiastical office, or to be an Ecclesiastical person, and so execute the actions of the causes, that (as you say) are commonly called Ecclesiastical: ye incur the common adversaries slander of her Majesty, although (I trust) unwittingly, and therefore will not (I hope) unwillingly reclaim your error. If ye mean by Ecclesiastical Government, her majesties Government, in or over Ecclesiastical matters or causes: we admit your sense: and now proceed on concerning the objection and your answer. Good reason that all Protestants should think that the Prince's supremacy should be first treated on. It may be thought of some, that we should entreat first, of the Supreme authority of Christian Princes. And good reason to, (as I take it) if you will needs take upon yo● (by what warrant or licence thereto, I do not know) to intermeddle in matters of state and Government. Whether there were anya thought the contrary (as I hope there are not many amongst us Protestants) come you in, saying: It may be thought of some? as though you misliked, that any should so think; or thought not your selu●●, that many amongst us thought not so. But go to, some were perhaps of such a strange opinion: and what (I pray you) is the o●●nion? That we should first entreat of the supreme authority of Christia● Princes. Here again I crave yet another interruption for my learning of so Learned discoursers. Do ye here afford Christian Princes th●● title of Supreme authority, Christian princes have a supreme authority in Ecclesiast. matters. by way of supposition; As, whether they have any Supreme authority in Ecclesiastical matters, or no, let th●● fall out in the Treaty, as it shall? or by way of assertion; acknowledging a Supreme authority in them? For, your words seem rath●● to carry, that they have a Supreme authority: Howbeit, not to be first treated upon: and so likewise do your words in the next page, saying: But of the Supreme authority of Christian Princes in Ecclesiastical causes, how far it extendeth by the word of God, we shall have better occasion to entreat hereafter, when we shall have described the Ecclesiastical state. So then, Christian Princes have supreme authority in Ecclesiastical causes, by your own assertion. But, how now doth this agree with your former conclusion? There remaineth therefore of these before rehearsed only in the Church these Ecclesiastical offices, instituted of GOD: namely, Pastors, Doctors, Governors, and Deacons: By which the Church of God may, according to his word be directed, in all matters which are commonly called Ecclesiastical. If Christian Princes have supreme government in Ecclesiastical causes: how are all Ecclesiastical matters, or causes directed only by these Tetrarcks. Shall the Prince be one of these four, and be included in the compa●●● of the Governors? No, these governors are such Elders as are chosen out of the people. How shall we reconcile these sayings then? well enough, (say they). For, these 4. are the only Ecclesiastical officers: now we name not the Christian Prince an Ecclesiastical officer, but the supreme governor. This is very well reconciled indeed, for that point: save that it falleth out hardly in an other, that still the Lay people are made persons Ecclesiastical. But what answereth this the point in hand? For, Difference between the Prince and his gov. and the 4. Tetrarcks. if the Christian Princes have the supreme government in Ecclesiastical matters or causes: then, none of all these four officers or offices, (call them Ecclesiastical or what ye will,) neither divisim, nor coniunctim, have the only direction of all Ecclesiastical matters or causes. For, the Christian Princes have here some direction; Nay, the chief and supreme direction in them. Except ye find out yet, some other quirk between matters and causes: or, between directing and governing. But, as here, Ecclesiastical matters, and Ecclesiastical causes, are taken indifferently: so, for directing and governing, Directing, & governing. I go plainly and simply to work. He that dir●cteth, he governeth, and he that governeth he directeth. The Christian Prince therefore, being (as our brethren grant) the supreme governor in Ecclesiastical causes, is also the supreme director in Ecclesiastical matters. But if now they stop on this point, and will distinguish between direction and government: and they (that is to say) these 4. officers, will direct all the matters, and the Prince must govern them, according only, to their direction: who a●e indeed the Governors then? The Prince or they; when he must govern, (nay, say rather; when he must obey) according to their direction? For, they understand by directing, What our brethren mean by directing. not their counseling, or showing their judgement and advise: and such direction, (we freely grant) belongeth unto them. But by directing, they mean, setting down order, prescribing, commanding, decréeing, and determinining: and what is this else, but governing? Who hath now the more supreme government in Ecclesiastical matters, the Prince? or these four estates? But the Prince (by their own confessions) is the supreme governor in Ecclesiastical matters, and not they: except our brethren give the prince this title, The Prince called supr. gover. in a bare title. only for a show, and keep the matters to themselves. For, so the Pope calleth the Emperor, Emperor of Room, and yet yet can he have no more room in Rome, than it pleaseth the Pope to permit unto him, who indeed hath all the Empire and government of Rome. Now if these our learned discoursing brethren grant christian princes this title, to be the supreme governor in Ecclesi. matters, in such a fashion: that is a planie mockery before God and man. N●n est bonum ludere c●● sanctis. But if they truly acknowledge the Christian Prince to bear the chi●●● stroke among them, in directing, prescribing, decréeing, confirming, forbidding, and commaunding· Ecclesiastical matters: then is the Prince indeed, the supreme governor in them, and not they. But then, stoop gallant; If the prince be indeed the supreme Governor than must our brethren submit themselves to the government established. All these iiij. estates, which (as they said before) must bear such sway, that all Ecclesiastical matters, may be directed by them, and by them only, are topsie turnie overturned. Wet may the Christian Prince by them, (though not by them only) be directed by way of counsel and information: but when all is done, he is still the Supreme Governor, and all they must be chief directed and governed by the Christian Prince: in all such Ecclesiastical matters, and causes, as are amongst them to be established. Sith therefore our Learned discoursers have granted this, w●●● yield they not without further discoursing on the matter, to h●● majesties supreme government, that hath confirmed by her Supreme authority, the decision of these Ecclesiastical causes, and controversies long ago, and maintaineth the Ecclesiastical government now established? And if now Christian Princes have supreme authority in Ecclesiastical causes: while these our Learned brethren discoursers take on them, not to speak only, but to set down directions of Ecclesiastical government: may not some think, (nay may not most men think) that they should treat first of th● Supreme authority of Christian Princes? If they have the first degree in dignity, why may they not have the first place in this Treatise? Howbeit, because this woor●● Supreme, The word Supreme. may be taken aswell for the last in order, though the first in dignity, as the Princes give their voices and Royal assent last of all● and when every body hath said, their voice strikes dead or quickens 〈◊〉 the matter. If our brethren here mean, to reserve the Treaty of the Christian Princes Supreme authority, to the purpose, & so to acknowledge them to be the supreme governors: then a God's name, proceed on, Let them say, as do the Gentlemen-ushers before Princes, On afore my Lords. Let all these four estates take their places before, because that these our Learned discoursers so assign them. We will not greatly strive with them about the room, where they please to place Christ●an Princes, first or last, or middlemost, if Christian Princes ma● entirely retain their supreme authority in Ecclesiastical causes. Nevertheless, there is no reason to the contrary, but it may be thought of some, or of most, if not of these Learned discoursers, that they shoul● have treated first on the Supreme authority of Christian Princes: The Princessupreme gov. sclan. that the reader might first have known, what Government pertaineth to them, and how far it extendeth by the word of God, that have the Supreme authority of Eccl. causes: and then to have treated on those in their orders, dignities, and places, that are under them, and seen likewise the differences of their inferior governments. And so should the reader of these controversies, have eastly & plainly perceived, whether any of their inferior Governments & authorities had encroached on the Christian Princes Supreme government & authority, yea or no. The injury offered to the Prince in the last place. This (me thinketh) had been the better, the simpler, and more direct Method: then first to bring in all the other inferior persons, and to assign this and that Government unto every of them, and when all have had their places offices and governements assigned to them: then, to come to the Christian Princes, and tell them: this is the place and office of Supreme Government, left for you. Your Majesties come late, these 4. are your seniors, ye are but their punies: and therefore be content, there is no remedy, you must take that which by them is not forestalled, & how far your Supreme authority extendeth, we shall have better occasion to entreat hereafter, when we have described the Eccl. state. Me thinketh, that Christian Princes may take grief hereat, yea, every indifferent Reader may suspect, that Christian Princes might have great wrong offered them by this dealing. But, whether our brethren, Discoursers, mean thus, or no: by bringing in first all the inferior persons, and taking up before hand (ere the Princes be so much as mentioned) the direction of all Eccles. matters to be directed only by them, and bid the Princes be content, they shall have the Supreme place of authority, that is, the last place (as they perhaps mean it) and the Princes understand it for the chiefest place: let them now go on, and tell their own tale, and show their reasons for thus placing of the Christian Princes. Whereupon it seemeth, that all the regiment of the Church dependeth. Where-upon? And where-upon (I pray you brethren) speak you this? either upon the giving to Christian Princes the first treatise? Our breath. captious slander of the Princes supreme government. or upon the Supreme authority of Christian Princes? The supreme authority you have granted. But the first place of the treaty, ye will not grant. Where-upon, it may be taken, that this your (where-upon) seemeth as if ye said: If we should first entreat of the Supreme authority of Christian Princes: than it might seem, that all the regiment of the Church dependeth on them. But construe your own words whereupon ye please, either upon the one sense or the other. Here is nothing yet alleged, but that only it seemeth that all the regiment of the Church dependeth on it. But if it be understood for the only first place of the treaty: it can not so much as seem to depend all upon the first treating of the same. If it be understood of the Christian Princes supreme government, in Ecclesiastical causes, which you have granted and we take hold thereon, and that some what yet in time, lest all be clean given from them, if all be not given away already, but yet will we take as good holdfast as we can, for the Princes right, that Christian Princes have supreme authority in Ecclesiastical causes: which once being granted: then, whether ye treat there-upon first or last: whatsoever would seem to fall out, will seem so still. But what is this that would seem to fall out hereupon? That all the regiment of the Church, dependeth on the Christian Princes supreme authority in ecclesiastical causes. A sclaunderoussurmise of the Christian Prince. Would this seem, if the Prince had the first place? Doth it seem that all the regiment of the Church, dependeth on the Pastor? And yet here you assign the Pastor the first place. Though afterward upon further advisement, you put him back, and make him come down with shame, and take the lower room, giving the first place to the Doctor, notwithstanding yourselves do thus here for a while exalt the Pastor. But it seemeth, ye have a greater jealousy of the Christian Prince, then of any of all these four Tetrarkes'. For howsoever y●● set them one before or after another, the Christian Prince must come behind them all, for fear it might seem that the regiment of the Church dependeth thereon. But shall the Christian Princes be debarred of the right of their place, in the treaty of their authority, because it seemeth that there-upon the Regiment of the Church dependeth? It seemeth, that these words are suspitiouslie cast forth, as though her Majesty would have all the Ecclesiastical functions, and all their ministery of the word and sacraments, and all the mystical state of Christ's militant Church in her majesties Dominions, to depend on her majesties supreme authority in Ecclesiastical matters. It seemetht, his is not very good dealing, to burden her Majesty with suspicion of such things. But we will suspend our judgement, for all this that seemeth to depend: for if we should not, but straight condemn a thing, because it seemeth this or that: what if this dealing of our brethren seemed hard to the Christian Prince? What if it seemed to her Majesty, that the bringing in of all these four Estates before her Majesty, and the giving unto them only, the direction of all Ecclesiastical matters, might be greatly prejudicial to the state of government established; to make a mutiny in the commonweal, to s●● us all together by the ears; to make an infinite number of factions and alterations; yea, to take from her Majesty the best part of her supreme authority; and to breed many more mischiefs and inconveniences, than she, or you, or we, or any yet saw? If (I say) it should seem so unto her Majesty, and to a great number beside, which think themselves as sound Protestants, and as good subjects as you either would seem to be, or are: would ye not strait ways answer? What though it seemeth so: yet, it is not so: it is but only your surmise, and though it seemeth so to you: Things not to be measured by seeming. yet it seemeth not so to us (ye will say) nor to many other. But sure it is not so, whatsoever it seemeth unto any. If now we reply: well, yet it seemeth not so of nothing. There can be no smoke, where there is no fire: and if it be not smoke indeed, yet since it seemeth to be smoke, it is not amiss to fear fire, We must abstain from all appearance of evil. 1. Thes. 5. Would ye be content, to have the matter overruled thus, against your Learned discourse for this tetrarchy, because these dangers might so seem to ensue, yea, to depend there-upon? And I pray you brethren, what stronger reason call ye this? It may be thought of some, that we should first entreat, of the supreme authority of Christian Princes: whereupon it seemeth, that all the regiment of the Church dependeth. Yea, but you will say: if it seemeth so, then, it cometh not of nothing. There is no smoke where there is no fire, We must abstain from all appearance of evil. Who said this? Forsooth (brethren) that did even I: and hardily return mine own words to mine own self, Lege Talionis. For ye see I am bold with you (brethren) in so doing. Some regiment of the Church dependeth on the Prince's supreme government. Well then (will you say) it seemeth that all the Regiment of the Church, dependeth on the supreme authority of the Christian Prince in Ecclesiastical causes: and this seeming, cometh not on nothing. No verily, doth it not. For, to set aside your partial suspicion, and go to the matter itself. The Christian Prince having supreme authority in Ecclesiast. causes: doth no Regiment of the Church at all, though not all the Regiment of the Church depend thereon? Tush, this is a thing, which is such a mist (say you) to dazzle the eyes of the ignorant persons, that they think all things in the Eccles. state, aught to be disposed by that only high authority and absolute power of the civil Magistrate. A ha (brethren) I thought it would prove somewhat. It seemed (as the saying is) either a fox or a fern brake. I took it for smoke, and it was a mist. So that I mist my mark. And yet till it came, it reeked like a smoke. And a mist will not only dazzle the eyes, but so darken the object, that we cannot discern the truth, till the mist be dissipated, and then, (if we have good eyes) we shall see all things as they are. But what is this, which is such a mist, forsooth, that all the regiment of the Church dependeth on the authority of Christian Princes? A slanderoous mist. This is a foul, thick, stinking, sclannderous, dark mist indeed. Whence riseth this mist? Do we raise any such speeches on the Prince? Doth the statute yield any such authority to the prince? Doth her Majesty claim, or take upon her any such authority? I hear of none but of the common adversaries, (and you now which ar● our brethren,) that cast forth any such speeches. albeit, I join not you and them in like condition. For, they most maliciously do anowe and blaze it: you only say it seemeth: but whether to them, or to the people, or to yourselves it seemeth: that you tell us not. But it seemeth, ye will exempt yourselves, and I am glad thereof: for I would not have it, that you, who are our brethren in jesus Christ, and her majesties tru● meaning subjects, as we are, should have either your eyes dazzled, or the very paper (whereon you writ) to be stained, with the suspicion, or but with seeming to suspect, such false, foggy, and infective mists a● those are. If ye be jealous of them, to drive this mist away, it is well done: so that in this jealousy to drive away the mist, ye drive not away withal our Mistresses Supreme authority: It is no reason her Majesty should lose her clear right, under pretence that a mist dazzleth the eyes of ignorant persons. The eyes of the ignorant dazzled with this mist. But if they be ignorant, than it is for that they know not the truth hereof: and then is the truth of the matter clean contrary. And although the ignorant be deceived: yet they that be not ignorant, hi● not deceived. And can not the ignorant be taught the truth by them that are not ignorant? The ignorant persons were deceived in many more things, of which ignorant persons then, many now (thanks be to God) do know the truth, except such as love mists and darkness more than light. But let not us suppress the truth, for fear of what may seem to ignorant persons For to them truth seems falsehood; and all that we say both of us, may seem stark lies. But it lieth us upon so much the rather, to tell them the truth: and then if they will be ignorant, let them be ignorant still. But what is the point, wherein by this mist the eyes of the ignorant persons are thus dazzled? That all things in the Ecclesiastical state, aught to be disposed by the only high authority & absolute power of the Christian Magistrate. This indeed is a dangerous error of ignorant persons. But if any be so ignorant: would this error be confirmed in them, if the authority & power of the Christian Princes were first treated upon, and thoroughly viewed? And not rather, if there be any such as hold that opinion (as by our brethren's speeches it seemeth sh●re should honanie) I take it were the best way which could be taken, that this mist, were first cleared, and the Treaty of the Christian Princes first treated upon: lest, either the Princes should take any such only high authority and absolute power upon them, or that the people should so grossly and erroneously conceive any such matter of them. This is my opinion in such cases. And I would wish you (brethren) to take heed, how in these your discourses, The casting forth of such false suspicions is not well done. (let them carry what name of learning soever ye will) sith that the people are taught no such matter, sith that her Majesty taketh no such absolute power upon her, but (as becometh a good Christian Prince,) that, which of right pertaineth to her majesties royal office, and most godly, with all humility, patience and ●uldenes, tempereth the justice of the same: you abuse not too much her majesties clemency, that deserveth no such slanders nor suspicions at your hinds. Wh●e put you such surmises in the people's heads, if they were ignorant, to deceive them worse? For this is the way, to make the people either become Atheists, as only and absolutely to depend on the Prince in all matters and causes Ecclesiastical: or to grudge against her Majesty, as taking on her such an only high authority and absolute power to dispose all things in the state Ecclesiastical. What could her open professed enemies have said worse? Save that they no less impudently then falsely, like arrant Traitors, do not shame to affirm it: and should you (brethren) come after those shameless children of belial, and say: But while we speak of Ecclesiastical government, it may be thought of some, that we should entreat first of the Supreme authority of Christian Princes: where-upon it seemeth, that all the regiment of the Church dependeth: which is such a mist to dazzle the eyes of ignorant persons, that they think all things in the Eccles. state ought to be disposed, by the only high authority and absolute power of the civil Magistrate? What suspicious speeches, and byous glances, under the name of some, and of it seemeth. and of they think, are here cast forth? and all this thinking and seeming to some, is turned to the people, and to ignorant persons: they, poor souls, must bear the fault of all. What is raising of mists, dazzling of eyes, walking in clouds: yea, dancing naked in a net, and when all the world looketh on, to think no 〈◊〉 seeth us, if this be not? And why is the Sovereign Prince called hereby no better term, than the civil Magistrate: who before, was acknowledged in more reverent manner, to be the Christian Prince, The term of civil Magistrate. and to have also Supreme authority? What? and did you likewise mean. herebie to grant unto Christian Princes, that all the regiment of the Church dependeth on their Supreme authority, and that all things in the Ecclesiastical state ought to be disposed by that only high authority and absolute power of the civil Magistrate? What? & do ye h●●e grant the● all this? Or grant them some thing? or deny them all this, and grant them nothing, nor any regiment, nor any disposing at all? Ye say, the ignorant persons, How far our breath. deny or grant this slander. thought thus and thus: and would you for all that, give so much unto Christian Princes, as the Supreme authority in Ecclesiastical causes? Did not you fear also, lest ye should raise a mist to dazzle the eyes of ignorant persons? And what did yo● mean, when you gave the direction of all Ecclesiastical matters to your four estates only in the Church? And among other terms, her● speaking of the Christian Princes, ye call their estate the only high● authority, and absolute power: but it sufficeth us, (if ye will abide by your grant,) that Christian Princes have supreme authority in Ecclesiastical causes, as for the terms, only and absolute, which are due only unto Christ; in talking of any others usurpation of them, we kno●● no Christian Princes that doth usurp them. It is manifest, that our most gracious Sovereign (the mirror of all Christian Princes of this age) claimeth or usurpeth, Her Ma. claimeth no such absolute power. no such only high authority or absolute power, whereby all things in the Ecclesiastical state ought to be disposed. Bestow the usurpation of these terms on the Pope, or of some tyrant: or look yourselves (brethren) better unto it. For, you give three things here to your four Tetrarkes'. First, direction: and then, of all Ecclesiastical matters: and that, only to these four in the Church. And wer● ye not afraid, lest, the fourth term, that is to say, absolute power, would follow in a mist, to dazzle the eyes of ignorant persons? Well, if after absolute, Absalon follow not also, it is the better. But let us now withdraw ourselves out of these mists, and com● to clearer coasts, concerning some particular points, what is here grau●ted, or denied to the Christian Princes by these our Learned discoursing brethren Others there be, with more colour of reason, that refer only indifferent matters to the disposition of Princes: The learned discourse. Page. 8. but in determining indifferent matters, they show themselves not to be indifferent judges. For, whatsoever it shall please the civil Magistrate or themselves to call or count indifferent, it must be so holden of all men, without any further inquiry. But of the Supreme authority of Christian Princes in Eccles. causes, how far it extendeth by the word of God, we shall have better occasion to entreat hereafter, when we have described the eccl. state. When under the name and blame of ignorant persons, these Learned discoursers have answered (as they think) sufficiently; Bridges. that they have not first treated on the Christian Princes estate, for fear, least in giving th● Prince place, before they had invested in full seazure and possession, these four Tetrarks in their offices assigned already unto them, the Christian Prince might be thought to have gotten too great advantage, The Princes auth. in indifferent matters. as having his share set ●ut before theirs: and therefore, he is put back, till all these four be served: under pretence, that if the Prince were served first: ignorant persons would think, that all the other had their shares from him, and all depended on him, and that his power might be thought absolute, and that this were a mist to dazzle the eyes of ignorant persons, which might sound to the Princes great reproach. Lest, now the Christian Prince, or any other his well-willers, should espy, that this indeed, were but a mist to dazzle the Princes own eyes, that pretending to stay him, for fear he might seem to have too much, they might leave him no authority at all, in the directing and disposing those matters, wherein his Supreme authority most of all consisteth, to wit, (be they politic, moral, or Ecclesiastical things) in matters indifferent: lest they might thus seem to spoil the Prince of all: they come now to answer those men, that yet would leave to the Christian Prince a Supreme authority in disposing of these indifferent matters. Others (say they) there be, with more colour of reason, Indifferent matters referred to the Prince's disposition. that refer only indifferent matters to the disposition of Princes. Who those others are, they do not name: but we may well perceive, that these our brethren discoursers favour not greatly those men's opinion, that the Christian Princes should have any disposing of indifferent matters. Notwithstanding, because they dare not in plain words deny it: it is worth the sight, to see how pretyly they fetch it about, in the answering to the opinion of those others. And first, they claw these others, how-beit with a hard curricombe, that they at least have more colour of reason, yet not reason, but colour of reason: Which rough or gentle yielding somewhat to them, at least of a colour, must serve for a reasonable colour, to seem to give them something, though (save a colour) nothing: both to bereave these others of their reason, & the Chr. Princes of all their Supreme auth. in indifferent matters. And indeed, as they tell their tale, they drive it to as little reason, as they can, for in saying: they refer only indifferent matters to the disposition of Princes: they plainly insinuate, that these others should say, that the Princes are not only the chief or Supreme, but also, the only disposers of indifferent matters: and this also our brethren affirm of indifferent matters indefinitely; as though, not some, but all indifferent matters, were in the only disposition of Princes, at their pleasure. Now, although that in some things, which of their nature are indifferent, all laws, of God and man, have had no small regard, of those that are called Principum placita, Prince's counsellors to give advise. drawing near to the kind of her majesties Proclamations: yet what good Prince hath ever reigned, (were he never so wise,) even Solomon himself, but he had his counsel? Not to give authority and life to his decrees in such indifferent matter●, which lieth (I grant) only in the Prince's disposition: but to gi●e ●●uise and counsel upon weighty and mature deliberation, what w●re be●● in all respects, according to the Analogy of God's word, the grounds and rule of reason, and all other things to be considered, for the advancement of God's glory, the establishment of the Prince's estate, and the benefit of the commonweal. But howsoever any other Princes have abused their authority, and followed their own disposition, rather th●n reason in these matters: or their own reason according to Machiauelle● rule, rather than the advice or consents of their wise and goodly Counsel●● shall we so deem rashly, and beyond our duty, of her Ma. our most gracious Sovereign, or of any other godly Christian Princes? Well then▪ what say our brethren these Learned discoursers here-unto, having moved this case? The Prince's authority in disposing indifferent matters. For, it is at this day a great question, & toucheth the matter to the quick, what the Christian Princes authority is, in the disposition of indifferent matters? Let us now listen to their answer & determination in this point. Whereby we shall see, what they leave to the Christian Prince, all or somewhat, Our brothers motion of this point aught or nought, in the disposing of these things. Their motion is this: Others there be, with more colour of reason, that refer only indifferent matters to the disposition of Princes. Our breath. answer. Their answer is this: But in determining indifferent matters, they show themselves not to be indifferent judges. The reasons of their answer. This answer they confirm with this reason: For, whatsoever it shall please the civil Magistrate or themselves to call or count indifferent, it must be so holden of all men, without any further inquiry. The breaking off the further answer till hereafter. And with this answer they break off the matter, saying: But of the supreme authority of Christian Princes in Eccles. causes, how far it extendeth by the word of God: we shall have better occasion to entreat hereafter, when we have described the Eccl. state. And is this all then, that we shall look for here, concerning this so gre●● and important matter? Who moved here this point now? Indeed it w●● looked for before. But why at the length was it now moved, and shall not now be throughly answered, but thus be posted off, till better occasion hereafter? Hear was a very good occasion, and moved by yourselves, and the matter weighty and necessary: and who would not now even have said to himself, although some great business or frien●● had called him away? Nay, soft, I will stay a while, and here these o●● brethren's Learned discourse and answer, in proving and determining of this great point: & then be gone. But we may now be gone when we li●t, we have our answer here already, such an one as it is: and till better occasion hereafter, we must be content with this. Well, and there be no remedy, then content: we will live in hope. But then (Brethren) forget not the matter quite and ●leane, when that better occasion hereafter cometh. But it is an old saying, Omne promissum est aut debitum aut dubium. I doubt w● must take this answer for all, in this Learned Discourse. For, hereafter, when our brethren at the end of all this their Learned Discourse, take their better occasion (as they think) to treat more largelée of the supreme authority of Christian Princes in ecclesiastical causes, how far it ex●endeth by the word of God: there is, fair and well, better and worse, more and less, ne gry quidem, not so much as one word mentioned of indifferent matters. And is this indifferent dealing in such a matter? But since it is so, lest we should go empty away, we must take this or none for an answer. The objection propounded by themselves, was this: Others there be with more colour of reason, that refer only indifferent matters to the disposition of Princes. To this they answer. But in determining indifferent matters, they show themselves not to be indifferent judges. This answer beginning with a But, is given rhetoricallie Ex abrupto. The weighing of our brethren's answer. Uttering (as it were, for quicker ●●spatch, in a Learned Discourse,) the one half, or part of the answer, by which they would have us to gather their whole mind: as who should say: it is true which these others affirm, How far our brethren grant to the Princes disposing indifferent matters. that refer only indifferent matters to the disposition of Princes: all this we gladly grant and yield unto. But in determining indifferent matters, they show themselves no● to be indifferent judges. Is not this (brethren) the meaning of your answer? For I would be loath wittingly to misconstrue you. Howbeit, to all that shall be indifferent judges of us both, I hope, they will say, I have more than colour of reason, thus to construe your word●. You have moved here a weighty objection: Your full, plain, and resolute answer is expected. If ye say nothing at all unto it: either it might be thought, that ye rejected it, as a matter not worthy to be answered: (and why then did ye move it?) Or ●lse, saying nothing thereunto: the old rule may hap to fasten on you: Qui tacet, videtur cons●ntire: He that holdeth his peace, doth seem to consent. Notwithstanding, that is but seeming, which though it enforce not, yet still it carrieth more than colour of Reason, that by all probability, the party yieldeth. And it is commonly, and in some cases necessarily taken, pro confess●, as a clear grant. But if a man of purpose, will take upon him to unswere to that, which is objected either by others or by himself, and answer only by way of exception, as you here expressly begin with this exception, But: what can that intend, but that ye freely grant, to all the objection, so far forth as is not expressed nor contained, wi●●in the compass of your exception? And this goeth beyond your mist of videtur, it seemeth: and I plainly take it for a plain grant. Our brethren grant it, and yet find fault with them that grant it Now if ye grant to the opinion of these, whom ye call others, that refer only indifferent matters to the disposition of Princes: why do ye so minceinglie, or rather odiously say of them: they do it with more colour of reason, as though they had no reason, but a colour of reason for it? And what reason or colour of reason have you to propose i●, and grant it, and yet to find fault with them that do avouch it▪ If y● say, ye find fault with the abuse of it: that is nothing to the objection, which was, whether only indifferent matters were to be referred to the Prince's disposition. But (say you) in determining indifferent matter● they show themselves not to be indifferent judges. So that, if they showed themselves to be indifferent judges, in determining indifferent matters: then they did well, and ye will allow Christian Princes to have authority, in the disposition of indifferent matters. Who are these now, that in determining indifferent matters, show themselves not be indifferent judges? Who are these not indifferent judges. If ye mean those others, with their colour of reason: with what colour of reason refer ye this to them, who (as ye say) refer only indifferent matters to the disposition of Princes? And how then are they become such determiners and judges of indifferent matters, referring them only to the Prince's disposition? What judgement or determination is that in these others, that hath no disposition of the matters, whereon they should judge and determine, but referreth the disposition to the Prince? And what disposition is that of the Prince, if these others and not the prince, be the judges and determiners of it? If ye say these others find out only, what be indifferent matters, and the Prince only doth dispose them, how they shallbe used, when by these others they are determined and judged to be indifferent: Mistaking indifferent for not indifferent. where is then the fault? In mistaking matters not indifferent, for indifferent: and indifferent, for not indifferent: and so in determining indifferent matters, they show themselves not to be indifferent judges. And who do thus? these others, that refer only indifferent matters to the disposition of Princes. The Princes right hereby not prejudiced. What is this to the Princes right, in the disposition of indifferent matters? The right of the Prince herein, may remain entire, for all this abuse of others. So that (I hope) we shall sooner agree, than we were aware on. For, so that Christia● Princes may have their right inviolably reserved: I dare hazard thus far of all good Christian Princes, and will presume (by her majesties leave) to give warrant for our most gracious Sovereign, that she wi●● not abuse her authority, nor hath done: nor (if any others have abuse● her authority herein, committed by her Majesty unto them) woul● maintain them, or allow thereof. The Prince slandered. But all this will not serve. For, under pretence of this abuse, though done by others, which other● notwithstanding are not named: not only they (whosoever they be) in authority under her: but also her Majesty herself is most unworthily defaced, and her right herein, Her mayest. right and doings unworthily defaced. which cannot be denied, but for a show is granted unto, (albeit not so neither in express words, but in necessity of consequence is evicted from them) is here clean undermined, and with a reproachful contumely overturned. Pretending not only that the Prince disposeth all these things amiss, according to the wrong determining of others: but that the Prince joineth with these others, in the wrong determining and judging of these matters. And that either the Prince and they, or else the Prince or they, rule all at their own pleasure, disposing of indifferent matters for not indifferent: and of not indifferent, for indifferent: and so, in determining indifferent matters, show themselves not to be indifferent judges. For, whatsoever it shall please the civil magistrate, or themselves, to call or count indifferent, it must be so holden of all men, without any further inquiry. What do they (brethren)? say me that again: do they deal thus with every matter whatsoever? And at their own pleasure, whatsoever it shall please them? And have they no better proof, than their bare calling or counting it to be indifferent? is that all the reason they allege? And would they hereupon only, have it holden for such a maximie, that, not only it may, but it must be so holden, and that, of all men: and that, without any further, so much as, inquiry? This is a very strange dealing: this is an heinous matter indeed. If the matter go thus: alas poor men, I cannot greatly blame you, if ye mislike such evil dealing, and thought them not to be indifferent judges. But (I beseech you brethren) who are they that use such dealing? The civil magistrate, or themselves. What? The civil magistrate? God forbidden. Take heed what ye say, yea, unsay that again. No, no, we say (you will say) the civil magistrate. And will ye so indeed? Whom then mean ye by the civil Magistrate? For, The civil magistrate. all our question was about Princes, and those not Heathen, but Christian Princes And we (will you say) by the civil magistrate, do mean also the Christian Prince. Well then (brethren) I now perceive your meaning. Neither do I deny, but that the term (civil magistrate) is a fit and reverend term, as time and place serveth. Howbeit, here treating of the supreme authority of Christian Princes, to come in (as before in a mist ye did, and now again, and that openly) with a term, that may as well fit the great Turk, or any Heathen, Infidel, profane, or wicked Prince, as a Christian Prince: and speaking of not indifferent judges, to call here the Christian Prince, only and in general, the Civil magistrate, as though it were some Civilian, or judge in the Civil law, or some other inferior Magistrate, under the Prince: Quàm contemptim? quàm incivil? But would God, this were the greatest fault in this discourse, to stumble now and then, on a course term, though some what unfitting for so learned discourses, and more unfit in this treatise for the majesty and reverence of the Christian Prince, to be termed by. But let terms pass, and tend to the charge. Not only others, but also the Christian Prince, is here charged and accused by the subject, of an heinous crime: that whatsoever shall please the civil Magistrate, The subjects accusation of the Prince. (meaning the Prince) or themselves (meaning others in authority called by the Prince) To call or count indifferent, it must be so holden of all men, without any further inquiry. What a sore and sharp accusation is this? And what a number of weighty branches hang thereon? For a Prince, a Christian Prince, yea the own liege, natural, and most godly Christian Prince: of the subjects, yea, of the own natural, loyal, and sworn subjects, yea, of us protestant reform Christian subjects: yea, of those that pretend to be the most zealous, godly, learned, faithful Ministers subjects, to be thus burdened and exclaimed upon. If this had been true: yet would it have required a more reverent admonition And if it be false: then, to have been spoken in never so great secret, is both a sin grievous before God, and to our own estate, dangerous. But to accuse the Prince openly of so foul● a matter, not only before God and his Angels: but to publish it in the hearing of all your fellow subjects: to thrust it out in print to other nations, to the wide world, to perpetual memory: and as it were, in tables of Brass, to set it down in a plotforme, and in a Learned Discourse of Ecclesiastical government: that the Civil Magistrate, pointing as it were with your finger, to that so gracious Christian Prince, under whom both you and we do so happily live: to whom we all do own obedience, love, duty, honour, fealty: to whom by so many great benefits we be obliged: that her Majesty doth deal with us so violently, so wilfully, so vni●silie, that whatsoever the please to call or count indifferent, it must be so holden of all men, The heighnousnesse of this slander, ●ot to be an indifferent judge. without any further inquiry: What greater crime almost can ye lay to any, not Christian Princes, but barbarous tyrant's charge, in such a matter, than here ye have done? For, any to be called a judge not indifferent, that is appointed to be a judge: is to charge him with a fore matter: that either of ignorance (which is too bad in a judge,) or of knowledge (which is worse) he is an affectionate, partial, corrupt, and not a just judge. For, what of all these, and worse, if worse can be in a judge, is not contained in this infamous term? He is not an indifferent judge. When a judge determineth a doubt or controversy, judicially, then to be not indifferent, is the manifest perverting of his office. For, what is the chiefest point of a judges office, but to give just judgement, and that justly? Thou shalt not (saith God unto a judge, Leuit. 9) do unjustly in judgement, thou shalt not favour the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty, but thou shalt judge thy neighbour justly. The chiefest point● of a judges office. And what is justice, but, Suum cuique tribuere, to give to every party and part that, that appertaineth to the same: so that if there be accepting of the persons, more than of the weighing of the causes: if right be not ministered indifferently to all: if the skoales be not of themselves of like poised, other wise then as the weight of the matter that is put in them, causeth the one to weigh down the other: and if the tongue of the balance incline not down that way, after the heavier weight: if were even against the course of nature. And if the judge, into whose hand God hath put the sword of justice, should not strike right, but clean overthwart: condemn the innocent, justify the guilty, say good is evil, and evil is good: light is darkness, and darkness is light: sour is sweet, and sweet is sour: false is true, and true is false: not indifferent is indifferent, and indifferent is not indifferent: then indeed he were a judge not indifferent, but unjust and false. The danger of this accusation. Such not indifferent judges God accursseth, and will root them out. Because, where they execute not their own, but (as josaphat calleth them) the judgements of God: they pervert them to God's dishonour, to the maintenance of wrong and falsehood, and to the injury and oppression of the people. This therefore is a most dreadful accusation. If ye reply, that ye speak this of others, not of Princes, that in determining indifferent matters they show themselves not to be indifferent judges: had ye said no more thereof, but so left it in suspense, what we might gather by this word they: although it had been spoken very suspitiouslie, to say: others there be, with more colour of reason, that refer only indifferent matters to the disposition of Princes: but in determining indifferent matters, they show themselves not to be indifferent judges: which they, do thus show themselves? The Princes to whose disposition the matters be referred? Or these others that refer them to the disposition of Princes? Because here this word they, might be doubtfully taken: and we ought not to construe doubtful words odiously, to the worst part, if they may be construed to the better: had ye therefore gone no further in the matter, and not yourselves made your meaning plain, and withal a great deal worse: I might have been thought to have offered you as great wrong, in threaping that sense on your words, as your words offer great wrong to Princes, in burdening Princes with so great a slander. But when as upon these words: they show themselves not to be indifferent judges: The Prince slandered. ye pursue it at the hard● heels, with this illative cause: For, whatsoever it shall please the Civil Magistrate, or themselves, to call or count indifferent, it must be so holden of all men without any further inquiry: do ye not most apparently (to any that hath but his common sense) infer this sentence on the other? The Prince directly accused so well as others in authority. And although ye utter it disiunaivelie, saying: The Civil Magistrate or themselves, and not jointly, the Civil Magistrate and themselves: do ye not speak it of the one as well as of the other? Yea, and place the Prince in this crime, before the other, as of the twain, the more culpable? If this be not a great overshooting of your duties, a foul forgetfulness of your estate and calling, and a very sore crime for the subject to burden the Prince withal: then with all my heart I cry God mercy, and I cry you mercy too (my brethren) and will be most ready to make all the amends I may, for mistaking this to be so great a fault in you, that ye have laid hére so great a fault, unto your and our Prince's charge. And though I would (God he knoweth) be most woe and loath, The grievousness of our brethoffence in this slander. to be found culpable of such a crime, as to become an accuser of my brethren, be the matter never so true, and much more loath, being false: yet could I rather wish, to sustain all punishment of a slanderer, then that you or any other could prove, such foul matter as this is, in her Majesty. For what one word have ye brought in all this your Learned Discourse, The Prince Slandered to proou● that the Prince enforceth you, to hold any one thing as indifferent, that is not indifferent? And now (brethren) alleging no one proof of any such matter not indifferent, to be holden indifferent: consider better with yourselves, what ye have here done against the Lords anointed, against your only, so good, and gracious Sovereign: who hath of you hitherto deserved so well, and shall she now of you her subjects, be rewarded so ill? How● should you not be ashamed to be thought so unthankful? yea, not tre●ble and quake, to be found so undutiful? Not so much for fear only, 〈◊〉 incur the danger of her majesties indignation: for, (God be blessed 〈◊〉 it) we have a most mild and merciful Princess, ready to forgive yo●. But what will ye answer to Almighty God, (for I hope, ye fear God more than man) and God (whose anointed her Majesty is) giveth this strait charge to every subject, Exod. 22. Thou shalt not rail upon 〈◊〉 judges, neither shalt thou speak evil of the ruler of thy people. No, Reproach 〈◊〉 the Prince (saith Solomon) so much as in thy thought: Neither speak th●● evil of the rich, in thy bed chamber: for the foul of the air shall carry thy voice, a●d that which hath wings shall declare the matter, Ecclesiast. 10. And yet (brethren) have not you feared with open mouths, to cry o●● these speeches in t●e air, and add your paper wings unto them, to fly about in the world. Pinion therefore (my brethren) these wild wings: lay your hands on your mouths, and acknowledge this great fault, that ye have committed: Leave these contumelious speeches, fit for enemies then for Subjects: cry God and her Majesty in your hearts heartily mercy, and with humble reverence and good opinion, submit yourselves to her majesties disposition of these matters. And as I hope (on better advising of these your unadvised dealings) ye will not be grieved thus to do: so I trust that God, Inconsiderate zeal. and under GOD her Majesty, (considering that all this hath been risen on a fervency of zeal (I grant) to God's glory, but not according to the knowledge and learning, whereof you persuade yourselves, and not of any evil will ye bear her Majesty, but otherwise, love, honour, obey her, and wish as well as we, withal your hearts unto her) will most readily both forgive and forget all these your distempered speeches and demeanours. If ye think, ye have not committed so great a fault, since that the matter (when all is done) is but for indifferent matters: and why then, should the matter be made so great, the ground being so little? Lessening the cause doth aggravate the fault. I pray you (brethren) doth the lessening of the matter, lessen the fault: or not rather aggravate the same? And yet, who make this great ado, and this foul outcry on the Prince for indifferent matters? Whereof (in the mean while) ye cannot deny, but the Prince hath the disposition: and when she hath disposed them, then to cry out on her disposition of them, on this fashion, that she disposeth them so, that if she call or count them indifferent, it must be so holden of all men without any further inquiry: call ye this (my masters) a small matter? Doth not the importance even of all religion hang upon it? For, if by this slander, the Prince please to call or count indifferent any one, or all the articles of our faith, it must be so holden of all men without any further inquiry. May they not then dispose thus of all religion, and alter the same as it pleaseth them? The very antichrist of Rome, This accusation reacheth further than we accuse the Pope. went never yet so far, neither do we burden him to have gone so far, in all his intolerable usurpation, although, he come very near unto this blasphemy. Indeed the Pope and his blasphemous railers, most impudently do lay such crimes unto our Prince's charge, and yet hardly they go so far as this reacheth. And shall we then ourselves (to confirm their most shameful lies) accuse our own so blessed a Prince, with so outrageous and apparent a slander? It helpeth not that he● Majesty is not by name accused. If ye think, ye are to hardly pressed, as speaking these things ●gainst her Majesty, whereas ye name her Majesty not at all, nor snye other Prince particularly. I confess, ye show herein a point of wit and learning▪ in this your Learned Discourse, to learn us, that although we sustain a snubbe for an unseemly term: yet to save ourselves upright, and out of danger, in speaking of Princes, it is good to speak somewhat more at random, and not of this Prince, nor of that Prince, but in general terms, of the Civil Magistrate, and then cannot one Prince find himself, more touched than an other: or at least, though they see themselves gléeked at, yet cannot such holdfast be taken on their words. Indeed if ye dealt thus with meaner persons, it were more tolerable, to put a case of john a Style, or of Ly homo, an Individuum vagum would save all cleanly, and might be counted but a presupposal. But when ye treat, not of a thing that mought, or mought not be doo●● by Princes, or by the Civil Magistrate: but flatly avouch things to be done by them, and withal complain of, and accuse the doing of them: What? do ye here complain of no body? Or, as if it were, not yet done: do ye cry and be not touched? Or who offendeth you? Do all Princes? Or some Princes? Or which Princes? Nay, (will ye say) we name none. The Civil Magistrate is a term indefinite. But how indefinite soever it be, either it containeth all, some, or none. If none: why whine ye? If some: name who. If all: ye have mended the matter very well. But what need this? Will you now also yourselves, having (almost even in your last words) found fault with mists to dazzle the eyes of ignorant persons, go about here to cast mists to dazzle all men's eyes, with these indefinite terms of Princes, & of the Civil Magistrate? think ye men are such ignorant persons, and very fools, that they perceive not, of what state ye speak, and of whom ye here say, they show themselves? Go to, go to, I perceive you will show your selves quickly, whom ye mean. Perhaps, some other reform Church, not ours: it is not our state that is so disordered: Neither is it our people, whom ye persuade to leave this disordered state of ours. Of ours? What sai● I? No, not of ours: and to embrace that most beautiful order of Ecclesiastical regiment, which God so manifestly doth bless and prosper in our neighbour's hand: it is not our Prince's disposition of indifferent matters, that ye mislike: it is not our Prince, nor others in authority under our Prince, that (ye say) in determining indifferent matters, show themselves not to be indifferent judges: it is not our Civil Magistrate, or any others under our Civil Magistrate, that ye mean, dea●● thus with their subjects, that whatsoever it shall please the Civil Magistrate, or themselves, to call or count indifferent, it must be so holden of all men, without any further inquiry. Fie, Fie, (my masters,) do ye thus so sot and sooth yourselves i● so Learned a Discourse, to think so courslie of all other men, as that they know not a B from a battle-dore. Who seethe not whom ye mean 〈◊〉 ye mean by all these speeches? The Prince with others slandered▪ And what Prince and other persons ye note, and whom, ye were as good, (save for fashion's sake) to have even pointed out with your finger, and named them by express name. But deceive not yourselves, think not thus to blear all men's eyes with these general speeches. For, how-so-ever ye may dazzle the eyes of the ignorant persons: all men, that have any sight, or wit, not blinded with affection, do see, as cléerens as noon day, whom ye aim at. Yea, the blind eyes of the adversaries see it and rejoice at it, and all godly zealous, with discretion and knowledge, do see it, and lament it. And all her majesties obedient faithful subjects, your unfeigned well wishing brethren in the Lord, but herein greatly dissenting from you, do see it with our eyes bedewed with our tears, and in our hearts bewail and rue the view thereof: praying for you, that God would open your eyes and move your hearts to consider better of these inconsiderate dealings. But these our brethren perhaps, will bid us pray for ourselves herein, and not for them. For, if there be any fault about these matters, Our brothers accusation of others with the Prince. they impute it not to her Majesty, so much as unto others. And therefore they will say, if ye mark our words well, ye shall find that we rather burden others than the Prince. Others? Who be these others? Have they no names neither? Nay (will they say) we name none, look you to that, and take it among you. As for us, we expressly say, whatsoever it shall please the Civil Magistrate or themselves, etc. Yea (my learned masters) are ye good at that? Nay, than I see we must mark your words better, and whatsoever the Princes calling or counting must be holden without any further inquiry: we must yet by your leave, inquire further, and take better hold of these your words, and call ye to account also, not only for the Civil Magistrate, but for them, whom here ye call and count these themselves, and others that ye mention. If ye would post it off to others, to excuse yourselves of any ill meaning ye had, to blemish her Majesty: I hold well with it: neither do I urge your words, to the intent to accuse you, but so far as I may, rather to excuse you. Wishing you (where your accusation of her Majesty is too apparent) that you should with submission and amendment, acknowledge the overshooting of your duties. For, what doth this relieve your accusation, if not only the Prince, but others also be accused of these things? If there be others besides the Prince, well may it lessen the Prince's fault, but it doth not clear it; if in giving the disposition of the matters to the Prince, and placing herein the Prince before them, ye make not the Prince rather principal in the fault, then accessary But because here are others with the Prince accused: may we be so bold to inquire further of these others? What have others to do in these matters? What? Whatsoever it shall please themselves also, to call or count indifferent, it must be so holden of all men, without any further inquiry. Where in these others are accused. Do they so? Then are they as deep in, as the Prince. And do they all this, without the Prince: or with the Prince? We say: whatsoever it please the Civil Magistrate or themselves. Then, if ye mean it disiunctivelie without the Prince: the Prince's fault was by itself, as theirs also by themselves, and the one neither burdeneth nor easeth the other. Nay (will they say) we mean not so, but by the one or the other, we conclude them both. But the question was, of the Prince's authority and disposing. Belike than the Prince doth not dispose these indifferent matters all alone, nor whatsoever pleaseth him or herself: but, whatsoever pleaseth themselves: so that, the Prince hath some others assistant, at least for enformation what these things are, The Princes clearing, not to dispose these matters all alone. yea to be determiners and judges, to have the same so called and accounted. Here then, the Prince playeth not the Tyrant's part: this is not, Sic volo sic iube●, stet pro ratione voluntas, thus will I have it, thus I command it be: let that stand for reason, whatsoever pleaseth me: but contrariwise, here is the token of a good Prince, that will not dispose of these matters alone, but call others unto this deliberation. Well then, the Prince is cleared of that point. And now if there be no greater, or not more faults in these others, to abuse the Princ, (for aught that I see) the Prince will soon be quit. But now, though the Prince be of a good nature and meaneth well: yet great fault may be in these others, who to flatter the Prince, will refer all matters to the prince's disposition. Such I grant there may be, yea, there is no prince so good, whom flatterers tempt not now and then. But (brethren) take heed here, that you do not eftsoons abuse the prince, Whether the fault be in these others. under pretence of speaking against such flatterers: and that ye also abuse none others in authority about the prince, by such odious and suspicious speeches. It is (ye know) the common practice of the arrantest rebels, not to pretend so much their quarrel directly against the prince: as to say, Rebel's practice. the prince (whom still they praise to be naturally of a good disposition) hath others of counsel and authority, by whom the Prince is lead and abused. And these others, they would have only removed. I do not (brethren) bring this, as an instance to resemble your doings: but that ye should beware, lest ye should resemble them. And yet as it is good for princes to take heed, what counsel of others they do follow: so if this Prince here, whom ye call the Civil Magistrate, examine these others, of whom ye have moved this suspicion, whether they be such flatterer's, yea or no: need they desire any better witnesses for them, than yourselves? For who-so-euer they be, (because it might be odious to inquire their names) they seem to be no flatterers of the Prince. For yourselves say of them: others there be, These other● give the Prince no absolute power, etc. that refer only indifferent matters to the disposition of princes. In which words, although they give to princes an authority of disposing: yet they restrain it only to indifferent matters. So that, they give not princes that only high authority and absolute power, that all things in the Ecclesiastical state are to be disposed by the Civil Magistrate: or that all the regiment of the church dependeth on the supreme authority of the Christian princes: but the disposition of princes (by these men, whom ye ter●e others,) is restrained only to indifferent matters. Whereby it seemeth, These others fear God. that these others, are men of conscience and knowledge, having the fear of God before their eyes, nor give the prince the disposition of any one thing, which God already hath disposed. So that hitherto, and that by yourselves, these others also are acquitted, except there be further matter against them. But (say our brethren) in determining indifferent matters, they show themselves not to be indifferent judges. What? are these others then, These others intrude not themselves into the office of judging. judges also and determiners of these matters? These are great offices: who called them héereunto? The prince called them to be examiners, and the judgement and determination of these matters, appertaineth to their office. And did they not then intrude themselves? No. But they show themselves not to be indifferent judges. Why so? Are they partial to themselves? These others take not the disposing to themselves, but give it to the Prince. And judge or determine, that indifferent matters, belong to their own disposition? No, they refer that, from themselves, to the disposition of princes. How are they partial then? Belike they refer it to the Prince, because they are matters that only concern the Prince, and not themselves. Nay, they concern themselves, as much, or more, than any other: and the judgements and determinations what is the nature of those matters, do especially appertain unto them. Do they so? Both these others and the Prince cleared. see how these things fall out, both for the Prince and for these others. The Prince hath here authority to dispose of indifferent matters. howbeit the prince will not dispose of them alone, but chooseth and calleth others, which by their office and function, are most skilful, to discern indifferent matters from matters not indifferent, which intrude not themselves into the judgement and determining of these matters: which are so far off to encroach any advantage or authority to themselves hereby, that they refer these matters to the prince's disposition: Nevertheless the prince will dispose nothing, but that which these men shall be judges and determiners of it, to be such an indifferent matter, as whereof the Prince may dispose: neither doth the Prince impose any thing upon them, against their wills, nor craveth any thing of them, to judge or determine, this way or that way, what is, or what is not, an indifferent matter, but leaveth that free to these others judgement and determination. Here the subjects give the Princes their due, and go no further: here the Princes take no more than is their due, nor all that neither, and but by the subjects own consent, and by their advise, judgement and determination, of the matters indifferency, to whose skill and function it chiefly appertaineth. Here neither the Princes can complain of the subjects, to intrude themselves, and to usurp upon the Prince's authority and disposition, Neither the subjects can complain on the Princes, to encroach on matters disposed of already by GOD, to rule all alone, to determine all by self-will, or to take advise of those that have no skill, or to impose on them matters that concern them, without their own● consents and determinations. O what a pitiful piece of work is here. Is not this a heinous matter, and this Prince worthy in such a Learned Discourse, to be coursed & cried out upon: yea to be blazed forth in reproach to all the world, for this so great and foul a crime? But what then shall we say to these others, these most perilous others, who-so-euer they be, these others, that are the causers of all this the Princes doing? For they, they of all others, are such off-scowrings, out-parings, woonderments, and gazing-stockes of the whole world, as he was, on whom the jews cried, Acts, 22. Away with such a fellow from the earth, for he is not worthy to live. How indifferently these others are thus accused for these indifferent matters. Ha, brethren, is this your indifferent dealing with Christian Princes, about indifferent matters, and that with your own so gracious Sovereign: (yea, let it be what Christian Prince ye please, to shift it unto) and is this also your indifferent dealing, with such others as these are, even by your own testimonies of them? How can ye (for very shame) avow this saying, that this Prince, and these others, do call and count indifferent matters, whatsoever pleaseth themselves? What? Quicquid libet licet? Or Quicquid licet libet? Do ye mean, that (without all regard of GOD, The further parts of this accusation. of their callings, of their people, of the matter,) they run altogether on a head, and follow only their own pleasure, without any deliberation of the matter? This were not only wilful and wicked, but mere brutish. Or mean ye, when they have deliberated and throughly debated thereon, that that (whatsoever it be) pleaseth them to call and count for indifferent, which they shall find indeed so to be? Yea, but howsoever they do it: yet, whatsoever shall please themselves to call or count indifferent, that must be so holden of all men. What? of all the nations in the world? What have they to do with all men? Nay, of all men, that they have to do with all, as the subjects to that Prince. And why not I pray you? Would ye have the subjects to despise or disobey their determination? Or to esteem those things which they call and account indifferent, to be not indifferent? And not indifferent to be indifferent? And still to use them, Whether things lawfully determined are not so of the subjects to be holden inuiolabl●e. as they their selves listed, at their pleasure? Or that things indifferent of their own nature, should be used still according to their own nature: indifferent things indifferently, by every man at his own disposition? Or that whether any used them or no, it makes no matter which end go forward? Would ye have the subjects still at this liberty? But what need then any disposing of them at all? Or any question of them? Or to trouble the Prince, or any others about them? Or what authority at all call ye that, either of judging, determining, or disposing of them, when every man may do as he please, and is not so much as bounden to hold them, or to account of them, as they be judged, determined, and disposed, but may still dispose of them at his own pleasure, without any restraint or controllement? For so they might have done before, and as good never a whit as never the better. If a matter be lawfully adjudged, determined, and disposed: why should it not of all men that live under those judges, determiners and disposers, be so holden and accounted? Either it is an order, or it is none: and if an order, either to be counted and holden orderly, or as good make none. Yea, but (say they) must it be so holden and accounted of all men, without any further inquiry? And what would ye inquire further? How far they are further to be inquired upon. Would ye call it again in question? And when should we then have done? And what would ye inquire upon? Whether it were so? That is already judged and determined. Whether it were to be observed and holden or no? That is likewise already disposed. And how would ye inquire? as those that would gladly learn, what is judged & determined of the matters indifferency, and what is disposed to be so holden & accounted? And understanding the same, believe it so to be, and obey it? Or to be fresh judges, determiners and disposers of it? And yet when ye have so done, may not other say as much on your judgement, determination, and disposition? So that, if further inquiry for these matters shall be thus admitted: then shall none of all these matters be ever fully judged determined or disposed: but still further inquiries made one after another, and never an end, never any certain resolution of these matters: but herein to be always like those, of whom the Apostle 2. Tim. 3. speaketh, The calling things determined into further question. Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. Would ye have it thus? No, if it were once throughly inquired upon, it should go no further. And who should be these last and full inquisitors, once for all? Will our brethren step out and say: that will we be? You? Who are you? Princes or subjects? Nay, but subjects also, as these others are, some of the clergy, and some of the laity. What, and would you be judges and determiners? Why not, as well as those others, sith the matters concern us also. And would ye be judges and determiners without the Prince, and without these others: or with them? Nay, we would judge and determine with them. And must they then reverse their own former judgements and determinations? Or else how is it a further inquiry? Let them choose: we will inquire of the matters further. What, uncalled of the Prince? Nay, the Prince shall call us. And will ye prescribe the Prince to call you? Then you call the Prince, rather than the Prince you. We will not prescribe nor compel the Prince so to do: but if the Prince call the others and not us, we will call both the Prince and them (by their leaves) not indifferent judges. And what if the Prince cut off both them and you, and (to void partialllie and stint all strife) will judge all alone? Will ye then stand to the Prince's judgement? If the Prince judge as we would have it: else not. And must it be as every one of you would have it? What if some would have this, and some would have that? Must every man, or some for all, be admitted on your side with the others? Nay, not all, that wer● confusion, and cannot well be done: but we would compromitte our voices unto some. And what now, if ye had already all this, that ye seem to desire: and those some for you, that have been in the judging and determining the indifferency of such matters, have assented unto the orders of them that are already disposed? Or were by the most and best part of the assembly so evicted: that the matter hath been sufficiently inquired of, examined, judged, determined, and resolved already, and thereupon by the Prince also disposed? Will not all this yet content you? No, no: we will then say and still cry out, that In determining indifferent matters, they show themselves not to be indifferent judges. And why will ye thus complain on them? For, whatsoever it shall please the civil Magistrate, or themselves, to call or count indifferent: it must be so holden of all men, without any further inquiry. This then (I perceive) must be the fa-burden of all this song. The Prince shall have a title of supreme authority, ●he conclusion of all this accusation. to dispose indifferent matters: and others shall inquire, judge, and determine, which be and which be not indifferent matters. But if the Prince or these others, whosoever they be, either inquire of, or judge, or determine, or dispose, otherwise of them, then shall please such as these our brethren the Learned Discoursers: not only they may coarse them for it, How this toucheth all politic matters. and discourse these matters again more learnedly: but it must be still free for all men, when and as often, and how they please, to inquire further, on all that is done, and revoke all their former inquiries, judgements, determinations and dispositions: or else they shall have this peal rung them: In determining indifferent matters, they show themselves not to be indifferent judges. For, whatsoever it shall please the Civil Magistrate, or themselves to call or count indifferent, it must be so holden of all men without any further inquiry. And now if there be any indifferent judge, let him judge (I beseech him) indifferently: If they deal thus with indifferent matters, (wherein the Prince's supremacy hath the greatest force) what is left to the Prince, or to any of these others, to inquire, judge, determine, or to dispose upon? And how now: may not this also reach, How dangerously this accusation reacheth from indifferent matters in eccle. causes to all politic matters by as much (not colour of reason) but substance of reason, to all politic matters in the commonweal, as well as to these Ecclesiastical, so far forth as both of them be indifferent? Whereby they may as well, when the Prince and all the states of the realm, have determined, judged, and disposed, of any such indifferent matter, cry out on the Prince and all others in the Parliament, and repeat this slander in their former leoden: that in determining indifferent matters, they show themselves not to be indifferent judges. For, whatsoever it shall please the Civil Magistrate and themselves, to call and count indifferent, it must be so holden of all men, without any further inquiry. And thus may all the supreme authority of the Christian Prince, both in politic and ecclesiastical matters, be clean overthrown: and every man set at liberty, to exclaim with open mouth on their sovereign, and of all others in authority: and under pretence of further inquiry, God knows how far they will run. We see a turbulent & Comical beginning, but we see not the lamentable & Tragical ending of these things: Principiss obsta, serò medicina paratur. But of the Prince's authority in these matters, thus roughly hewed at the entry, they will here for this time make a pause, and promise for a while to go no further, having indeed at this very first step gone over the shoes already, more than a little to far: and yet would God, they could here have made a cleanly stop, and not made the matter a great deal worse, but have rested at these words, saying: But of the supreme authority of Christian Princes in Ecclesiastical causes, how fa●●e it extendeth by the word of God, we shall have better occasion to entreat hereafter, when we have described the ecclesi. state. And I pray God, better entreating and treating to: for, this was but a hard entreating of Christian Princes, and a sorry treaty of their supreme authority. But belike the moving here of these matters, for the Prince, (though indeed moved by themselves) in the course of their Learned Discourse of ecclesiastical government, by their four estates, to be thus but a little interrupted, by touching only, rather than by treating, of the christian Princes supreme authority, did some what perhaps disturb and move their patience. And therefore, as they here till hereafter take their leave: so in this perturbation at the parting, declaring the cause of their departure now from them, and why they need not, and will not talk further with them at this time: in steed of shaking or rather wring hands, they give them such a parting blow for a farewell, such a volie for a vale: that it were enough (unless they handle them gentlier hereafter, at their better occasion) to dash all Christian Princes, for all their magnanimity, out of countenance: yea, to thrust them clean out of Christendom, except they will hold themselves contented, with such places and authority, as they (after they have at large described the ecclesiast. state, and fully served all their four Tetrarks) shall please to assign unto them. And now, declaring their reasons hereof to every man, thinking (belike) that every man hath an interest in the further inquiry of these matters, they say as followeth. And that it is neither needful nor agreeable to good order of teaching, The learned discourse. Page. 9 and 10. to begin first therewith, it may be plain to every man by this reason. The church of God was perfect in all her regiment, before there was any Christian Prince: yea, the church of God may stand & doth stand at this day in most blessed estate, where the Civil Magistrates, are not the greatest favourers. By which it is manifest, that the regiment and government thereof, dependeth not upon the authority of Princes, but upon the ordinance of God: who hath most mercifully and wisely so established the same, that, as with the comfortable aid of Christian Magistrates, it may singularly flourish and prosper: so without it, it may continue, and against the adversaries thereof prevail. For the church craveth help and defence of Christian Princes, to continue and go forward more peaceably and profitably, to the setting up of the kingdom of Christ: but all her authority she receiveth immediately of God. In these words our brethren the Learned Discoursers, to break off this matter, Bridges. having alleged one of their reasons, (as we have heard) why they will not make their first treaty, on the supreme authority of Christian Princes: which reason was this, that they would not seem to confirm the opinion of those, to whom (it seemeth) that all the regiment of the Church dependeth, on the Christian Princes supreme authority: and by the way answered (as we have likewise heard) the opinion of others, that refer indifferent matters to the Prince's disposition: They now conclude this point with another answer, saying: It is neither needful, To begin with the Prince's author. needful. nor agreeable to good order of teaching, to begin first therewith. This scruple (I perceive) sticketh yet in their stomachs, & peradventure suspecting, that they had hitherto said nothing oughtes-worth unto the purpose, why the Prince in this their Learned discourse, should not have the principal place: that they might therefore proceed more frankly, this offence being taken away: (for the Princes supreme authority is no small moat in their eyes) they will yet, ere they part, confirm it further, with a few more reasons, and so leave it (as they promised) till hereafter. And first (they say) it is not needful to begin first therewith. Whether it be needful to begin with the Prince's authority. If by needful, they mean necessary: they might seem to say somewhat to the purpose. For so, it was not needful for them at all, to have entered into this Learned discourse, nor to have dealt on this wise, nor to have proceeded so far therein. Neither yet needful, as behoveful for them, or to all the parties to whom they have communicated the same: but mere needless, and better if they had dealt less: yea much better, if not at all, but had been déedelesse to therein. But having unnecessarily intruded themselves into this discourse: I think it had been very needful, Needful necessary & convenient. though not in necessity, yet of conveniency and of duty, to have given the Prince (being the principal party) the principal place. Yea, had it been but for very reverence and and comeliness, or to avoid offence and suspicion, both of the Prince and of many others, especially in this last age of the world, whereof S. Paul prophesied. 2. Tim. 3. saying: This know also, that in the last days shall come perilous times, for men shallbe lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, cursed speakers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, truce-breakers, false accusers, intemperate, fierce, despisers of them that are good, traitors, headdie, high minded, lovers of pleasures, more than lovers of God, having a shadow of godliness, but having denied the power thereof. Turn therefore away from such, etc. Sith now of such as all these are, we see the manifest experience, both in the Papists, and in the Anabaptistes, in these last days: how much needful therefore might it well be thought for us, in any treaty of government in God's Church, next after jesus Christ himself, to have preferred none in place, till we had seen how far the Princes right had stretched. And to have followed S. Peter's order, who, after he had generally handled the spiritual state of our Christianity, entering into the treatise of conversation and government of the Church: first requireth submission to Princes, as to the chief, and then proceedeth to the duty of husbands, and wives, of neighbours one to another, and so cometh to the Pastors and the people. Not, that this order is so needful neither, that it should prescribe: and yet, if the Apostles at any time give the chiefest place to Princes, Good order of teaching. which at that time (as our brethren here say) were not yet become Christian Princes: what would they have done, had they been Christians? And how much more should we (they now being Christians) when as we treat of the external Regiment of the Church, next and immediately after Christ, give the first treatise to Christian Princes, as to the Supreme Governors of the same. Especially, the Princes, being in lawful possession of the Supreme Government, and the same possession established unto them: how needful were it, (if not necessary,) first to consider the title of them that plead in possession established, or ever any other Governors be brought in. But needing not stand so much on need: All things (sayeth Saint Paul) are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient. 1. Corinth. 10. You needed not (brethren) to have kept this order of your treatise, but you should have been more heedful to that, that is expedient, than to that that is needful. So that the Princes supreme authority be reserved entire, (for that is needful) use your liberty in the order of your treating thereon, a God's name. But ye add, that it is neither needful, nor agreeable to good order of teaching, to begin first therewith. It will perhaps set your teachers and Seniors out of the order that ye have placed them in, The beginning with the Prince's treatise agreeable to good order of teaching. if it clean remove not some of them. And so I grant, it is not agreeable to your order of teaching in this Learned discourse. But otherwise, it is agreeable to all good order of teaching well enough. And I take it to be as good an order of teaching, as any other. Namely, treating of the order of Government, first to set down the best and chiefest Governor. Yourselves do teach this Order in your tetrarchy: first, Teachers, than Pastors, thirdly Governors, and lastly Deacons. Wherefore (I pray you) do ye marshal them thus, The order of our brethren in placing their Tetrarkes'. and treat on them afterward at large in this order? (For I can show you an other order in God's word) but that you think this to be a good order of teaching, to place them according to their dignities. And so you say, page. 15. the office of teaching is the first and principal office that is in the Church. If you now esteem their dignities thus, and according thereunto give them their former or later places: since that by your own confession already past, the Christian Princes have Supreme authority in Eccl. causes, which non● of these 4. Tetrarkes', nor all of them have, and so, are higher in dignity than they all: how is not then the office of the Christian Princes, the first and principal office in the Church: which you attribute to the teachers? And why may not by this your own reason, the Prince's interest & office be treated upon, before any of all these Tetrarkes'? No, no, to begin first with the Supreme authority of Christian Princes in Eccles. causes, The argument to put back the Prince's treatise is neither needful nor agreeable to good order of teaching. But to begin with all these 4. Tetrarks, first Teachers, than Pastors, than Governors, & then Deacons, and then to see what remaineth for the Christian Princes: yea, yea, that, that, is needful, and is very agreeable to good order of teaching. O, this is a proper, needful, agreeable, good, and orderly kind of teaching, is it not? Our brothers strife for the first place. But I pray you (my Masters) in this your Learned discourse, teach me one thing here for my learning. Wherefore make ye all this ado, to have the Prince come after all these 4. Estates? Do ye strive so earnestly (as did, yea, more than did the Pharisees) for the highest rooms▪ that Princes and all, must give room to these your new Tetrarkes', and that so soon as ever their heads peep out of the shell? Our Chronicles tell us of the old striving for places now and then, among the Popish Archbishops: and do you so reprehend all Archbishops, that not only they must be clean put down, but Princes and all put back, till every one of these new Tetrarkes' come forth, and have taken their places. Whi●, (brethren) you of all men, should not thus do, who pretend equality. What, is it to be equal to Princes? or to have equality in the ministery? You cannot abide these names of Grace, of Honour, of Lords. Do ye shun the names, and shove at the matter? And so far, that Emperors, Kings, Queens, and all Christian Princes, for all their supremacy, must backarie, and come after you; or else, it is not agreeable to good order of teaching? If ye teach in this order, it is such a lesson, that (I am afraid) some can not easily learn it. But for my part, I hope it is not of any pride in you. Nevertheless, I tell you plainly, as my friends and brethren, leave it: for many mislike it, and suspect it shrewdly, if it be not of pride, yet, to be no orderly kind of Teaching, nor good and plain dealing with Christian Princes. But you say, it may be plain to every man, by this reason. The Church of God was perfect in all her Regiment, The argument to put back the treatise of the Prince's authority. before there was any Christian Prince: Yea the Church of God may stand, and doth stand, at this day in most bessed estate, where the Civil Magistrates are not the greatest favourers. By which it is manifest, that the Regiment and Government thereof, dependeth not upon the authority of Princes, but upon the ordinance of God. May it be plain to every man by this reason? Every reason or argument, as it should be good and true, both for form & matter: so it ought to be directed to the purpose, and to conclude the point that is to be proved. And then, to every man it is a plain reason. What now is the point here to be proved? It is not needful nor agreeable to good order of teaching, to begin first with entreating of the Supreme authority of Christian Princes in Eccles. causes. The argument▪ This then (being the point to be proved) must by necessary consequence of the premises, be plainly argued and set down in the conclusion: or else every man may plainly see, it is no plain reason, nor needful to be yielded unto, nor agreeable to good order of teaching; but either some intricate Sophistication, or some unnecessary conclusion, little or nothing pertaining to the purpose. plain dealing (sayeth the Proverb) is a jewel. Let us therefore see this plain reason, and the parts thereof, whether it conclude this point, or no. The Church of God was perfect in all her regiment, before there was any Christian Prince: Yea, The Church of God may stand, and doth stand at this day in most blessed state, where the Civil Magistrates are not the greatest favourers. What is the conclusion? By which it is manifest, that the Regiment and Government thereof, dependeth not upon the authority of Princes, but upon the ordinance of God, etc. Lo, how plain to every man, and how agreeable to good order of teaching, in any figure and mood of Syllogism this reason is framed: and how pat the conclusion of this reason, hits the point to be proved, which they have here so lustily avouched, may be plain to every man by this reason. What, will our Learned brethren here say? Tush, we mean not, in saying: it may be plain to every man by this reason; to reason so strictly, A Learned discourse. according to the order of teaching in Logic: but we reason at large Rhethorically. This is (ye wot) a Learned discourse, and therefore we are not bound to make short conclusions, but according to our title, to show our Learning in discoursing on it. Call ye this discoursing? It is a Discourse indeed, but of the coarsest fashion that ever I saw. I know these Discoursers have learning enough, though they spare it here: yet if they should utter it, I would be loath, for my part, to contend with them. But see, how affection in discoursing may carry Learning and all, quite away, The hurt of too much affection. so far from reason: that here neither in matter, truth only (which is principal) is remembered: nor in form and manner, any good order of teaching is observed; nor yet in the conclusion, the principal point is marked, but gone clean from, whereunto all the reason should be leveled. Well, yet, since this is the best reason, and all, that here, or hereafter they have, to make this matter plain to every man: The argument a priore. lest perhaps in the parts, or in the conclusion, there might lie hidden some further matter, or reason, than they would open plain to every man: let us weigh the parts and conclusion better, and lay them more open, that every man may perceive plainly, the plain truth, and full validity of this reason. For this seemeth to be a great reason, and to have many small reasons in it. First, on this first and maior proposition of the same, the Church of God was perfect in all her regiment, Our brothers arg. fr● seniority. before there was any Christian Prince: although they make no direct conclusion thereon, yet they seem to draw an argument, à priore, from the former, as pleading from the elder hand, by seniority; and on that also proceed to the greater perfection, and thereupon reason, as it were, in this manner. That which in the regiment thereof, was perfect before the other: that is to be treated upon before the other. But the Church of God was perfect in all her regiment, before there was any Christian Prince: What followeth hereupon but this? Therefore the Church of God is to be treated upon before Christian Princes. But the question is not here betwixt the Church of God, Our brothers conclusion not in question. and Christian Princes, whether of them shall first be treated upon. For, whereas the name of the Church, is an integral word, and containeth the whole: and the Christian Princes are, though principal parts, yet but particular parts thereof, included in the whole: and so the question were, as if one should ask, whether is the man before the head, or the head before the man? they offer therefore herein an injury to Christian Princes, as seeming to contend with the whole, and so strived against themselves, being parts of the whole. And yet, if a man would make an Anatomy of the whole body, and begin with the treatise of the head, as the principal part, though the head was not the first part that was form, but the heart, or some other, and afterward the head: yet, beginning with the head, and to treat first of the office and powers thereof, he should not do a thing disagreeable to good order of teaching. Or, in the description of a house, though the house was not perfect till all the parts were made: if he treated first of the court, or of the hall, or of the roof, which perhaps were builded last: yet might he in process, orderly describe the whole house. For our question is not here, of any part compared with the whole: but in the whole, of any part compared to another. For, as the Christian Princes are but parts of the Church of God: so these four estates that claim the direction of all Eccl matters in the Church, are but parts of the Church also. The argument à Priore. So that, this first and Maior proposition, might have been less captious (as will appear after in the view of the conclusion) and a great deal plainer: not to say, the Church of God was perfect in all her regiment: but, this kind of government: or, these only 4. estates in the Church, were Governors, before there were in the Church of God any Christian Princes. But because in this proposition, you include here these two things: the one that these four Tetrarkes' (under the name of the Church) were before any Christian Princes: the other, that their regiment was in all points of regiment, a perfect regiment, before that Christian Princes had in the Church of God any being at all: let us therefore consider a little better, either of these two things, both of what force they are in consequence, to strengthen your reason; and of what truth in substance, to give credit to the matter thereof. And first, for the force of the reason and argument, A Priore, admitting the case, A thing is said to be before another in divers senses. that these four Tetrarkes' were the former: yet, sith Prius est multiplex: Tempore, Natura, Ordine, Honore: A thing is said to be before another, in diverse respects: either before it in time, or in the nature of the thing, or in the order of the place, or in the honour of the dignity: we must look to your track, how ye confound these things. For if ye make (as here ye seem to do) your reason for these Tetrarkes' from seniority, that because they were in time before, therefore in the order of treating on them, they must be placed before: and having encroached thus far: Former in time inferreth not former in order, & much less in honour. creep yet further, that therefore also in dignity, and honour, they must be set before, to make up the perfection of the Church's Regiment. This must be cut short, and your Senior in time (presupposing he were so) must be bidden to leave his perching, and draw back with shame, to come after both in order of place, and in honour of regiment, for any necessity that he can claim, but to be Master Prior in his own Cell, which is of time only. So that Aristotle's rule thereof is true: but every cock on his own dunghill: there let him crow and crack, as fast as he will. And yet notwithstanding not without exceptions. Antiquity of time makes a jolly claim. Bonum, quò antiquius, eò melius. A good thing the more ancient, the better. Howbeit, this is not true in all good things. Neither doth this rule so much respect the time, as the nature and continuance of those good things. So that, it is true in those good things, which either of their nature are not m●table, or their inutabilitie doth better their state, and so the time is limited till they come to their perfection. For otherwise, in things that are the worse for wearing, or are past the period of their ripeness: the former and the elder are the worse. And if the former in time be thu● and yet more, restrained, in his own kind of foremanship: Former in time. when the former in time, will wax so proud of his birthright, that he must needs have place in order, and preferment also in regiment, before all his younger brethren: I could show you not only many specialties and examples against it; but you can show no necessary rule, to prescribe upon it, that, that which was former in time, Examples of the later in time former in order. must always have the first place in treaty. Except the treaty be, to describe the manner how the things began. For though Moses, writing of God's creation of the world, set down the manner, and tell what was created the first day, when as yet other things were not created, and so the second and the third day, and all the residue, mankind being created last of all: yet cannot we rightly say, that he, which would take upon him to treat either by writing or speaking of God's works, or of the government of his Church, or of God himself, which in every respect in nature, time, order, honour, & cause, is first and before all other things, is tied to this order, so that God must be first treated upon: or else it is not a treatise agreeable to good order of teaching. Did S. Paul teach the Romans amiss, when he said, Rom. 1. His invisible things, being understood by his works, through the creation of the world, are seen, that is, both his eternal power and godhead? Doth not calvin begin his institutions first with the knowledge of man, and so ascend to the knowledge of God? Had not Christ a number of Disciples first, out of whom afterward he chose his 12. Apostles? And yet doth not S. Paul 1. Cor. 12. reckon them up in this order, that God hath ordained some in the Church: as first Apostles, secondly Prophets, thirdly Teachers? And Ephes. 4. He therefore gave some to be Apostles, and some Prophets, and some Evangelists, & some Pastors & Teachers? Yea, do not yourselves also fetch your Seniors pedegrée so high, that ye make them to be Seniors in antiquity of time, both to the Evangelists, and to the Apostles? And nevertheless in this your treatise ye place them after them? What, shall we say therefore: it is not agreeable to good order of teaching, thus to place them after: because in the Church of God, ye say, there was a regiment of them, before there were Evangelists or Apostles? If ye say, ye stand not so much of the placing of them, in respect of the Priority of the time, as of the dignity: saying, Former in honour, not always former in order. that ye speak of perfection and of regiment, and therefore in time and honour also it is before them: and why not then in order of place to have the former treaty? yet followeth this no more than the other. Is not God before all things, in all respects? And yet first or last, by good order of teaching may be treated upon. And as in the regiment of a man's life, though he first apprehend a thing with his senses, & his senses convey it to the intellectual powers: beside, that his senses be freshest when he is young & unexperthis science groweth after upon long experience, when his senses decay: again, Former in dignity. his habits of virtues arise first on his actions precedent, and felicity succeedeth on his habits last of all, though in dignity of honour first and chiefest: yet may any man treating of these natural and moral matters, pertaining to the regiment of man's life, either (per synthesin) begin with the parts, and so by little and little join and knit them altogether, till he come to the highest and make up the whole: or begin with the whole, and per analysin resolve it and make (as it were) an Anatomy of all the parts and powers: and either begin with the soul and the faculties thereof, and so come to the body, and the parts there●●: or begin with the body, and so come to the soul: so that (which way so ever he proceed) when he cometh orderly to any faculty or part, he so set out the same, with the full power and perfect regiment of it, that no injury to any faculty or part be offered, nor any confusion, by shuffling one into the office and regiment of an other. This rule therefore, that because it is first in time before another, it is in order to be first treated upon before an other: or, because other as yet were not, therefore that which was before, made a perfect regiment: is no perfect nor good argument. Which argument being grounded on so uncertain and weak● foundation: all that is built thereon is easily shattered. The Papists for the traditions of the Church which they call the unwritten word, The Papists argument à p●iore for traditions. or verity unwritten, use the like argument against the authority of Gods written word, and verity of the Scripture. The word was delivered by tradition of preaching, before it was delivered by writing: therefore, traditions are of no less authority, nor less to be believed, than the written word and holy scripture: yea, the Church's authority is above the scriptures, and is the judge thereof Thus do the Papists encroach from the time to the authority, as our brethren here do. Now, as this reason faileth, both for the seniority of time, and forestalling the order of place, and much more for claiming any priority in dignity, and most of all for inferring any such honour as perfection of regiment: so for the truth of this proposition, that, The Church of God was perfect in all her regiment, The proposition untrue. before there was any Christian Prince: I can not yet see how directly it can be justified. For, if this were true: then there need no regiment of Christian Princes at all. And how then have the Christian Princes any authority at all in Eccl. causes? Or, ●f they have any, how came they by it: if the Church's regiment were perfect, or the Church perfect in all her regiment, before there were any Christian Prince? The Church's regiment bettered by Christian princes Or whereto serveth the Christian Princes supreme authority in Ecclesiastical causes, if not to make the regiment of the Church in better estate. For otherwise, the Church were as good without it, if she be no better in her Regiment by it, than she was before she had it. But it is not so: both the church, and her regiment, The Church's regiment. etc. is bettered by it. Which yourselves are feign in part to confess, even here in the conclussion of your argument: saying of God who hath most mercifully and wisely so established the same (to wit, the church's regiment) that as with the comfortable aid of christian Magistrates, it may singularly prosper and flourish etc. And again, for the church craveth help, & defence of christian Princes, The healps, that Our brethren grant, the Church receyveth by the Christian Prince. to continue and go forward more peaceably and profi●ablye, to the setting up of the kingdom of Christ. Although here ye will afford, no more but this: yet, if there were no more, this is enough to overthrow your saying, that the church of God was perfect in all her Regiment, before there was any christian prince. For, if this comfortable aid, help, and defence, to continue and go forward, (in so great matters as) more peaceably and profitably to the setting up of the kingdom of Christ, were taken away: then, the church of God, though (I grant) it may continue, and against the adversaries thereof prevail: Yet should she not be perfect in all her Regiment, needing this comfortable aid, help, and defence of christian Princes. And the setting up of the kingdom of Christ, should with more trouble and less profit, go forewarde: yea, rather it should go backward, and he hindered, though it continue, and not so singularly flourish and prosper, but decay. And is this so small a matter in your eyes, (brethren) as that it nothing appertained to the Regiment of the church, but that craving all this of christian princes, and so without them, wanting the same; ye dare so boldly avouch, that she is perfect in all her Regiment without it? Doth she crave that she wanteth not? Then is she a wanton. Doth she want it? Our brethren stray from the question by them s●lues propounded. then is she not perfect in all her Regiment? Or doth it not greatly pertain unto her Regiment? Or, do ye think, that this shall salve the matter, because the church may continue, and against the adversaries thereof prevail without it? Our question now, is not of the substance and being of the church, but of the Regiment of it. Neither yet simply of the Regiment: but whether she were perfect in all her Regiment, before any christian princes were, or no The church (I grant) was then, and shall continue ever, and she had even then a Regiment also. Yea, and that Regiment in soon respects might be called perfect for that time, The difference of the Church's perfection in regiment while there were not such open professed christian princes to be foster fathers, and nursing moothers of the church, as (God be praised) now there are. For, concerning the Rectors of the church then, as they were then more perfect and singular persons: so had they more perfect and singular extra-ordinary offices, and withal, more excellent gifts to be able to govern it the better. But this argueth so little the church's perfection then in all her Regiment (understanding the same of all her ordinary external Regiment, The Anabaptistes' arguments confuted. whereupon our question is,) which Regiment she was not then so perfectly come unto: that rather their extra-ordinary gifts and offices of Apostles, Evangelists, Prophets, etc. were added for that time, to supply & furnish that part of the Regiment thereof, that was afterward to be made more perfect, concerning the ordinary state, by the access of the Christian Princes following. Except therefore our Brethren intend, utterly to shake off all Christian Princes, and account their supreme authority in Church causes, if not now to be nought, yet to be nought worth, and altogether unnecessary to the perfection of the Church's Regiment; how can this be any good argument to infirm it now, because (admitting this also were true) there were no Christian Princes them? & what do they infer here-upon? that there is no more need herein of Christian Princes now, then there was then, (presupposing that then herein there was no need at all of them,) that were a very suspicious and perilous conclusion. For, although then there were the less need of them, because that need was then otherwise supplied: yet, those supplies not continuing: and malice increasing, both of adversaries without, and of Hypocrites within: and the gifts also that remain decreasing: there is now far more need of the Christian Princes supreme government, The state of the time differing the argument faileth for the regiment to the perfecting of the Church's Regiment. And so, the state of the time for the regiment of the church differing: the argument of the Regiment, from the time then, to the time now, is defective. But if they needed then herein, the help of christian Princes, as they do now, then was not the church perfect in all her Regiment, otherwise, than as it was extraordinarylie supplied, before the christian Princes help and comfortable aid, was added. Before which time, those temporary supplies coming to the church: as the Manna and other extraordinary helps, made the jews estate to flourish, prosper, and go forward in the Deserts, though they ceased when they came to the land of promise: So, the church might be said to be perfect in all her Regiment, meaning that Regiment which was fittest for the state of her aff●iction and traveles then: because she had such extraordinary helps. But this is no diminishing of that perfection (if it may so be called) that is requisite to the ordinary regiment of the Church, under the Supreme Government of Christian princes, albeit the offices and gifts of Apostles, Evangelists, Difference of peculiar regiment for a special time & ordinary regiment to continued. Prophets, etc. are ceased, nor to be expected, nor revoked. Now then, as the proposition, (admitting there were no christian princess) is not true, in affirming that the church of God was perfect in all her regiment, before there was any Christian prince: unless we understand that perfection of all her Regiment, which was appropriate to her, by the extra-ordinary prerogative, of that particular age, and peculiar state thereof, & not extending it to all her ordinary Regiment that should perpetually continue: So is this proposition likewise most untrue, in this other part, that there was not any christian prince then. Albeit this also be no good argument: there were no christian princess then: Or, they were not reckoned among the Governors of the church then? therefore they are not to be reckoned among the governors of the Church now. Neither this argument The Apostle Rom. 12.1. Cor: 12. and Ephes. 4. reckoneth up only in the church these 4. Pastors, Teachers, Governors, and Deacons, as the perpetual offices, by which the Church of God may, according to his word, be directed in all matters, which are commonly called Ecclesiastical: therefore Christian princes (as not mentioned) have not to deal in the regiment of the same. It is not meet our Brethrens should use the same Argum▪ that the Ana-Baptists do● against Princes. Which kind of arguments, I am the sorier that these our Brethren, in the earnestness of their zeal, should use: because, as Gellius Snecanus Phrysius noteth (from whom our Brethren seem to take many things in this their Learned discourse) all these reasons that our Brethren here use, are the very plain reasons of the Anabaptistes, against christian Magistrates. Whose heresy sith our Brethren do utterly detest: I would have them utterly detest, & in any case not to use their reasons, whichis nothing but to bolden & strengthen the Heretics, & to breed suspicion to themselves. Snecanus de Magistratu pag. 637. allegeth the Anabaptistes' objection, Gellius Snecanus de Magistratu. saying: Hucque trahunt quod Ephes. 4. etc. And to this they draw, that (Ephes. 4.) the office of a Magistrate is not to be reckoned up among the functions of the church. Whereunto he answereth in the next page, Quòd autem, Ephes. 4. But as for that, Ephesians. 4. S. Paul doth not mention the office of a Magistrate; that is to be supplied out of other places, to wit, Rom. 12. & 1. Corinth. 12. Whereas Rulings, and governments are reckoned up, among the gifts of the church, and kinds of vocations: as is above declared. Otherwise many things ordained in the church to edification, should be condemned. Yea, even as the Apostle Rom. 13. properly treating of the civil Magistrates, mentioneth not the Bishops: so it is no marvel that Paul here passeth over the mention of the Magistrate: namely, when here he reckoneth not up the kinds of all offices, but specially and properly the functions only of the Ministers of the word. Whereby not only we see, that this argument is the very argument of the Anabaptistes, and therefore not to be used of our brethren: but also that those places, Romans 12.. & 1. Cor. 12. cited also by these our Brethren: whereas they understand the words of the Apostle, Rulers and Governors, only for their supposed Seniors and third sort of Tetrarks: those words are aswell to be understood of Christian Magistrates. Yea, if those words of Rulers and Governors should not be so understood, to wit, for Christian Magistrates: many things ordained in the church to edification, should be condemned: those words therefore being thus understood: both such ordinances in the Church ordained by Christian Magistrates, are not to be condemned: and Christian Magistrates have power to ordain such things. And the argument that our brethren here use, that th●re were n● Christian Princes, at that time, is also confuted. But this is handled by Gellius more at large, pag. 555. To this purpose (saith he) serveth the likeness and conveniency of the Civil Magistrate, The Civil Magistrate hath ever from the beginning been joined with the Eccl. ministry. and the Ecclesiastical Ministry, which fight not one with the other; but from the beginning have always been most nearly joined together, although the proprieties of them both, in the Church are distinguished. Even as it is manifest by the example of Moses and A●ron. This order was distinctly observed in the Church of GOD, in the time of godly King josaphat. 2. Chron. 19 Which thing of all other, is most evidently declared in the new Testament: Mat. 22. Where Christ saith, Give unto Caesar that that is Caesar's, and to God, that that is Gods. Where-upon it is manifest, that God is no less the author of the order of Magistracy among the faithful, Rom. 13. then he is of the order of the Church's offices, Ephes. 4. ver. 11. These things dot● Paul most effectually confirm, The Testimonies Rom 12. & 1. Cor. 12. for Rulers, serve aswell to the Magist. as to the Eccl. governors. while Rom. 12. ver. 8. and 1. Cor. 12. v. 28. he reckoneth up Rules and Governments among the gifts of the Church, and among the offices thereof. For the propriety of the words which the holy Ghost, both in the Greek and in the Latin tongue doth use, not only signifieth especially the censure of the Eldership: but may be also generally stretched to the Rulings and governments of all offices, as it is manifest by the declaration & conference of the Scripture. For, besides the former places, Rom. 12. v. 8. 1. Cor. 12. v. 28. The name of government, Pro. 11, v. 14. is given to counsellors. Act. 27. v. 11, and Apocal. 18. v. 17. it is referred unto Ship-maisters. Likewise also, the name of Ruling is applied in the first Epistle to Timoth. the 3. chapter, the 4. and 5. verses, to the administration and discipline, that is domestical. And to these forecited places, cometh that, which Paul Rom. 13. v. 1.4. and Tit. 3. ver. 1. doth express in the same words, aswell in the Greek, as in the Latin tongue: the civil power and revengement of the Magistrate against unrighteous men and malefactors, against whom the Law is made. 1. Tim. 1. v 9.10. and the spiritual power and revengement given of the Lord, to the Apostles, for the edification of the church, against all contumacy: 2. Cor. 10. v. 6.8, and the thirtienth chapter, the tenth verse. For in both places he useth these words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 insinuating by these self same words, that the distinct propriety of power and power and revengement, (both whereby the Magistrate taketh vengeance of the contemner of the Laws, and whereby the Church hath yet in a readiness revengement and power against all contumacy) is of God, and to be reckoned among the offices of the Church. Scythe that therefore, the ordinance of the Civil power, and of revengement▪ and the matter and the ends thereof, are no less of God, than the spiritual power and revengement of the Ecclesiastical ministry: The civil & Eccles. power always joined in the Church. & sith these two distinct functions have always been joined together in the Church, and the holy Ghost (reckoning up rulings and governments, among the gifts and functions of the Church) doth generally comprehend all kinds of offices: yea, doth rather express both the Civil and the Ecclesiastical power and revengement by the selfsame means: With what rashness would the adversaries exclude that from the Church, except they will take this away withal? Besides this, not only the Scripture calleth the distinct Civil and Ecclesiastical function, by the self same names, by reason of the conjunction and use of them both in the Church: but also calleth the ministers of them both, Guides and Praesidentes. This is manifest, by the conference of the Testimonies Mat. 27. ver. 2. Act. 23. ver. 26. Hebr. 13. ver. 7. and 17. & 1. Pet. 2. ver. 14. for in these places the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is commonly attributed aswell to the Civil Magistrate, as to the Ministers of the word. To conclude, when Paul, 1. Cor. 12. v. 10.28. & 29: And 2. Cor. 10. v. 5. &. 6. doth reckon up powers and revengement against all contumacy, lifting up itself against God (wherewith Peter strake down Ananias and Sapphira, Act. 5. and Paul strake blind Elymas the Sorcerer) among the gifts and powers of the Church: who would exclude the powers of the Magistracy, ordained of God for the punishment of evil-doers, from his Church? Either of the powers is of God, aswell this ordinary of the Magistrate, as that extra-ordinary: you see the revengement of the wicked, to be both ways approved of God, although the properties of the offices & the form of the revenging are distinguished. It is not to the purpose, whether ye kill with sword or with word, (as saith Lactantius:) there is no difference, in the very substance of the revengement: the end of either power is all one, to wit, the glory of God shining in the righteous punishment of the evil. Yea, rather, since that temporary power of punishing the obstinate, hath ceased, after that kings are now made the nourishers & champions of the Church: Therefore the church of Christ hath so much more need of this ordinary power & revengement of the Magistrate, whereby the good may be defended, & the evil punished. Lo Christian Reader, the scripture teacheth, that the Civil power hath always been joined with the ministry of the word in the Church. Thus saith Gellius Snecanus (one of the principal writers at this day, of these our brethren, the Learned Discoursers side.) Wherein we see, how our brethren run upon the same flats, that the Anabaptistes do. Grounding themselves (against the Prince's supreme authority in Ecclesiastical matters) on the very selfsame reasons, that those Heretics do. And the very same reasons, whereby Gellius confuteth the Anabaptistes, do also directly confute these Learned discoursers. The Anabaptistes say these words, Governors and Rulers, Rom. 12. and 1. Cor. 12. are to be understood only of Ecclesiastical Governors and Rulers: and do not our Learned discoursers avouch the same? But Gellius here very exactly doth confute it. The Anabaptistes say, that in Christ's and in the Apostles time, there was no Christian Magistrate, as Gellius setteth down their objection, pag. 568. and what doth this differ, from this assertion of these our Learned discoursers: The Church of God was perfect in all her regiment, before there was any Christian Prince? I do not speak this, as though these our Learned discoursers did savour of Anabaptistry, or favour Anabaptistry wittingly: God forbidden. Howbeit in a heat zeal inconsiderately, they run upon these quick sands. But, Ictus Piscator sapir. Gellius who saw the state endangered, when this old supposed and new devised signory, was set up: and that the anabaptists used these arguments against the Christian Magistrates; was driven, not only to wring these weapons out of their hands, but to break them in pieces, as naughty arguments. And will our brethren now take up the broken shivers, and fight with them, to put back the treatise of the Christian Princes Government? Let Gellius therefore come forth, and plainly tell them, that this is no plain reason to prove their matter by, Gellius confutation of our brothers arguments. but both a frivolous and intrue assertion, that the Church of God was perfect in all her Regiment, before there was any Christian Prince. No, no (brethren saith Gellius) it is nothing so, your saying is not agreeable to good order of teaching The Scripture teacheth, that the Civil power hath always been joined with the ministery of the word in the church. If it were always joined, it was joined even then, when our brethren avouch it was not only disjoined: but that the one was perfect, when the other was not at all. But because this Gellius, a Phrysian in the Low Countries, is one of the chiefest writers of our brethren's side, in those reformed Churches, of whom our Discoursers willed us before, to embrace that most beautiful order of Ecclesiastical Regiment, which God so manifestly doth bless and prosper in our neighbour's hands; and here they remember us again, that the Church of God doth stand at this day, in most blessed estate, where the Civil Magist. are not the greatest favourers: it is good therefore, that our brethren should see, both how they are troubled with anabaptists, among these our neighbours, where this order of Ecclesiastical Regiment, so much extolled by our brethren, is set up: And to see the judgements of our brethren's best favourites, and most experienced in these matters, how clean contrary it is, to these our learned, Our neighbour's state commended before so much by our brethren, see how it is troubled with the Anabaptists. (but not experienced,) discoursers judgements. Whereby our learned brethren may learn, not only to make better reasons, but much better, and with more reason. to wax wiser herein, with this Gellius, and rather use their reasons to beat down the Anabaptistes: then to use, such as the Anabaptistes' use, to beat back the christian Princes. And good brethren mark the reasons of this Gellius well, and ye shall find them fully to answer your reasons in this matter. Gellius still proceeding against the Anabaptistes, beateth especially on these points that, the Church and the faith, of the old and new Testament, is but one and the same. pag. 559. That there is one and the same doctrine of both the covenants: aswell concerning the article of Magistrates, and controversy of punishing the evil, or use of the sword; as concerning the moral works of God's Law. pag. 560. Whereupon he discourseth by particular collations of the old and new Testament: how, not only God in them both, is showed to be the author of the Magistrate, but how the like things are required of the Magistrate in both estates: how both Testaments direct the Magistrate to one end: how both Testaments give Magistrates like authority in punishment: how all manner of persons, aswell Ecclesiastical as Civil, were and are subject to the Prince in both estates: and how even from the beginning of the world, always the Magistrates authority was, to see, that the Law of God be in all points maintained: which authority is not diminished by Christ, no not one jot. pag. 562, After the proves of all this, he concludeth thus in the 565. page. Non ergo nova, etc. Therefore, there is no new and diverse doctrine delivered of Christ: but the doctrine of either Testament is one and the same, agreeing with the Law of nature, engraven in Adam even in his creation, and at length set forth in the Tables of the ten commandments. Yea, let the adversaries show, that Christ hath taught any thing, which is not extant, either in express words, or in consequence of the Scripture, in the old Testament: not in respect of all things done, but as pertaining to this controversy, and to the rule of life: and we, will yield. The extraordinary examples of Moses, Elias, etc. and other peculiar doings of God, as was that also of Peter, Act. 5. and the change of the circumstances of the policy of Moses, do not prejudice the general law of God. There is therefore no difference between the faithful of the old and new testament, Christian Princes from the beginning. so far forth as appertaineth to the reason of justifying, and of living, save that, certain in these last days, being lovers of themselves, glorious, and proud, 2. Tim. 3. Despise Abraham and other godly men in respect of themselves; as though (to say no worse of them) they were but rude children. The state of the old Testament and new all one. And so Gellius knits up all this point out of S. Paul 1. Cor. 10. from the examples of punishment then, to be admonitions to us now, saying: Thou seest here (Gentle Reader) that, either the punishment of the evil is not together with the policy of Moses' abrogated, but abideth perpetually: Or else these examples of punishments for our admonition, are of Paul naughtily applied: especially when the same were not immediately of God inflicted upon the Israelites: but by Moses, as echone of them are read of, in their places. To the which purpose, are to be applied the examples of God's vengeance against Ananias and Sapphyra: Act. 5. and Elymas the sorcerer, Act. 14. which, although they be extra-ordinary, yet they teach, that God also in the new Testament, would have sins punished with bodily punishment. Of the extraordinary power of punishing where they wanted the ordinary. Thus doth Gellius show, that, as the state of the Magistrate ●till remained one in all times, before the coming of Christ, and after perpetually: so, even at that time when the Apostles lived, they extraordinarily did exercise an extraordinary supply of the Magistrates authority for punishing. And S. Paul brought in the examples of the Israelites punishments inflicted by Moses extraordinarily, to the Corinthians in those days, when the chief and ordinary Magistrates, over them, were not Christian princes. Here upon Gellius proceeding to especial arguments, among other cometh to the Anabaptistes' objection, of this selfsame reason that our brethren in this Learned discourse do urge: That the Church of God was perfect in all her regiment, before there was any Christian prince, saying: pag. 568. The Anabaptists objection. But they object, that in the time of Christ, and of Paul, there was no Christian Magistrate, Ergo: etc. I answer. The authority of the Magistrate is not therefore weakened, albeit in the time of Christ and of Paul, Emperors and Kings set in high estate, were aliens from the faith. For, the higher power took not then her, beginning from the unbelieving Gentiles under the new Testament or in the time of Paul: but even from the very beginning of the world it was ordained of God himself, and approved of Christ and his Apostles: as appeareth by that above declared. Yea indeed, where Paul doth say, the powers are ordained of GOD; he not only respecteth the Magistrates of the Gentiles in his time: (as most of all the first institution of God:) in the Church of the patriarchs and the Israelites: expressly signifying, Christian Princes in the Apost. times. that one and the same ordinance is yet ratified under the new Testament, and that God is aswell the Lord of the Gentiles as of the jews. Neither yet to this day are the people of all the world less governed of him, than in times passed Israel was. For, the foundation of the ordinance of God being laid, The untruth of our brethren's asse●tion that there were no Magist. in Christ's & his Apostles times. Rom. 13. the use of the same, is withal established. Moreover, here lurketh a fallation, whereby, under pretence of part, the whole is denied. For it is false that no godly persons or such as feared God, did execute the office of a Magistrate in the new testament, as by the example of the Centurion, etc. we may hereafter perceive. Besides this, the adversaries here do stumble at that fallacy, whereby they snatch at the causes which are accidental, One & the same ordinance in both Testa. for Magist. for those that are necessary: and whereby, for the vices of men, serving the Prince of darkness in the time of Paul, they condemn the thing ordained, which is good and holy. Might not by the same reason, all honest kinds of life be condemned? yea, the Magistracy in the Church of Israel, for certain wicked Kings whom God would have reign, to punish the sins of his people, might be improved in the godly Kings that followed. We must therefore of necessity distinguish the matter itself from the persons. The fallation and the answer the reto Norsubtilly confound the good ordinance of God with the infidel men, that executed the office of the Magistrate in Paul's time. The power both of the old & new Testament, is one and the same: which, as it dependeth not on the dignity of men, but on the highest: Sap. 6. v. 4. Rom. 13. so, it is not vitiated by their indignity, or by circumstances of time and places. Moreover those things, that are separated in time, are not by and by in the matter itself, and in the nature of their definition diverse. Many things may be done agreeable to God's word, whereof no examples in Paul's time are extant. Otherwise the credit and authority of the New Test. should be weakened, because the new Test. was not yet set down in writing in Paul's time. Yea, it had not been lawful to have translated the scripture in the mother tongue. Besides, that Paul according to the letter, maketh no express mention of Schools, etc. Also, the common adversaries do not yet baptise the infants, of the faithful. And many that yet are lovers of themselves, but without charity, & notregarders of their bounden duty, will not keep the night watch, with the residue of the Citizens: who will therefore avow that they ought not to do these things? we must distinguish the Law itself, from the facts of men, neither is judgement made of the whole, under pretence of the part. If again they demand, how the wicked Magistrate, such a one as in the old time Nabuchadnezar was: and as there was at Rome, in the time of Paul: may be called the good ordinance and minister of God: Or how the gifts of the holy Ghost, as the care of Peace, of honesty, of godliness, can have place in them: I answer, we must distinguish the matter by itself, from the person: and the lawful from the unlawful use. For, the vices of the men are not to be imputed to the order. Moreover, the gifts of God are diverse, of the which, some are common, aswell to the evil, as to the good: as miracles, Matth 7. external peace, fertility, etc. For God suffereth his Sun to arise, both upon the good and upon the evil. And hereunto Marriage and Magistracy may be referred. The substance of which things by itself, (as the good ordinance of God, Distinction between the ordinance of God & the vice of men ) we must distinguish from the vice of men. The question betwixt our adversaries and us, is not of the persons, or of the abuse of the Magistracy: but of the very matter itself. Which as it is not vitiated by the impiety of the Gentiles in Paul's time: so, most commodiously may it, and aught, to be administered of a Christian. To conclude, it maketh nothing for the adversaries, nor hindereth the godly which execute the office of a Magistrate, that Nebuchadnezer is called the servant of god. Hier. 25. For, albeit the evil Magistrate also be of god (in respect of the Divine ordinance) notwithstanding, the malice of man is not therefore to be imputed to the order itself. But of necessity, we must distinguish the persons, from the offices instituted of god. Hear, the adversaries stumble on the fallation of composition, and on the fallation of the accident: (as also in that sentence Rom. 13.) whereby they confound the persons of the wicked & their vices, with the ordinance of god. Nebuchadnezar is not absolutely called the Servant of god, but in a certain respect, to wit, of the judgement of god, as it were a scourge, wherewith the sins of the Israelites were visited. But Paul calleth the Magistrate, the minister of god simply. Yea, he calleth him also a good ordinance. Moreover, if Nebuchadnezar, and the heathen Magistrate, be called the servant and Minister of god, to whom the godly were compelled to obey: much more therefore, even by the comparison of the less to the greater, the godly, executing the office of a Magistrate, are GOD'S Ministers, to whom we own obedience, according to Paul, 1. Tim. 6 ves. 1.2. would god all would here mark the venom of the old serpent, how much more we incline rather to rule, and to abuse the Christian liberty, than to obey. Last of all, Nebuchadnezar is not reprehended in the Scripture, in respect of his Magistracy, but in respect of his malice. etc. The necessity of a Magistrate among christians. Lo, (gentle Reader) out of these things, one of these two followeth of necessity: either there ought to be a Magistrate among the Christians, and that they may administer their Magistracy: Or else Paul did amiss in writing to the Romans of the matter. Whether of these 2. shall we believe? The Apostle saith, the Magistracy is of God: the adversaries deny, that a Christian may execute this ordinance of god. Is it not lawful for a Christian to be of god? Yea, to be good, and to be gods Minister? See, whither pertinacy, and partiality will carry men away. The adversaries exclude Christian Princes, that favour not Anabaptistry, from salvation: when they themselves are not afraid, to exercise among themselves, the office of a Magistrate, and to join it with Faith. Did not god commit unto Moses, and to Esdras (as to the Politic Magistrate) the Libel of Divorcement, and matrimonial controversies to be decided? Wherefore, do you take upon you the separation of those that are married, for the cause of Fornication, and and of departure made from the infidels: yea, and that also, the judgement of Civil controversies among yourselves: sith that these things (according to your saying) have no place in the Church of Christ, nor can stand together with Faith? Truly one of these twain followeth of necessity hereupon: either the office of the Magistrate ought to have place among them, (as the only Christians:) or else they thrust their sickle into another's harvest, and arrogate to themselves, that, that properly belongeth to the Magistrate. Lo, (gentle Reader) thou seest the adversaries, contrary to their own doctrine, turn indeed the office of the Magistrate, to their own commendation, which in Christian Princes they discommend. As though that were lawful for them, which unto other were not lawful. Not that the thing is diverse, but because the men are diverse. Markest thou not here in the adversaries the venom of the old serpent, and the seditious spirit of the judaical Rebellion, how it inclineth more to Ruling, than to obeying? God requireth men, that are valiant, fearing God, lovers of the truth and of righteousness, which hate filthy lucre, and are prudent, to be the ministers of God. Exod. 18. ver. 21. Deut. 1. ver. 13. & 2. Chr. 19 Psal. 2. v. 10. etc. also Rom. 13 v. 4. Whether of these men are the fit to execute these properties of Magistrates: those that are strangers from Christ and from his church, as the Jebusites & Canaanites (to whom the adversaries compare at this day the Magistrate:) or those that are true Christians and believers? Paul Rom. 13. & 1. Peter. 2. do concordantly teach, that the Magist. is God's minister, ordained for the praise of those, that do well: and for the punishment of those that do ill. To this accordeth Paul 1. Tim. 2. teaching that we must pray for all manner persons, placed in high authority, that we may lead a quiet and honest life, with all godliness. Out of which places conferred together, we see in brief the Magistrate's office is to minister unto god: the parts of whose Ministry, consist generally in the custody of both the Tables of the ten Commandments, and first in the care of Religion. Hereupon the volume of the Law is commended unto the King. Deut 17. and the execution, against the despisers of religion. Hereunto appertain the examples of Moses, David, joshua, Ezechias, etc. and 1. Tim. 2. godliness properly respecteth the worship of God: and then in maintaining the public peace, aswell in defending the good, as in punishing the evil: and thirdly, in honesty of life, whereby every one performs his duty, 1. Tim. 2. These final causes therefore of instituting the Magistrate being set down: A Church without magistracy never seen. with what boldness take they away the use thereof, out of the Church of Christ? Or else, do they dream of such a Church, as no man hath ever seen? And if the office of the Christian Magistrate, and custody of the ten commandments were taken away: What I pray you would remain in the world, but mere Libertinism, and a licentiousness of all mischiefs? If the adversaries were not blinded in their own self-love and boldness: they would easily learn this, not only in themselves, but also in the examples of the faithful, both of the old and new testament. For if the godly have no manner of need at all of the Magistrate: Why doth Moses complain of the Israelites (who did eat of the same spiritual meat, and drink of the same spiritual drink that we do) How can I labour alone, The godly have need of the Madge. and bear your burden and contentions? Why were strivings and contentions among the faithful Corinthians? Do our adversaries (holier than they) want Darnel and evil doers? But if they object, that albeit these things may be granted, concerning the latter table of the Law: yet the former table properly respecteth conscience and faith, over which the Magistrate hath no power, but God alone. I answer: the adversaries are here deceived, and do deceive: in that they exclude out of the former Table of the Law, outward Idolatry, and profanation of the name of GOD, and of the Saboth, and the punishment of these things. Sith that this former table of the Law, comprehendeth in one and the same nature of definition, not only the inward worship of faith, and the Idolatry contrary thereunto: but also the outward works and punishments of them both. As, when the Magistrate punisheth perjury: God testifieth, that he accurseth the soul that reverenceth not his name. But the Magistrate when he punisheth, properly respecteth the outward work, although he be not able to change the mind. Rather no commonwealth without a christian Magistrate then a Magist excluded, etc. These things orderly considered: it were rather to be wished, that there were no commonwealth without a true Christian Magistrate: than that the same should be excluded from the Church of God. For, who is able better to fulfil the conditions of a Magistrate, before already noted, or the office and ends pertaining to him, then is a Christian? Insomuch that if we shall judge aright of the gifts of God, we must confess that it is a mighty benefit of God, when he giveth a godly and a Christian Magistrate unto his Church. Is it not lawful for a Christian to be of GOD, and to administer the Ordinance of God? Is it not lawful for a faithful person to defend the godly, to punish the evil, to exercise justice, to defend the Widows, and the Fatherless, and to be the Minister of God? Rom. 13. Is it not lawful for a Christian, to preserve the public tranquility, with all godliness and honesty? 1. Tim. 2. By these works God is glorified. And the Prophets and Apostles exhort the faithful thereunto. Therefore, the Christian Magistrates office being taken away, all the former virtues are taken away withal. With what rashness therefore (O man) darest thou exclude the Magistrate from God, by reason of the use of the sword, whom Paul even for the same reason calleth God's Minister? Yea, when Paul sayeth, Wilt thou not fear the power? do well. He signifieth that it is a manifest testification of an evil conscience, to despise the Magistrate. Christ and the Apostles acknowledged the Heathen Magistrate to be God's ordinance, and gave honour unto him. It is marvel therefore, that the adversaries will not admit, that a Christian may exercise that divine ordinance. Especially, seeing that Paul wished after holy judges, & preferreth them before Infidels: Yea, and expressly teacheth, that the Saints shall judge the world. 1. Cor. 6. ver. 1.2. Hereunto serveth that that Paul 1. Tim. 6. ver. 1.2. saith: Let servants: whosoever be under the yoke, esteem their masters worthy of all honour, & those that have faithful Masters, let them not despise them, in that they be their brethren: but so much the rather serve them, because they are faithful and beloved. These things teach, and exhort saith the Apostle. Would to God, and adversaries would teach also those that are theirs, in like manner, and enforce these things with exhortations. If Christ and his Apostles yielded thus much unto an Heathen Magistrate: how much more is due unto a Christian Magistrate? If the end of the Magistrate be, to have the care of Religion, and to defend good men: with what reason do the adversaries exclude the Magistrate from the propriety of Religion, and of good? If they describe the office of the Magistrate, only by Politic constitutions: I pray you, what difference make they between the Turkish, and the Christian Magistrate? The Magist. office necessary to the Church. If the office of the Magistrate be not necessary to the Church: Why did Paul and Peter write of that matter to the faithful, that were subject to the discipline of Christ. Wherefore had the adversaries rather, to despise rule and to rail on dignities, by comparing them unto Jebusites, etc. according to the Apostles prophecy of the last days, 2. Pet. 2. ver 10. then to follow the wi●● of God. 1. Pet. 2. ver. 15, etc. And by well doing to bridle the ignorance of mad men, and to honour the King? With what boldness call they Magistrates, murderers: because they kill homicides, and the transgressors of the Law? Which (Magistrates) the holy Ghost calleth Gods, and the Ministers of God. Psal. 82. joh. 10. Rom. 13. No man in very deed will deny, but that all men (none excepted) are subject unto their ordinary Magistrates, and may be compelled to render unto them, that they own them. etc. Rom. 13. ver. 1. etc. If obedience be godly: the use of the sword is also godly. These things of necessity follow one another mutually: to be subject to the Magistrate, and render that we own them; do generally comprehend all things, without the which, the sword of the Magistrate, by itself alone, cannot be borne. It followeth therefore, that the subjects own obedience in the use of the sword unto the Magistrate, to defend the good, and punish the evil, and that for conscience. See, the adversaries make a matter of conscience, to obey the Magistrate in punishing the evil: But Paul saith, we ought to do the same, even for conscience. Unto whom agreeth Peter, saying: for the Lord, or for the Lords will. Lo, whether of these shall we believe: the holy Ghost speaking by the Apostles, or the adversaries? If any man shall say, we must more obey God, than man: Paul answereth: the Magistrate, and the use of the sword, for the punishment of Malefactors, is the ordinance of God: and therefore here, we own obedience not to man, but unto God himself. Furthermore, no man can serve two Masters, Certain of the Proph. & Apostles exercised also, the office of the Magistrate. Mat. 6. Neither God at any time hath commanded, that we should obey wicked constitutions: but all the godly of the old and new Testament: the Prophets, Christ, & the Apostles, have not only served God and the Magistrate both together: but certain also of them have exercised the office of the Magistrate. Heb. 11. etc. Whereupon most forcibly it followeth, that to be a Christian: or to serve and to exercise the office of a Magistrate, and to punish the evil, are not contrary, neither fight with the faith in Christ, but rather are ordained one under the other, which may both without any damage to Christian godliness, consist together in one man. And this is evident (among other, Why, God distinguished these Offices. by the examples of Melchisedech, Heli, and Samuel: who were Priests and Magistrates both at once. Yea, God did not distinguish those two offices, for that they fought one with another, but that one man was scarce sufficient to exercise both, etc. All this and much more writeth this Gellius Phrysius, in his answer to the Anabaptistes' objection, who made this one of the chiefest of their arguments, that in Christ's and Paul's time, there were no Christian Magistrates. Neither do I set down all this, as though these writers of this Learned discourse were so far gone, as these Anabaptistes, to deny that there ought to be any Christian Princes: But rather to give them warning to take the greater heed, that they come not too near them, either in whole or in part: nor strengthen their error, and weaken the Prince's state, and breed themselves suspicion: by using the selfsame arguments, that they use. It is an old saying, He that will no evil do: Must do nothing that longs thereto. For, if they do, lo here, how (we need not) one of the chiefest of their own side, among these our neighbours, whom they before so highly commended unto us, will not spare to set against these our Brethren also. Neither yet doth Gellius Snecanus Phrysius end this matter thus, but (as it were) sets afresh again, upon this proposition, that the Church of GOD was perfect in all her Regiment, before there was any Christian Prince. To improve this further, Snecanus doth enter into the fowrthe part of his treatise against the Anabaptistes, saying. Pag. 599. It now remaineth, that having opened the foresaid rules of the Scripture (taken from God, the only author of the Magistrate in both the Testaments: from the agreeable proposition of the Civil and spiritual power in the Church; from the Church and the doctrine being one in both the Testa. and from the examples of punishments declared by Paul for our admonition: and also from the definition, nature, The example of Christian Magistrates, in Christ's & the Apost. times. or propriety and final causes of the Magistrate, and the office of the subjects: & at the length from the special sentences of Christ and his Apostles) we should now set down under these things certain lively examples, that that which is in sentences set before the mind, may in a certain manner be evidently laid before the senses, by examples. first, thou hearest Mat. 8. That the Centurion at one and the same time together, was both a Minister of the military affairs of the Romans, and had so great faith, as Christ at that time found not in Israel. Ver. 9.10. Also joseph of Arimathia is called a disciple of jesus, who looked for the kingdom of God, who was also a Senator (exercising judgement against the wicked, and those that were guilty of death, as appeareth by that, that the Scripture mentioneth, and excepteth him, that he consented not to the death of Christ) being a good and a righteous man, Mat. 27.57. Mar. 15.43. Luc. 23.50. etc. Moreover, Theophilus unto whom Luke dedicateth his Gospel, was a Prince and governor of some certain Region, as it appeareth by the property of the Epithet; The most excellent: which is a title agreeable to men that are Princes. For, Acts 23. ver. 26. it is attributed unto Felix. And in the 26. chapter likewise, the 25. verse. unto Festus, either of them being the Ruler of judaea, etc. Furthermore, Nichodemus one of the chief Rulers of the jews, instructed by Christ himself in the Faith: Io. 3. remained in his vocation and his Magistracy, as appeareth Io. 7 v. 50. Neither did he for the same cause forsake Christ; as it is evident, by his officiousness of Christ's burial. Io. 19 ver. 39 Besides this▪ in that royal Courtier joan. 4. converted by Christ unto the Faith. And in the E●muche that was the chief governor of Candaces' Queen of the Aethiopians, Act. 8. baptised by Philip. And also in the proconsul Sergias Paulus, Act. 13. etc. Also Cornelius. Act. 10. ver. 1. etc. who also is called a Centurion, and a godly man, and one that feared God: who also continually prayed to GOD, which could not be done without Faith in the Messiah, (except a man will absurdly say, that all before the time of Christ were without faith, when as this man especially is called, one purified of God, and acceptable unto him, ver. 15. and 35. etc. Hear I pass in silence the example of the chief rulers of Asia: F●r, who will affirm, that they being the friends of Paul, were without the knowledge of Christ? Act. 19 ver. 30 etc. To these above named, cometh the example of Erastus the procurator of the city. Rom. 16. ver. 25. Exercising the office of a Magistrate, and reckoned by the holy Ghost, among the Faithful. Yea, and the example also of the Saints who were of the house of Caesar, Phil. 4. v. 22, etc. Thus we see most evidently, even by the testimony at large of this one man, as one of the principal of their own side, (to press them with 〈◊〉 more) how this reason that here these Learned discoursers stand so much upon, that the church of God was perfect in all her Regiment, before there was any christian Prince, is not only one of the principallest reasons of the anabaptists, (whom they, I hope, no less than we detest) albeit i● this affectionate zeal, they do in so many points as we may hereby ●●ther, even in a manner jut with them (though vnawars) to justle at the authority of Christian Princes: but also how weak and of no force at all this their reason is. And with what a multitude of far better reasons, yea, as the Apostle saith, with a cloud of witnesses, it is beaten down. And that, (which is most of all to be respected) how greatly they overshoot themselves in the truth thereof. Our Brothers exception of Emperors. Neither doth it avail them to say, that none of these were Emperors: For, it evicteth the cause sufficiently, th●● they were Princes, or at least, any kind of Magistrates. If they reply, that yet they did exercise no authority & government in the church but lived as private persons among the Christians: albeit this is also the refuge of the Anabaptistes; y●t how can this be proved? Which if it were true, might make indeed, not colour, but ground of reason for the Anabaptistes. But as those Princes▪ were converted unto Christianity: Christia● Princes from the beginning. So (no doubt) they retained their estates still, and the Christians so acknowledged and called them, as before. And if they submitted themselves before to their authority, while those Princes were Infidels: shall we think, that either the Princes did not much more think themselves bounden to oversee (so far as their ability stretched,) all the three especial points of their charge, The Magist. lost no authority by professing Christianity. in the maintenance of both the Tables of God's Law, Peace, honesty, and godliness, to be maintained among the Christians: or that the Christian subjects did not now much more honour them, obey them, & commit the Government of their controversies to them, when after they remained among them being Christians, and retained still their Governments being Princes? But Gellius also saith somewhat hereunto, Page 634. Moreover they object that Paul 1. Cor. 6. Forbade the faithful, that they should not hale one another, before the judgement seats of the unfaithful. I answer, Paul did not absolutely, and by itself, condemn here the judgements ordained of God. Deut. 16. & 17. scythe Paul himself without any revenging of himself, appealed to the judgement of Caesar. Nether forbiddeth he those things to the Christians in general, Acts. 25. but reprehendeth the Corinthians, in respect of circumstances, & of their vices. As those, who prosecuted the extreme rigour of the law against their neighbour, & that before infidel judges. Yea rather, they themselves endamaged their brother. Whom notwithstanding, he did not by & by therefore excommunicate; much less did he disallow the function of the Magistrate, in respect of itself, or denied that it might be administered of the Christians: but rather contrariwise, permitted unto them Arbiters and judges, & wished that the Magistrate were a christian, in that he requireth holy judges. And this he clearly setteth out by a comparison from the more, to the less, affirming that the Saints shall judge the world, yea and the Angels. Lo (Christian Reader) here the controversy is most evidently decided. The adversaries require an unjust, and Infidel Magistrate. Paul would have a Saint, and a believing person, to be appointed. If Paul permitted Arbiters to be chosen out of the faithful, in deciding controversies among the brethren, and saith that those, (albeit the basest of the faithful.) are fit than the infidel judges: how much more than are the greatest faithful ones, & wise ones, fit persons to be set in the public judgement seats. Besides, that the Apostle expressly underhand, sets out a show, wherein, whensoever better times should shine upon them, those judgement seats should be brought into a more happy order, and more holy judges should be ordained. The Ch. Regim. more happy, where Christ. Princes are. For whatsoever is granted to an unfaithful: can much less be denied to a faithful person. Howsoever it be, Paul wisheth not (as do the adversaries) Infidel, but holy and faithful judges. Yea, except the judge be holy, he can scarce with good conscience before God, be a judge. Here-unto we may apply, that S. Paul wisheth King Agrippa to be a Christian. Whereby we perceive, that wheresoever any of these Christian Princes were at that time among the Christians, they had no final authority, in decision of such controversies as rose among them. Neither only in titles of land, breaches of peace, civil cases, and other worldly matters: but also in matters pertaining to the Regiment of the Church and Ecclesiastical: as were the matters, for the which Saint Paul so often pleaded against the jews, even before such judges as were not Christian. And albeit, Acts 18. When Paul was accused before Gallio by the, jews, saying: This fellow persuadeth men to worship God contrary to the law; as Paul was about to open his mouth, Gallio said unto the jews: If it be a matter of wrong, or an evil deed (O ye jews) I would according to reason maintain you. But if it be a question of words, and names, and of your law: look ye to it yourselves, for I will be no judge of these things: Yet Paul, when he came before Felix, and he also would hear the plea between his adversaries and him, Acts 24. After that the Governors had beckoned unto him, that he should speak, he answered: I do the more gladly answer for myself, for as much as I know, that thou hast been of many years a judge unto this Nation, perhaps thinking that in all that time, he might (as Cornelius and others) have attained to the knowledge of God, and so been the fit judge of these matters. And although he was but a corrupt judge, both in affection and religion, and Festus also that succeeded him: yea, Nero the Emperor was worst of all: yet, because he occupied the room of him, that should have been a better, yea, the highest judge in earth unto him, albeit Paul were himself an Ecclesiastical person, & an Apostle and one of the chiefest pillars in the Church of God: yet he appealed even to Nero's judgement seat. And when Festus brought him forth, to plead before Agrippa, he so rejoiced of it, that he saith, Act. 26. I think myself happy (King Agrippa,) because I shall answer this day before thee, of all the things whereof I am accused of the jews. Chiefly, because thou hast knowledge of all customs and questions, which are among the jews. Wherefore, I beseech thee, hear me patiently, and when he was even in the chiefest point of his plea, concerning the resurrection of jesus Christ, ver. 24: As he answered thus for himself, Festus (who had little skill of those matters) said with a loud voice: Paul, thou art besides thyself, much learning doth make thee mad. But he said, I am not mad (O noble Festus) but I speak the words of truth and soberness. For the king knoweth of these things, before whom also I speak boldly, for I am persuaded, that none of these things are hid from him. For this thing was not done in a corner. O King Agrippa, believest thou the Prophets? I know that thou believest. The Church's state. Then Agrippa said unto Paul: almost thou persuadest me to become a Christian. Then Paul said, I would to God, that not only thou: but also all that hear me to day, were both almost, and altogether such as I am, except these bonds. So that, if Paul did thus submit himself unto them, in the decision of these Ecclesiastical controversies, hoping they had been more faithful judges them they were; did not other Christians to other Princes that were indeed Christian Princes, submit themselves also, to the decision of such their Ecclesiastical controversies, arising among them? And though S. Paul miss in the person, yet he wished those persons, to have been such, as he hoped, and as they ought to have been. But (as Gellius saith) if they were not such, yet this expressly insinuateth a show unto us, of those better judges that should come after, and better employ those places that they abused. So that, although no Prince had been good or Christian at those days: yet this argument had not been good nor Christian. And there being (no doubt) even at that time, some, (if not many) it is not only no good argument, but an untrue, and wrong assertion to ground upon, that the Church of God was perfect in all her regiment, before there was any Christian Prince. But would God, these our brethren would have made the matter no worse against Christian Princes, then that they had not yet been come into the Church of God. But it followeth at the hard heels, with so hot a pursuit, even to the estate at this day, saying: yea the Church of God may stand and doth stand at this day, in most blessed estate, where the civil Magistrates are not the greatest favourers. What have we here? O Lord, Our brothers hard speeches of Christian Princes. who would have looked for such speeches at the hands of our brethren, & in so Learned a discourse of the Church's government? Yet was it much better said before, speaking of the state thereof in the Apostles times: that the Church of God was perfect in all her Regiment before there was any Christian Prince For that might yet have been restrained to that time, Paul's wish of Christian Princes. considering the special prerogatives, of that age, to have supplied the want of Christian Princes. Notwithstanding it was not even then so perfect, but that S. Paul wished the Regiment thereof to have been better. And that better even by christian Princes. Else, had he never had such troubles, nor needed to have wished, that Agrippa, Festus, Bernice, etc. had been Christians: nor have appealed unto Nero, nor have had such hinderances in his function. But when these our brethren, thinking to have carried this clear away, will now make a general rule thereon, that the Church may stand perfect still in all her Regiment, and that in most blessed state, without any Christian Princes: then GOD help poor Christian Princes. For, being such poor helps unto the Regiment of the Church, they may be as well spared, or wished ●way (which the Anabaptists wish them) as to be wished for, which S. Paul did wish them; save for the Prince's salvation of their own souls, in which respect, they are not Christian Princes. Nay, if this were true: why may they not as well with the very Anabaptistes, set down this rule to, that the Church of God may stand, and doth stand, better without them? For, howsoever they seem here to allure the reader, with these godly titles, The Church's perfection and most blessed state. of the Church of God, of perfection in all her regiment, and that she standeth at this day in most blessed estate, where Christian Princes are not at all, and the civil Magistrates are not the greatest favourers▪ yet dare we not ascribe these titles of perfection in all her Regiment, and of most blessed state unto the Church of God, being militant and traveling still under imperfection. But we acknowledge (as S. Paul sayeth 1. Cor. 13.) that we know imperfectly, and we teach imperfectly, but when that which is perfect shall come, then that which is imperfect shall be done away. And then shall come indeed the most blessed estate of the Church's perfection in all her regiment. But if it be now already, and that where no Christian Princes are, or where the Civil Magistrates are not the greatest favourers; then whereto serve the Christian Princes, and the Civil Magistrates, to favour the Gospel, but rather to hinder the perfection of the Church in all regiment, and to cause it not to be in most blessed estate? For where any Christian Princes are; yea, the greatest favourers of the Church of God that ever were: it could never yet aspire hereto. But where they were not, and are not, there these Learned discoursers tell us, that the Church of God was perfect in all her Regiment, and stands in such estate as is most blessed. But where was this perfection in all the Regiment of it, before Christian Princes? And where standeth & yet at this day in most blessed estate, where the civil Magistrates are not the greatest favourers? May not the places be named, that we might view them? Must we run to Utopia for to seek them out? Where was this? in Sodom and Gomorra, under Chedor-laomer, & where the civil Magistrates, nor all the people, were any great favourers of the Church of god? Where Lot being righteous, 2. Pat. 2. and dwelling among them, in seeing & hearing them, they vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds? Was he & his family in most or more blessed estate, or the Church of God there, better governed, then in Salem, under Melchizedeck, or then in the Pilgrimage it made under Abraham? Was the Church of God better under Pharaoh, The Church in better state under Christian Princes, then, etc. then under Moses? under the tyrants that oppressed them, then under the judges that delivered them? Was the Church's government better under Saul, then under David? under jeroboam, Achab, Manasses, & other Idolatrous Princes: then under Solomon, josaphat josias, Ezechias, & other godly Princes? & is it more perfect in all her regiment, and standeth in more blessed estate at this day, under the great Turk in Europe, under the Sophy in Asia, under the great Chan in India, where also great parts of the Church are dispersed: then under godly Christian Princes in England, Germany, scotland, Denmark, Suecia, Polonia, Hungary, and all other places where Christianity is openly professed at this day? Is the regiment of the Church of God better, To great unthankfulness towards her Majesty. & in more blessed estate in Italy under the Pope's tyranny, or in France, in Spain, in Flaunders, etc. where the Christian Princes are not the greatest favourers of the light of the Gospel, than here in England, where her Majesty favoureth the same so tenderly, and hath ventured her state & life so often for it? O unthankfulness O blind: (what should I call it?) Malice? No, but self willed opinion, the, to deface the good estate of the Church of God, wherein we are (under such a right Defender of the faith) defended & sheilded from all our enemies, in a far more blessed estate than we deserve; will make such an odious comparison, as this is. But, as the old saying is, itch and ease, can no man please. But if the Church be so imperfect in all her regiment under our most gracious and true Christian Prince here in England, if our estate be so disordered and so little blessed, in comparison of theirs at this day, where the Civil Magistrates are not the greatest favourers: why do not these Learned discoursers take their course thither, where the Church is so perfect in all her regiment, even as they would have it, & in most blessed estate that they can wish it? If this be a matter of such moment & necessity, as they would bear us in hand, why go they not thither, where they say it is even at this day? & they may go thither when they will. No, I warrant you, they will none of it on that price: but will tarry here still, & trouble their brethren, though they have it not. No, no, whatsoever is pretended, to get that they would have: if they cannot have it, they have learned this (or they may easily do, if they try experience) that it is good keeping themselves well, when they are well. And welfare a good Christian Prince, that favours the Church of God and the Gospel of jesus Christ, when all is done. But what mean they by these glances, that the Church of God doth stand at this day in most blessed estate, where the Civil Magistrates are not the greatest favourers? Do they mean by civil Magistrates, as they did before, where they said, Whatsoever it please the Civil Magistrate to call or account indifferent? etc. Referring this term to our most gracious Prince & Sovereign? But I think they do not mean so, for as they speak more at large, saying, Where the civil Magistrates are not the greatest favourers, noting many, or more than one, & some other estates, which they compare with ours: so they here give them an harder title, to be not the greatest favourers, then that (I hope) they will say, Her Mayest. favour of the Gospel. they imply our gracious Sovereign in that term. If then they mean, that we live under such a blessed Prince, as favoureth the Gospel: do these men speak it in good sooth (as indeed soothe it is) or do they jest, or speak it but for fashion sake? But howesoever they seem to glance hereat, (for they neither say it in express words, but as it were by comparison, do seem to infer as much, in telling us of other places in the world, where the Princes are not the greatest favourers) notwithstanding they tell us neither what thing it is, whereof they are not the greatest favourers. But I guess, that in this their Rhetorical brevity, they mean that they favour not the Gospel, or the Church of God. For it seemeth, they refer it not to this Regiment, that themselves favour and desire. For so, they know, that her Majesty being also not the greatest favourer of their desired Regiment: they might conclude, that the Church of England, which they cry out of to be in a state disordered, should be in that most blessed estate which they desire. They seem therefore to mean this, that her Majesty is indeed a fovourer of the Gospel, or Church of God, and yet the state of the Church of God, (under Her Majesty) is in an unperfect, less blessed, and more disordered estate, than it is, where the Princes are not the greatest favourers of the Church of God, and of his Gospel. Which if it be their meaning, (as I would be loath to gather of their words any thing beyond their meaning,) so I had rather they expounded themselves, or that their words needed not an expositor, as well many times, as an answer. Now then, if their meaning be thus, that her Majesty is a favourer of the Gospel, and of the Church of God, although this in some sense, may seem but a cold and slender commendation bestowed on her Majesty, to be but a favourer; as though thee liked well enough thereof, and liked of others that professed it, but herself were not so zealous a professor, and lover of the Gospel: yet construing all this to the best interpretation of her favour thereunto, that her Majesty is a great favourer of the Gospel of God and of his Church: how then doth she so highly favour the same, and yet not suffer the Church of God, to be so perfect in all her Regiment, as where no Christian, but Heathen Princes are? and not to be in so blessed estate, as it is under those Civil Magistrates, that are not the greatest favourers? Meaning indeed (under a gentle name for reverence sake) are no favourers at all, but so much as they can, hate and persecute the Gospel and Church of God: How her Majesty under pretence of commendation is discommended. and yet (will they, nill they) suffer it more to flourish herein, than her Majesty doth, being so great a favourer of the same. What a foul rebuke, (under pretence of commendation) is this to her Majesty? Yea, what a kind of favouring call ye this, when the not favouring of the enemy, is better for the Regiment of the Church, than the favourers love? Indeed, accidentally things may fall out so clean contrary, (as he that thought to kill his enemy, did him more good in thrusting him through, The primitive state. and opening that imposthume settered within him, than all his friends and Physicians that could not help him. But what gramercy was that to him? Whereas directly of itself, is not this threatened of God, that he will take away a good Prince in his wrath, and give an evil Prince, to punish the wickedness of his people? and doth not God promise, Good Princes a great blessing▪ etc. ill Prince's a great curse of God. Isai. 49.23. as a great blessing to his Church, that Kings should be the foster fathers, and Queens should be the nursing mothers thereof? But by these men, they had a better Regiment, when they had Pharaoh to nurse them, with drowning of the infants in the water, and oppressing their parents on the land: and when Herode bathed the infants in their own blood. Did GOD mean, they should have such Pap with an Hatchet, and that Princes should be nurses on that fashion? Or did he rather mean, that when he would send such Princes as should favour his Gospel and his Church, even as the good nurse comforteth and guideth well the child, and is as it were another Parent to it, under whom the child battelleth, and is well brought up; so next under GOD our heavenly Father we should be nourished, fed, comforted, defended, and guided, till we grow to our perfect age in jesus Christ, under the godly Government of our Christian Princes. And is this, that is promised for so great a blessing, turned to a curse? And the curse turned to so great a blessing? God is able indeed, to turn all things to good. God had his Church still, even in the most dreadful persecutions that ever were, How God can turn his curse to a blessing. and the gold is finer that is tried in the furnace seven times. So that this redoundeth in the end, both to the greater glory of God, and to the better confirmation of his Church. But what can we conclude hereon? That the Church, when such havoc is made in the congregation, and it is dispersed here and there: is then more perfect in all her Regiment, and in most blessed state? S. Paul saith, Rom. 5. Where sin abounded, grace did more abound. But what? shall we say then, (saith S. Paul, Rom. 6.) Shall we continue still in sin, that grace may abound? God forbidden. And in those days of more iniquity abounding, in the time of planting among the Gentiles, the faith and Gospel of jesus Christ: the most part of the Gentiles raged, and the people imagined vain things: the kings of the earth assembled, and the rulers came together against the Lord, and against his Christ. albeit, the faith took rooting among some, both Princes and people. And GOD in that extraordinary time, dealt extraordinarily with them, both with extraordinary gifts and extraordinary offices. Whereby he so helped and beautified that Primitive estate of the Church of Christ, among all those troubles, persecutions & dissipations; that the Church seemed rather to flourish them to be oppressed, & to be In most blessed estate in some respects, when in other respects, it was in most pitiful estate, as S. Paul saith, 2. Cor. 6. of God's help at such times: For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, How the Primitive state was blessed and yet pitiful. and in the day of salvation, have I succoured thee. Behold now the accepted time: behold now the day of salvation. We give no occasion of offence in any thing, that our ministery should not be reprehended: but in all things we approve ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses, in stripes, in prisons, in tumults, in labours. By watchings, by fastings, by pureness, by knowledge, by long suffering, by kindness, by the holy Ghost, by love unfeigned, by the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left, by honour, and dishonour, by evil report, and good report, as deceivers, and yet true: as unknown, and yet known: as dying, and yet behold we live: as chastened, and yet not killed: as sorrowing, and yet always rejoicing: as poor, and yet ●aking many rich: as having nothing, and yet possessing all things. The state of the primitive Church striving thus against all these temptations and calamities, but by the grace and power of God surmounting them: in this respect was in more blessed state, then when afterward enjoying peace and prosperity, and abusing the same, contentions and other corruptions arose thereupon, in which respect the state was not so blessed. Is therefore persecution and all these troubles, better for the regiment of the Church of God, than peace & prosperity? Yea, was not that regiment that the Church had then, abused also, in those that had the gift of tongues, the gift of healing, & the gift of prophesying? Which gifts not only many among the Corinthians, did abuse? but also there were mani● false Apostles, many ●uill Pastors, many Teachers of false doctrine, & some Deacons not all the best. And (no doubt) their Segniories were as much corrupted as the residue, if they had any such standing officers among them, as these Discourses do conceive, and as wherein they say, the Church's regiment most consisted, with the Pastors, Teachers, & the Deacons. So that the Church of God, no, not at the time; no, not in that regiment that she was governed by; was then so perfect in all her regiment▪ nor in most blessed estate; for all that the Apostles were then living, and for all the extraordinary gifts and offices, that then she had. No such Eccl. Governors in the Apostles times as our Brethren pretend. And may we think, if there had been such Governors among them at that time, that either they (if they had not themselves been infected) would not have reform so many foul abuses? Or did not their authority stretch so far? Or would not the residue be rather ruled by such governors among themselves, then to trouble and endanger themselves being Christians, before Infidel judges? Or if they had had any such governors among them, would not S. Paul (chiding them for going to law before infidel judges) not rather have exhorted, yea charged them, to have referre● those matters to the signory & Governors, the he had appointed over thee If he had appointed any, having builded so great and famous a Church of God among them, continuing at Corinthus a year and a half together: or to those that they had chosen among themselves to be their Governors, if that were the only order of the Church's regiment, then, and of such importance and necessity? Or how chance, Saint Paul finding these inconveniences (in his absence from them) to have fallen out, (perhaps because there wanted such Governors among them) doth not will them (among so many precepts, pertaining to the regiment of the church) in one place or an other of both his Epistles, to choose and ordain such Governors over them? Or, mentioning Governors, What the Gouernour● were mentioned 1. Cor. 12. and other gifts and offices, 1. Cor. 12. Would not say, these Governors, are those Seniors, that either ye have, to direct these matters by: or at least, if ye have them not, ye ought to have them? But as though, they neither had any such, nor urging them to have any such Consistory of Governors over them, speaking of their having business one against another, he saith unto them, 1. Cor. 6. Do ye not know, that the Saints shall judge the world? If the world then shallbe judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge the Angels? How much more, 1. Cor. 6. things that pertain to this life? If then, ye have judgement of things pertaining to this life: set up them which are least esteemed in the church. I speak it to your shame. Is it so that there is not a wiseman among you, no, not one that can judge between his brethren? By which words it appeareth, that, not only in those matters, (whatsoever they were) but that also in other matters pertaining to the regiment of the church, being matters pertaining to this life, they had no such Consistories of judges or Governors among them. Nor S. Paul enforceth any such upon them: but only to have some one or other wise and godly man, to be chosen among themselves (and that also without any prejudice to the authority of the government then established) to be their Governor. For, they being without a Christian Prince, to be their Governor, and being at that time also given to such corruptions and contentions: either they must go before Infidels, or breed a confusion among themselves. So necessary at all times is it to have a Governor, that even the primitive Church could not be without her Governors. And yet neither the thing that S. Paul persuades them to, (being one of the greatest Christian churches in those days) was to set up a Consistory among them, but some one Governor. Neither the matter that he dissuades them from, is any other thing more, The Corinthians had no ordinary consistory of eccle. Governors among them. then for bringing their brethren and causes before Infidel judges. So that, this is not to be stretched beyond the state of the Corinthians then, nor any rule prescribed to any particular church of GOD now, living under a prince or judge that is a Christian: That any church may, (otherwise then by way of private arbitrement, as charitable, neighborlie, and blessed peace makers) take authority to elect or ordain hereby among themselves, any one or other public judge or Governor, and much less elect among themselves, and set up a signory or Consistory of Governors, in matters pertaining to this life, as are all indifferent matters, pertaining to the Ecclesiastical regiment of the Church: but that, when any controversy ariseth about them in the church, (if they be not already prescribed in God's word) we must all, after all our deliberations on them, bring them to the final determination, and disposition of the godly christian Princes judgement and censure, how they shall be used of the subjects. And thus may we keep any other good order of judges and judgements, We having Christian Princes, are not bound to such judges as the Corinth. did choose. even as well in ecclesiastical as civil controversies, according to the government already established, with out any more néed● of reviving those consistories whatsoever, that were then in any christian church used, than of reviving this constitution of S. Paul for judges. For, although S. Paul gave such a prescription of judges to them, in the want of other Christian Governors: yet we that have now Christian Princes, and Christian judges, and I hope godly and righteous judges also, are not bound to choose judges in our own Parishes. If we could indeed take up many needless controversies among ourselves at home: it were well done, and would save much travel, veration, and expenses, and perhaps the judges might be eased to. But if we should thereupon make a rule, and say that we must needs have judges at home in our several Congregations, because S. Paul prescribed the Corinthians so to have: and that all such public judges to serve a whole realm or country, were not lawful or were needless, because, in the Primitive Church they had no such public Christian judges for a whole realm or country: The danger of imitating the Primitive Church's regiment here in. might not this grow to the manifest injury not only of th● judges, but of all the whole commonweal? Yea, might not the Christian Prince fear, that by the same rule, (if it were true that ye say, there was no Christian Prince then, when the Church was perfect in all her regiment) he might be driven clean out of his civil regiment too, and out of all, not supreme only, but any authority at all, among the Christians, and clean dispossessed of his kingdom, except he would content himself, to be a judge chosen in one particular city? So that, neither inheritance, nor a whole Realm or Realms, to be ruled by any one christian Prince, could hold any plea, if such rules might be coined on such examples. And then forsooth, the church of GOD, as, before there was any christian Prince: so after, they are all thrust out, or reduced to that state that they were in, might be said to be perfect in all her regiment, once again. And that the Church of God may stand and doth stand in most blessed state, where the civil Magistrates are not the greatest favourers, nor bear the greatest rule, but all is brought again to the estate it was in before, in the Apostles time, Do ye not see, what a most blessed estate the church of God would come unto, by this rule? Caution in mutation. And I pray you (brethren) what warrant have you more, or so much, for the prescription of your signory in every congregation, as is here prescribed by S. Paul, for the choosing of this judge or ruler, among the particular congregations of the christians? We must take heed therefore, Caution in imitating examples, or prescribing upon particular rules. how we stand on such examples, or how we enlarge any rule, that was particular to the time, or state then, or to the place or persons there, to be-come an ordinary, general, absolute, or perpetual rule to us, and to the whole Church, whether it be by S. Paul, or by S. Peter, or by any, or by all the Apostles, or by our Lord and Saviour jesus Christ himself, practised, yea, or commanded. For diverse examples and commandments were but for certain times, states, & places, and stretch no further. As the Disciples, to carry neither gold, nor silver, nor money, nor scrip, nor two coats, nor shoes, nor staff, Matth. 10. To abstain from things offered to Idols, and from blood, and from that that is strangled, Acts. 15. And that men should pray bare headed, etc. 1. Cor. 11. And albeit, that in the commandments and rules prescribed of these things, and of the like, neither Christ nor his Apostles tell, that they were to continue, but for a time: yet levelling the same by the analogy of our faith, and by the proportion of our Christian liberty; we find no such necessity in these things, nor of any other such like orders, as in the regiment of the Primitive church was used. For though they were used as orders, or as ornanaments, to beautify the blessed estate of the Church's regiment then: yet neither the blessedness, nor the estate thereof, consisted in them, when they had them. And if any church that now flourisheth have any of them, it is never the more blessed for them, as of any necessity to the estate thereof. And if any have them not, and have other good orders of regiment established among them, it is never the less blessed of God, for the not having of them. If they have what is necessary: that sufficeth. Prove either this signory to be necessary for us imagining there had been any such: or else all this most blessed estate, resolves to nothing. But neither of these is yet proved, nor (I fear me) ever will be: that there were any such Governors at all: A Confisto. of Ecclesi. Seniors not necessary▪ but Magistrates necessary. or that we are bound in every particular congregation, to obey, or to have such a signory. But we are bound to have, and to obey in all lawful ordinances, our Princes and Magistrates: especially being Christians, and favourers, and fosterers of the Church of God, defenders of the faith, setters forth and professors of the Gospel. Where such Princes are, (as we must needs confess we have, except we be too unthankful) there indeed the Church of GOD may stand, and standeth at this day, in far more blessed state, without this signory, then where this signory standeth, and the Civil Magistrates are not the greatest favourers: or to speak plain English, Whereon the churches gouer. depends. are no favourers at all, but haters and persecutors of the Gospel. And thus we see, how weak and untrue, both these propositions of these reasons are, by the which as a notable great reason, in the end scarce worth a little currane, these our Learned Discoursers avouched, that, it might be to every man so plain, that it was neither needful nor agreeable to good order of teaching, to begin first to treat of the supreme authority of Christian princes in ecclesiastical causes. Now, a● we thus have seen the valour and truth of these two propositions, whereon their reason is made: so let us see their conclusion of this reason. Their conclusion is this: By which it is manifest, that the regiment and government thereof, dependeth not upon the authority of princes, but upon the ordinance of God: who hath most mercifully and wisely so established the same, that as with the comfortable aid of christian Magistrates, it may singularly flourish and prosper: so without it, it may continue, and against the adversaries thereof prevail. For the church craveth help and defence of Christian princes, to continue and go forward more peaceably and profitably, to the setting up of the kingdom of Christ: but all her authority she receiveth immediately of God. Is this then the conclusion of their reason? What is this to the present question: The conclusion of our breath. argument against the ●irste treaty of the Prince. Or how hangeth this upon the premises? May not th● princes supreme authority in ecclesiastical causes be first treated upon, except this must straight be concluded on it, by which it is manifest that the regiment and government of the church dependeth not upon the authority of princes, but upon the ordinance of God? Wherefore is this so far fetched conclusion brought in here? Before, you sai● it seemeth, (not yet telling to whom) but now it seemeth, that it seemeth so to you, The dependence of the church's government. and that for a manifest and plain conclusion, that if the princes supreme authority be first spoken of, than all the church's regiment dependeth on it. But I cannot tell how it seemeth to you, to be a manifest and plain consequence: I promise you, it seemeth not so to me. Nor (I think) to any man, that will way the reason with any reason. And yet you threape such kindness on us (that are, God be thanked, reasonable creatures also) that it now goeth beyond it seemeth: for it is manifest. Whereas indeed, not only it seemeth, but is manifest, to be a manifest violent, and extorted conclusion. Yea, a manifest injury both to God, to his church, and to all the authority of all godly Christian Princes, and most manifest wrong unto her Majesty. Doth her Majesty in claiming the supreme authority in Ecclesiastical causes, in that portion of the church of God committed to her majesties government, or in not yielding to this your desired regiment, claim this, that the regiment and government of the church, dependeth upon her authority? And if ye say ye mean not her Majesty, but speak still upon Princes at large: though ye mend not the matter, but make it worse, yet would to God ye would once name soon, to put the matter out of all suspicion, and let them bear the blame, that claim such high authority and absolute power, that all the regiment of the Church dependeth thereon. No, I am sure ye can name no godly Prince that doth so. And yet see, not only how ye make this a manifest conclusion, but how to aggravate the matter, and make it more odious, ye conclude it also with an opposition, between the Prince's authority and God's ordinance: saying, by which it is manifest, that the regiment and government thereof, dependeth not upon the authority of Princes, but upon the ordinance of God. As though the Prince's authority, were not also the ordinance of God. As the Apostle expressly saith, Rom. 13. Let every soul be subject to the higher powers, for there is no power but of God. And the powers that be, are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth, resisteth the ordinance of God. And shall we now make an opposition, betwixt the authority of Princes (especially speaking of Christian Princes) and Gods ordinance? No opposition between God's ordinance and the Prince's authority. How could the very enemies of us both, either the Papists or the Anabaptists, have rough hewn a sharper conclusion, against Christian Princes authority, than this is? Notwithstanding, least Christian Princes should take just offence, not only to have their authority thus clean cut off, but cast out of the doors also of the Church of God, with such a contumely, as an authority opposite to God's ordinance, and yet claiming all the Church's regiment to depend thereon: This conclusion shall be afterward smoothed with gentler terms, and Christian Princes shall have somewhat granted to appease them. And what in this conclusion is that authority, that shall be now yielded unto Christian Princes? Forsooth, that God hath most mercifully and wisely so established the same, that as with the comfortable aid of christian Magistrates, it may singularly flourish and prosper: so without it, it may continued, and against all the adversaries thereof prevail. For, the Church craveth help and defence of Christian princes, to go forward more peaceably and profitably, to the setting up of the kingdom of Christ, but all her authority she receiveth immediately of God. Why, what again is this to th● supreme, or to any authority of Christian Princes in ecclesiastical causes? Here is somewhat indeed for the Church's authority: No opposition between the churches & the Prince's authority. but we speak not now of the Church's authority, so much, as of the prince's authority in the Church: except they will here make a double opposition, not only between the prince's authority and God's ordinance: but also between the prince and the Church, and either of their authorities, the princes, and the churches, and so enter into a new question, which of these is greater. But this is another great injury offered to christian Princes, The Church's authority. who are by this means (as it were) thrust out, not only of their authority in the Church, but as being, either none at all of the Church (save as an opposite part thereunto) or if a part of the Church, yet a contentious part, for authority striving with the Church, of the which themselves are a principal part and member. For what else mean they by these words, the Church craveth help and defence of Christian Princes, but that they separate the Christian Prince and the Church? And whom mean they then by the name of the Church, the whole o● particular body thereof? Whom they mean by the name of the church. But, all the people deal not with the government of themselves, nor are their own Governors, which would breed a great confusion in their government, and quickly come to no government at all. If they mean these four tetrarchs, (as it seems they do:) they likewise be but parts to the Church, as are the Princes, and inferior parts of the Prince also: except they will contend for superiority above the Prince. But, inferior, or superior, they be but parts, and cannot claim to themselves any more the name of the Church, being but the Church's Ministers, (if all be so) than the Prince or the people may. Nor so much neither, the Prince representing the head, and the people being the body. And if they say, they be Christ's ministers, so is the Prince also, no less in his function, than any of them in theirs. And let them look to it, thus under the name of the Church, to part all the church's authority among them, The adversaries dealing under ●he name of the church. and so oppose their authority (as the churches) to the Prince's authority. For thus played even the very popish Priests, the common enemies to us both. And under pretence of the church's authority, and that they were the church, the Ecclesiastical persons, and the church men; and that the Prince and the people, were but mere lay and civil persons, separate from the church: they not only kept the people down, but also wrong all authority in Ecclesiastical causes from the Prince. And used even the same terms of the church, and the Civil Magistrate, that here these our brethren use. Yea and the same reason, and give the christian Princes as much, yea, the selfsame titles, that here our brethren do. While thus, between them both, the christian Princes are spoiled of all their authority in Ecclesiastical causes. For what is all that is given to christian Princes here, but to be only aiders, helpers, and defenders of the church? Our brethren here give no more to the Prince then do the adversaries. And do not the Papists use the same terms? And give as goodly titles as these, to christian Princes? Yes, and more, and better too. But what is this unto regiment, government, and authority? No, here is nothing mentioned, but the regiment and government thereof. Whereof? Of the Prince? No, of the church. And the church craveth help and defence of christian Princes, but all her authority is immediately of God. So that, of the Prince she receiveth no authority at all. For, if s●ée receive all immediately of God: then she receiveth none immediately, nor mediately of the Prince. And if the receive none from the Prince, but all of God immediately, without any authority of the Prince: then is she exempted from all the authority of the Prince, and all her authority, is above all the authority of the Prince. Yea, the prince, hath no authority at all over her. And so not only the Prince, for any not supreme, but any authority at all, over the church in Ecclesiastical causes, The Prince spoiled of all authority in all Eccl. matters. may go seek it elsewhere: (for the church is sped already of all her authority from God immediately, without any from the Prince) but also the prince hazardeth his civil authority too. For if the church finger any of that also, it is as good as a Mortmain against the Prince. For why? the prince may help her, make her flourish and prosper: but all her authority is immediately of God. Have not Christian princes here, a fair supreme authority in Ecclesiastical causes left them? If the church deal thus with christian Princes: is that church worthy of the comfortable aid of christian Magistrates, and to have it, when it craveth help and defence of Christian princes, that will acknowledge herself to receive no authority at all of christian princes? If she saith, she will acknowledge that she receiveth, that is to say, comfortable aid of christian Magistrates, with the which it may singularly flourish and prosper: and that she acknowledgeth the help and defence that she craveth of Christian princes, to continue and go forward more peaceably and profitably, to the setting up of the kingdom of Christ: This is yet somewhat more, than before was granted. So that, the church hath need of Christian princes comfortable aid, The help that the church receiveth of the Prince. help, and defence. And then without them, she is not so perfect in all her regiment, nor in most blessed, nor so much blessed estate, but that I perceive she is more blessed with them: and where the princes are favours of the church, and Gospel, and kingdom of Christ: there it may flourish and prosper, and that singularly: which is somewhat more yet by one ace, then where the princes are not the greatest favourers. But where they are favourers, there the church (that belike, stood still before, or went backward, or went forward more difficultly) may go forward not only more peaceably but also more profitably, to the setting up of the kingdom of Christ. This is much more than was before granted. Yea, but say they, as it may have all these benefits by the prince's help: so without it, it may continue, and against the adversaries thereof prevail. GOD forbidden, else. But doth it nota great deal better prevail, with it? Yes, but what is all this unto any government, regiment, or authority in the Prince, over the Church? My friend may help me, that hath no authority over me: yea, so may my servants, that are under my government, and with their comfortable aid, help, and defence, when I crave it, I may singularly flourish and prosper. Yea, the prince himself (be he never so high and mighty) may crave comfortable aid, help, and defence, of an other prince, or of his own subjects, whereby he may both singularly flourish and prosper. And also continue and go forward more peaceably and profitably, not only to the maintenance of his own estate, but also to the setting up of the kingdom of Christ: what shall we conclude héereon? that such persons therefore, have any authority over him? And this is all that is here afforded to any Christian prince over the church of God. And how much is this? Forsooth, What authority the Church receiveth immediately of God, what mediately of man. for any authority more or less, when it comes all to all: none at all. And why so? For, the church receiveth all her authority immediately of God. What, and nothing mediatelie of man? No? Not of the Apostles? Nor by all, or by any of these four estates? Or, are they only the church, and have all the authority? Yea, are they God himself, if they only, be not the church? Or doth God give them still that power that they have, or pretend to have of him, immediately, and by his own self, without any mediation; and that in all the authority, not only of preaching the word, and ministering the Sacraments, and binding and losing; but also of electing, imposition of hands, and ordaining ministers, and of calling Counsels, and of making any ordinances and constitutions concerning any Ecclesiastical matters? What if some of these be of God, but yet mediatelie of God, by God's Ministers? And what if some of them be of God also, but mediately from the Christian Prince? Yea, what if the Christian princes authority be of God also, as much immediately as the church's authority? Yea, and more immediately, then can be proved for all these four estates? But, be the prince's authority of God immediately, or mediately of God by man: hath not the Christian prince as much authority now, since Christ's and his Apostles time here in earth, as it had ordinarily before? What authority the Prince receiveth immediately of God and mediately of man. Or, did the church of Christ begin only then: and not rather from the beginning of the world: as Gellius proveth against the Anabaptists, that the church still, not only in substance of the mystical body, and of doctrine: but also of the authority of government, was even from the beginning of the world, one and the same? Adam, Abraham, Moses, joshua, the judges, David, Solomon, Asa, josaphat, josias, Ezechias, zorobabel, etc., were all christian princes Had all of them authority from God, either immediately or mediately: and have christian princes no more authority, then is here allowed? Or how, and when, & where, have they since lost it? When we reason against the papists, that still pretend the church's Authority (meaning thereby their popish Hierarchy) that they might bereave all christian princes of their supreme authority in Ecclesiast. causes: we bring forth the examples of Moses, joshua, David, Solomon, josaphat, etc. If they had not been (in substance & grounds of one & the same faith with us) Chri. Princes then, (though not so called) as well as these that are called Christian Princes now: or if Christian Princes have not as much authority now, as the Princes in and over the Church of God had then: then are these examples, and the arguments drawn from them, nothing to the purpose, but the Papists and the Anabaptists will deride them. Yea, as Saint Paul saith of the Resurrection of Christ, 1. Corin. 15. If Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain, and we are found false witnesses of GOD. So, if these arguments for the Prince's authority, from the Old Testament to the New, Our Breath. confirming the adversaries and the Anabaptists in all these examples. are not substantial and good arguments: then our preaching and alleging of them against the Papists, and against the Anabaptists, is in vain, etc. But these arguments of their examples are firm and good: (standing upon one and the same perpetual rule of the Prince's charge and government, in both Testaments:) & so confute both the Papists and the Anabaptists▪ Christi●n Princes therefore, according to the examples of Adam, Moses, joshua, David, etc. Have as much authority both mediate and immediate from God, as the Ministers of the Church, or the Church itself hath, to be Governors in the Church, and over the Church of God also, or over any other of God's Ministers. Not, to have the Ecclesiastical Ministers peculiar offices, and Ecclesiastical authority, or to execute the actions proper to their Ecclesiastical functions; but to oversee, govern and direct all Ecclesiastical persons, to do their duties in all Ecclesiastical causes, and to have the highest authority in the Church, for the ordering, disposing, and authorizing, any order or constitution Ecclesiastical in indifferent matters: notwithstanding any assertion, reason, or proof, in this Learned Discourse, as yet alleged to the contrary. And as the Christian Prince hath immediately under Christ, this supreme, first and principal authority: so ought the Christian Prince, by as good reason, in the treatise of the government of the churches Ecclesiastical matters, to have had that supreme place which is first and principal; and not that supreme place which is last and least of all, or rather which is none at all: while all Ecclesiastical matters must be first distributed among these four estates, and be only directed by them. But until these four, be all served in their places and orders: her Majesty, and all Christian Princes, must hold themselves contented with this: and in the end, they shall see further, if any more authority in Ecclesiastical matters, be left unto them. In the mean season, let us now return, whether our brethren lead us, to the producing of these four Tetrarkes', what their offices are, how necessary and important they be: and what several authority, or in common, is assigned unto them. The second Book of the Doctor or Teacher. The Argument of the second Book. THE second Book, is of their first tetrarch, called the Doctor or Teacher: wherein, after their resolutions of all the 4. tetrarchs, with the effects, & necessity thereof, with challenge of the Father's alteration, and the unhappy success, & of our disordered state: & after their Apology for their method of this Learned Discourse: they come to their treaty of their Doctors. That this D. is the chiefest office in the Church, & most necessary, and to be had in every congregation. And of their name, institution & office, whether they be a several office necessarily distinguished from Pastors: whether the Apostles words, Rom. 12.1. Cor. 12. & Eph. 4. do infer such distinction of office: the interpretation of the ancient fathers, and of the late writers on these places for this question: especially, whether the Doctors or Teachers must only teach true doctrine, and confute false, or may with their teaching join exhortation and application, to their hearers. Whether there were ever, in the Old Testament, or in the New, any such Doctors as our brethren suppose: with the examination of the examples they allege. What was the manner of the Doctors and Catechisers, teaching in the Primitive and ancient churches: and what now in the churches reform. LET us therefore return to those offices of Ecclesiastical Regiment, which remain to be exercised in the Church of God, The learned Dis. Pag. 10. being instituted and ordained by Christ himself, which before we have proved out of the Scriptures, to be only these? Doctors, Pastors, Governors, and Deacons, whereof some appertain to doctrine, some to government and discipline. The duty of Doctors and Pastors, is chiefly to teach and instruct the people of God, in all things, that God hath appointed them to learn. The office of Elders and Deacons, is to provide, that good order and discipline be observed in the Church. IN this return, Doctors. to these four offices of Ecclesiastical regiment, Bridges. these Learned Discoursers first set down as a clear race, these resolutions. That only th●se, Doctors, Pastors, Governors, Our Breath, to bold resolution of these four tetrarchs. and Deacons, do remain to be exercised in the Church of God: That these four offices of Ecclesiastical regiment be instituted and ordained by Christ himself: and that they have proved this out of the scriptures. Soft a while (Brethren) let us return with you. Where (I pray you) and when, and how, and out of what places in the scriptures, have ye proved this? It was said so indeed, but not proved. Ye alleged only three places, Rom. 12. ver. 6.1. Cor. 12. ver. 28. and Eph. 4. ver. 11. But neither have ye Proved out of any, or all of those testimonies, all these four offices of Ecclesiastical Regiment: neither can ye do it. What these Governors were: whether the same that Bishops, or Pastors and Teachers, or your supposed Seniors, or any Ecclesiastical or civil officers, is not there, or in any other place, that ye have yet cited, either in the Text of scripture expressed; or by any argument, that you have made, Proved. Neither have ye proved, that all these four Ecclesiastical offices, were instituted and ordained by Christ himself, as here you affirm. Neither have ye proved that all these four offices, now remain to be exercised in the Church of God. None of all these things are yet proved, as may appear by that we have seen in all this your Learned Discourse hitherto, and by all the places themselves in the Scriptures. And thereupon, I put me to the veredict of every indifferent Readers judgement. And yet see, how boldly you dare avow all this, and flatly say thereon: (which we have proved out of the scriptures:) where, neither the Scriptures which ye have cited, have it: nor ye have proved it out of them; yea, neither with them, nor without them, ye have proved it at all. Now concerning the distribution of this four squared government, to the which these offices are severally to be assigned, whereas these Learned Discourses say: Whereof some appertain to doctrine, some to government: What? do ye here divide these four officers, A doubtful and confused distribution. into three wards, or into two? If ye say into two (for, the distribution is manifest) some to doctrine, and some to government & discipline: and not, some to doctrine, and to government, and some to discipline: but the latter two government and discipline, (not dividing the same by a several some, but by the copulative and, conjoining them together, government and Discipline,) we contain under one of these two several sums. Very well said, and can you thus yourselves divide these things, and conjoin, and it must be holden for a good dividing and conjoining, and can you not be content with Saint Paul's like distribution, where he saith, Ephes. 4. ver. 11. He therefore gave some Apostles, and some Prophets, and some Evangelists, and some Pastors and Teachers? The Apostle here distributeth them by sums, as you do, & when he comes to this, The Apostles distribution. and some to be Pastors: he addeth not, as an other different office, and some to be Teachers: but as you do here say, some to government and discipline, including both together, (without any further distribution) under one some, both appertaining to one office: and yet you will solemnly break this order of Saint Paul, contrary to your own order here of distribution▪ and where he makes but one office, in two diverse words: you will divide them into another some, and make Pastors one office, and Teachers another office by itself, as that of the Evangelists distinct from the Apostles, or from the Prophets. But of your reasons, why ye thus divide these things, we shall see God willing more, in your several handling of these offices. But now, because, besides this distribution of these four offices, some are referred but to one Province, that is doctrine; meaning the two former offices, as you divide them, Teachers and Pastors: and some are referred to government and discipline; meaning the two later, Governors & Deacons. Howbeit, not telling which appertain to which: whether government to Governors, and discipline to Deacons: or government to Deacons, and discipline to Governors: or (as they says in the Schools) Confuse capitur, let them take both indifferently between them. Except ye will say, that ye mean these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as though diverse words, yet but one matter. But I cannot perceive how ye can well do so, distinguishing so precisely between feeding and teaching, and yet confounding government and discipline. For though discipline, as we usually take the word (which otherwise, by the Etymology thereof, might be drawn nearer unto Doctrine,) may be comprehended under the name of government: yet is not government, being the genus, or general word to discipline, comprehended under discipline, nor all one with it. And therefore, as this is a confused distribution, or rather disturbation of these offices: so the bounds and lunits here assigned to them, are much disordered, and out of all proportion. Neither is this any better that followeth, of the several partition of these four officer's duties in their charges, saying; The duty of Doctors and pastors, is chiefly to teach and instruct the people of God, in all things that God hath appointed them to learn. What mean ye here by this word chiefly? Not, all their duty: but the principal? And is this the chief duty, of both these two? Or the chief duty of one of these two, that is to say, the Doctors? To teach and instruct the people of GOD, in all things that GOD hath appointed them to learn. This indeed is properly called doctrine, and thereupon, ye are now content (although it were long before) to afford this title of Doctor unto any. But belike some of you that compiled this Learned Discourse, or some other that way affectionate, have taken the degree of Doctors: and therefore the name is more gracious, then when it was expressly exclaimed upon. And if any of that degree had written against them, he was méetelie well, Master Doctored, for his labour. The Doctor hath the chiefest place. But Master Doctor is now become one of these four estates. Yea, Master Doctor is the first man that shallbe treated upon. And Master Doctor hath his authority assigned to him, before any of the other three estates. Only this, methinks, Master Doctor is somewhat hardly penned up, and scarce offered elbow room, in his chief duty and peculiar office. For here, doctrine, teaching, instructing the people of God, in all things that God hath appointed them to learn, is made as well the chief duty of the Pastor, as of the Doctor. As for the office of Elders & Deacons: it is to provide, that good order and discipline be observed in the church, but what they contain under the name of order, and under the name of discipline, and which of them shall have which, or both alike: and how they shall provide: and whether they shall make any order more than the other: or whether the other two, or any of the other two, shall not do this, as far forth as they: or whether they shall only look to the observation of these things, not making orders, but provide only that the orders made among them, be observed: or whether they shall be like to our churchwardens and sidemen, as we call them: These things and many other arising héereon are not here expressed. But we shall peradventure see more hereafter, what shall be severed out to every several office, when they shall come forth more orderly in their orders. In the mean season, having thus distinguished and assigned these duties and charges, to these four offices: they tell us of the fruit and benefit, that shall redound unto us, by the establishing and exercising of them. These offices being rightly established and exercised in the Church, The learned Dis. Pag. 10. and 11. are able to make us meet together, in the unity of faith and knowledge of the son of God, unto a perfect man according to doctrine. And both for doctrine and order of government, to make us one body of Christ, and members one of an other. All this (we hope in God) may well be done, by the Pastor or Teacher, Ephes. 4.13. 1. Cor. 12.27 without any bringing in, establishing or exercising of any such Governors, as is pretended. And yet this may be granted well enough also: Bridges. these offices being rightly established and exercised. What effects may ensue of this tetrarchy. For thereby hangs a question, about the right or wrong establishing and exercising of them. And as for the order of government, what these are able to make us: GOD grant, they may not aswell (our order of government established being thoroughly considered) be able to mar us, The tetrarchy. as to make us; or to make us not to meet together, but to separate ourselves in the unity of faith & knowledge of the son of God, far from a perfect man, according to doctrine: and both for doctrine and order of government, to make a foul disorder in this one body of Christ, and jarring of the members one from another. What necessity of these effects But the mark, that we must aim unto, is not, what we may be made able to or fro; but whether these offices be of such importance and necessity, that without all these four offices meet, we cannot meet together in the unity of faith, and knowledge of the son of God, unto a perfect man, according to doctrine, etc. For than should we condemn all the Churches, that have not all these four offices, thus distinguished, established and exercised, as they prescribe. Yea, then had God no Church at all, in any part of the world here on earth, this many hundredth years, until these days. For these Governors, that they would set up, have not been any where, since the Primitive state: presupposing, there were then any such, as they imagine. But God forbidden, that, for the want of these Seniors, whom they call Governors, we should condemn all the militant Church of Christ, so universally, and so long a time, having had the unity of faith and knowledge of the son of God, according to doctrine: albeit, it were not unto a perfect but an unperfect man. And yet all this (appertaining to the office of Pastors and Teachers) may make us meet together, in these things, unto a perfect man also. And is not this enough withal, to make us one body of Christ, and members one of another? And is this done by the order of government? Or not rather by the unity of faith and knowledge of the son of God, unto a perfect man according unto doctrine? Nay, the place here quoted, Ephes. 4. ver. 13. Nor any verse thereabouts, mentioneth Deacons or Governors, These effects without this tetrarchy. or any order of government, concerning any external form of Ecclesiastical regiment: otherwise then precepts of godly life, going before and following in that chapter. And yet the Apostle notwithstanding, setteth down all this effect, and more to, saying? He therefore gave some to be Apostles, and some Prophets, and some Evangelists, and some Pastors and Teachers: for the gathering together of the Saints, for the work of the ministery, and for the edification of the body of Christ; till we all meet together in the unity of faith, and knowledge of the son of GOD, and unto the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ, that we henceforth be no more as children, etc. Here Saint Paul addeth three other things, unto those cited by these our Learned Discoursers. For the gathering together of the Saints: for the work of the ministery: and for the edification of the body of Christ. And yet is no mention at all made of any more offices remainder with us, than Pastors & Teachers, having also joined these together as is aforesaid. Now then, if God do all this that is here expressed, by Pastors & Teachers only: what necessity is there here unto, so peremptorily to enforce these Governors upon us? If they say, yet these may do good hereunto, that we may the more easily attain all these effects: If they press us no further: than, with the grace of God, having Pastors & Teachers here mentioned, yea having Deacons also (without the setting up of these their other supposed Governors) we may well-inough enjoy all these effects, the the Apost. nameth. But these Disccoursers, presupposing the consequence of these effects, only upon the establishing & exercising of all these 4. offices: they shove further & further on the same, to assay, if they can shove all other order of government out of the doors, saying: The learned Dis. Pag. 11. Bridges. Now, what should be desired more than this, in the church of God? I answer, that in respect of the inward regiment, of the mystical state of the kingdom of Christ, or of the necessity of our salvation; nothing need be more desired than this. But in respect of the outward regiment of the Church, and the state of this life: Many things, as means, furtherances, & ornaments hereunto, may be more desired. They demand further: Or what wisdom of man can espy better than the spirit of God, The L. D Pag. 11. by what means this should be brought to effect which we do desire? I answer: if the spirit of God have set down the order of the regiment, of all these four offices, to be the only, necessary, ordinary, Bridges. and perpetual means, whereby this should be effected: then, the wisdom of man can espy none better, nor aught to espy any other; and if it do, Man's wisdom & wit. it is both folly & sin. But if the spirit of God have not set down this order, of the regiment of all these four offices, to be the only, necessary, ordinary, and perpetual means, whereby this should be brought to effect: then the wisdom of man (meaning the man of God) may safely set down, such godly orders of government, as shall be best to bring these things to effect. They demand again: What man's wit can devise better than the wisdom of God hath expressed? The L. D Pag. 11. Bridges. I answer: what man's wit can devise worse than to tie us with necessity perpetually to that, which the wisdom of God hath either not expressed, or not so expressed, the he hath perpetually bound us thereunto? The L. D Pag. 11. Bridges. Or, when God hath established an order, for the administration of his own house: what presumption of man dare change it? Or, when God hath not established an order, for the administration of his own house: what presumption of man dare urge it? But what dare not dust & ashes presume to do against his maker, The L. D Pag. 11. and that with greatest inconvenience: when with best pretences of correcting & reforming that, which they do think to be unperfect in his doings? But what dare not dust & ashes presume to do, Bridges. under pretence of his maker, & of his doings? And what dare not vassals & subjects presume to do, against their Princes & Magistrates established government, & that with greatest inconvenience, Doctors. when with best pretences of correcting & reforming that, which they do think to be unperfect in their doings? The learned Dis. pag. 11. and 12. Example thereof we have most evident. That, which is alleged as the chief defence of this disordered state, which now remaineth in our church: namely, that our fathers of old time were not content with the simple order instituted by Christ, and established by his Apostles: but for better governing of the Church, thought good some offices to add thereto, some to take away, some to alter and change: and in effect to pervert and overthrow all Christian and Ecclesiastical policy, Ephes. 2.20. which was builded upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, jesus Christ being the chief corner stone. Bridges. True indeed, the disorderly dealing of these our Brethren, is a most evident example of all this: we need not run to old and far fetched examples. Our Breath. disordered speeches, of our disordered state. That this state is disordered, is but the former standerous and disordered speech of these Discoursers: Reaching further in such a general word of state, then humble and godly subjects ought to do. Yea, if the state were in some points disordered: yet would these speeches have been moderated in better order, than so lavishly to lash out such terms, against the state. But if any thing therein were out of order; were this the way to order it better, to turn all the orders established clean out, and to bring in new strange orders, or old antiquated orders, or that either never were, or we are not bound to be ordered by? Were not this rather the very high way, to make a more (if not most) disordered state, and to bring all the government established out of order? But what order call ye this: to say, that is alleged as the chief defence, etc. Namely, that our forefathers of old time were not content with the simple order instituted by Christ, Disordered alleging our allega●ions. and established by his Apostles? Which of all us doth allege this, as his chief defence, or any defence, or alleging at all thereof? And which of our forefathers (I pray you) are alleged, and of what old time do we allege them so at random, that a man may neither know who they be that allege them: what they be that are alleged: when, where, & what they allege: & yet to say that they were not content, but Malcontents (as you seem herein to show yourselves) & not content with the simple order instituted by Christ, Chris●es institution. & established by his Apost. What simple order do ye mean, so instituted & established? If ye mean, the order of regiment, of all these your four offices: I pray you, where did Christ institute all these four, & the Apostles establish them, in such order as you prescribe them? And I beseech you, did not the Apost. themselves think good, for better governing of the Church, to add to some offices, that Christ instituted not? And withal (I pray you) were all the offices that Christ did institute, yea, & all those that the Apostles added, to be simply so holden for perpetual offices, that neither they, nor the Church ever after, might take away some of those offices, The Fath. slandered nor alter and change some, that were instituted even by Christ himself, yea, and established by the apostles themselves in their times; but that this must be thus roughly censured, to be in effect, to pervert and overturn all Christian and Ecclesiast. policy, which was builded upon the foundation of the Prophets and the Apostles, Ephes. 2.20. jesus Christ being the chief corner stone. And did S. Paul (I pray you) in this place, mentioning building on this foundation, either speak of, or mean, S. Paul's words wrested. all Christian and Ecclesiastical policy? If he did not: how dare you add this sense unto the Apostles words? Which speaketh there altogether, of our mystical incorporation into jesus Christ, by the spirit of God and preaching of his word, building v● into his Church and habitation and not of any external form and order of offices in the Church, builded, whether they were perpetual or to be altered. Of the which orders that all were not perpetual, but some to be altered and changed, though Instituted by Christ, The ancient Fathers slandered. and established by his Apostles, for that time: the old Fathers that succeeded the Apostles, did so little pervert and overturn, any material part of the Church of God builded upon the foundation of the Prophets and the Apostles, jesus Christ being the chief corner stone, letting go those orders and offices which were not perpetual: that some of those old Fathers, rather did offend (succeeding the primitive Church) in that they laboured to retain some of those orders and offices still, holding and urging them as necessary and perpetual. And how much more than should they offend, that when one of these offices presupposed, so mani● hundred years hath ceased in all the whole Church, would now go about, (and that of necessity) to urge & prescribe the same to all Churches? Yea, what offence then, should we call this: when to bring in those offices that have been out so long, we should thrust out th●se, that have been continually in: to wit, the offices of Bishops, which were instituted and established in the Apostles times, and have continued ever since, Perverting the Church's policy. notwithstanding any corruptions and abusinges of them, even as well as the office of Pastors, and Teachers hath done, which have likewise been corrupted and abused? And now, after so many hundred years establishment, to remove the office of Bishops and take it away: what were this, but to pervert and overthrow a great part of the Christian and Eccles. policy which remaineth? But how unhappy a success this good intent, (as they call it, The learned Dis. Pag. 12. ) of theirs, deserved to have of God, who always abhorreth all good intents of men, that are contrary to the good pleasure of his will, expressed in his holy word: the age before us (alas) hath felt, the present time doth plainly see, and we pray God the posterity, warned by examples of their ancestors, Good intentes. may take heed of it. Bridges. We defend not, nor stand upon these good intentes of men, that are contrary to the good pleasure of God or his ●●ll, Good Intentes. expressed in his holy word. Thanks be to God, we know, God abhorreth it: and (God be praised) we abhor it, and confess, it hath had, and still will have unhappy success. But why speak ye this, more to the blemish of the state of God's Churches government among us: then among yourselves? Do we maintain and enforce (as you do) any such intent? Name it. If ye say, it is this our order of government in Ecclesiastical matters: Prove it. As yet in this your Learned discourse, you have not proved it. And if ye can not prove it; how do not these your own words then, with a recumbentibus, return on yourselves? If ye have no good intent: that is worse. If ye have a good intent (as I hope ye have) and can not prove, that this your platform of Eccles. government, is prescribed necessarily unto us, in God's word, and aught to be perpetual in all Churches: will your good intent, (thinking it so to be) excuse you? Take you also heed therefore, & we pray God for you, (as you for us,) that we may both of us, and all of us, be warned by such examples, of the unhappy success of good intentes of men, contrary to the good pleasure of Gods will, expressed in his holy word. But what are these ill events, of these good intentes ye speak of? For where there are especially 2. things propounded in the Church of God; The learned Dis. P. 12.13. Doctrine & Discipline, (as if a man would say, knowledge and practice) by which the glory of God is sought & shineth therein: in steed of true doctrine, followed all manner of corruptions of the same, both in the whole and in every part thereof, as ignorance, heresies, Idolatry, superstition, etc. the Discipline degenerated unto intolerable tyranny & external Domination, clean contrary to the commandment of Christ, whereof ensued all unbridled licence of ungodly living. To be short, the exchange of the ordinance of God and Christ, brought in nothing else, 2. Thes. 2.12. but the Devil and Antichrist. This division here, of Doctrine and discipline, (which notwithstanding I speak under correction) seemeth to me somewhat intricate, Bridges. to make these 2. membra dividentia, doctrine & discipline, answerable to knowledge and practice. An uneven division of Doctrine & discipline. Which latter twain, knowledge & practice, make indeed a good division. For as the one is not confounded with the other, so they 2. do part the whole between them, knowledge & practice. But so do not, Doctrine & discipline. Of which the one may be included in the other & so they divide not, nor comprehend the whole between them. Except ye conclude regiment in discipline. Where discipline rather, should better be contained in regiment, as a part appertaining thereunto. But let your division go; & understand discipline in your own sense: (which now & then is made a part of doctrine itself: & here parteth stakes with doctrine) albeit it is good to go plain & even, especially in defining & dividing, upon the importance of which two, hangeth the greatest moment, both of truth & perspicuity, in all controversies that arise. And many there be (even in these controversies between us) that talk much of discipline, and (God wot) full little know they, what it means. Now, although Discipline contain not all the actions & practise of the life of man, which is Membrun dividens here with knowledge or Doctrine, nor contain all the regiment of the Church, but a part thereof: yet because discipline (as it is usually taken) is a necessary part of Regiment: true it is, that both in doctrine & in discipline, the glory of God is sought, Unhappy success. and shineth. And this also is very true, that when the good intentes of men, are contrary to the good pleasure of Gods will, expressed in his holy word; there is deserved this unhappy success, that in steed of true doctrine, followed all manner of corruptions of the same. At leastwise, this is a ready way to make it to have followed. For we must here again, temper & mollify this peremptory speech: This success hath not followed in every part of the Church. scythe (God be praised) it hath not so followed in the whole Church, & every part thereof; neither in the whole corpse of doctrine and every part thereof, as ignorance, heresies, Idolatry, superstition, etc. For then, the faith of Christ had utterly sailed, contrary to the promise of Christ Matth. 16. and the gates of hell had prevailed against his Church: these Good intentes (I grant) having done much hurt, even in all places, at leastwise in one thing or another. And likewise I grant, that on this occasion among others, the Discipline degenerated into intolerable tyranny and external domination: Too sharp a conclusion. Whereof ensued all unbridled licence of ungodly living. Howbeit, whereas you conclude, saying: To be short, the exchange of the ordinance of God and Christ, brought in nothing but the Devil and Antichrist. 2. Ephe. 2. This is somewhat too short a conclusion on this matter, and too sharp also: to impute all this, to the exchange of the ordinance of God and Christ. Ye spoke before, of good intentes of men, contrary to the good pleasure of Gods will, expressed in his holy word. And if ye mean, such exchange of the ordinance of God and Christ; you say something: The Church not tied to all the offices instituted of God. but, to us, or to this present question between us, nothing. But if you think, that the Church of God, is so necessarily and perpetually tied to all those Offices, which either God (meaning the Father, or jesus Christ his son our Lord, being God also) did either himself ordain, or the Apostles, or the Church (in their days) ordained, that she cannot let go some of those offices, and bring in other some; still retaining those, that are by Christ and his Apostles ordained to be perpetual in his Church: this is a great error in you. For, God himself ordained all the levitical and sacrificing Priesthood, and other offices; no we clean ceased. Change of God's ordinance. And Christ (whom ye will confess to be God also) did his own self ordain Apostles, and Evangelists, etc. And these were the principal offices that were established: and yet even these are ceased and gone also. So that here we see, the manifest exchange of the ordinance of God and Christ. And will you conclude strait ways hereupon: Is there a change of the ordinance of God and Christ? Then, to be short, it brought nothing but the Devil and Antichrist. Yea, but (will you say) you take us now too short: for we mean not such changes as God and Christ made: but such changes as men make of good intents, contrary to the good pleasure of Gods will expressed in his holy word. Well, if that be your meaning, Our brethren's slander of us confuted by their own testimony. what is that to us? Or else, how doth your argument follow? For (God be blessed) none of all these unhappy successes are happened yet to us, and I hope, and pray, that God will bless us still from them. Have not we the only, and whole doctrine of God's truth? Do we maintain any errors? No, themselves can not deny it. I report me to these Learned discoursers own testimony in their Preface, that we differ not in matter, or in the substance of Religion, which hath in diverse assemblies abroad and at home, been disputed, resolved, and now publicly maintained, for our true and holy faith. If then, we maintain the true and holy faith, and differ not from themselves (as they say) in substance of Religion: can these speeches be charitably or truly applied unto us: that we bring in, or maintain nothing but the Devil and antichrist? Or do we bring in, or maintain the Devil and Antichrist? So hardly under the name of the old Fathers, these speeches run against us their Brethren, whom they confess to agree with themselves in doctrine. and who is this Antichrist that they mean? If it be the Pope: have not we driven him out, and all his errors: and profess and Teach the only truth of God? And if we teach the truth, have we the Devil? Or rather, may we not say with our Saviour jesus Christ, both in our defence, we have no Devil; and demand of you, If we speak the truth why do ye not believe us? O Brethren, take heed of such bitter speeches, as prepostorous and eager zeal (howbeit grounded on good intent) made the jews break forth against jesus Christ, with such reproachful terms as these are. Our Breath. too peremptory censure. And although these Discourses quotation here 2. Thess. 2.12. be both impertinent to the matter in hand, and also to the proving of the bringing in the Devil and Antichrist: and lest of all, (as we trust in God) shall any whit touch us: yet see here, with how sharp a censure, they be alleged against us: which words are these; that all they might be damned which believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. But scythe, (by their own confession) we are so far from pleasure in unrighteousness, that we both believe and profess the truth, so well as they, or any other do; we more repose our selves upon the mercy and righteousness of God: Reformation minded. then that we fear to be damned for these things, or for the rash judgements of our brethren. For why, to those that be in jesus Christ, there is no condemnation. And if God justify us who can condemn us? But what is now the conclusion of all this drift? Wherefore if we mind such a reformation as shall be acceptable to God, and profitable to his Church; The learned Dis. Pag. 13. we must throughly be resolved to set up no new kind of ministery, of our own invention, neither for teaching, nor for discipline in the Eccles. state, but bring all things to that most perfect and absolute order, which God himself hath established by his word. We have indeed minded such a reformation. Bridges And God be praised for it, who gave us the mind, that he hath given us the means also, The reformation of our Church to do the thing we minded. And we believe, the Church of England (for the public state thereof) hath such a reformation, as is acceptable to God, and profitable to his Church. And would be yet more acceptable unto God, & more profitable to his Church: if it were not for such unnecessary schisms and hindrances of our Brethren. And if among us being reform from the Popish errors and abuses, there remain any particular defects, or personal faults: they also being convinced so to be, may be reform in such good order, as shall not be prejudicial to the government and reformation that is established. And if we must (as these discoursers say) be thoroughly resolved to set up no new kind of ministery, of our own invention, neither for teaching, No new ministery to be set up. neither for discipline in the Ecclesiastical state: Surely then (for any thing I see) we must be thoroughly resolved, not to set up, either the officers for teaching, whom these men call Doctors, or the officers for discipline, whom they call Governors, in the Ecclesiastical state of this their desired regiment: Yea, their Pastors and their Deacons to. For, in such order as they prescribe them, I think they will be all found a new kind of ministery: howsoever they pretend, to bring all things to that most perfect and absolute order, which God himself hath established by his word. But, to set aside these terms of perfect and absolute: what do these men mean by so often inculcating of these sayings? Would they have us look for Apostles, Evangelists, and Prophets again? For, they were the chiefest that were then, of God himself established by his word. If they say, they mean of such established, as should be perpetual: let go, the perfection and absoluteness of them, and prove the perpetuity and necessity of these offices. And because all offices of the Church are so linked together, as the members of one body, whereof Christ is the head: The learned Dis. P. 13.14. we will so describe one part, as the description of them all may be sufficiently comprehended therein. Our Breath. Method. As if a man would set forth the manifold office & uses of the hand; he should declare what it doth alone, and what it doth with the help of the other hand, or with the arm, with the breast, with the knee, or with the foot. etc. what it can do, with diverse kinds of tools, and what without all manner of instruments. This order we thought good to observe in describing the ministery of the Church, as by which, both the distinction and communication of all offices & services in the Church, might most plainly appear. Otherwise, we force not, by what Method: so the same truth be plainly set forth by any man. And as we control not other men's methods by ours, so we would not, that other men's manner of teaching should be prejudicial to ours. This we say because of them which either for lack of wit, or through too much wilfulness, if they see any difference in the form and order of teaching of diverse men, though in matter and substance they all agree: they exclaim there is no unity, and therefore no truth among them. That all offices of the Church are so linked together, Bridges. as the members of one body, whereof Christ is the head: I think may be further called in question, How the head and parts of the mystical and natural body are linked. how it may be rightly understood. For the members of one body are so linked together, and especially the official parts thereof; that if any of them be disjoined from the body, beit hand, or arm, or breast, or knee, or foot: the whole body is maimed. Yea, without th● breast (I take it) it can not live. And as for the mystical body of jesus Christ, whereof he is the head; though this communion be in such a mystical sort, as the life of this head dependeth not upon the maiming, or taking away of any part or member of the mystical body, not taking any life at all, of any part of the body, but giving all th● life they have: unto all the parts thereof (as the Apostle saith, Ephes. 4.) that we should grow up in him which is the head; that is Christ: by whom all the body, being coupled & knit together by every joint, (for the furniture thereof, according to the effectual power, which is in the measure of every part) receiveth increase of the body, to the edifying of itself in love. So that, no true part or living member of this mystical body, can indeed be severed from Christ their head, as Christ himself saith, I am the vine, joh. 15.5. ye are the branches, etc. except they be such unfruitful branches, of whom he saith: If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch and withereth, and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they burn. But if they be● members of the mystical body indeed, then may they safely boast with Paul, Rom. 8. and say, Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or anguish, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As who say; no. For (saith he) I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor Angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, not things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, New ministery. shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in jesus Christ our Lord. And shall we now say, that all offices of the Church, The church's offices not so linked as the parts of the body. are so linked together, as the members of one body, whereof Christ is the head? For my part, I dare not anowe it, of all offices of the Church. Neither only of those offices, that are ceased, as the levitical Priests, or as the Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, and diverse others: no, nor yet of all the offices of the Church remaining, and that have continued, and be still among us, as Pastors and Deacons: which are two of these your four offices. For if we had no Deacons at all, (as we have:) yet might the Pastors and Teacher's office still continue entire, in the substance of the office (and much less impaired) without any such necessity of these supposed Governors, that are so importunately required. But this cannot be either in all the members of a natural body, and much less in any of the members of the mystical body, where-of Christ is the head, that they can be separated one from another, and remain entire: and therefore all offices of the Church are not so linked together, as are the substantial parts thereof. As for these our Learned discoursers description of the Church's offices, promising so to describe one part, as the description of them all, The order that our brethren promise to observe. may be sufficiently comprehended therein: although it be not material; yet I see not also, how they have discharged this promise of theirs, in describing every one of their four officers, after this manner, as we shall plainly perceive in their treatise even of their first office of Doctor immediately following. Wherein they neither deal with, nor speak of, either their Deacons, or their Governors, or show how their Doctor hath any intermeddling with them at all. And therefore, they fail both in the manner of this description, that here unnecessarily they tie themselves unto; nor they do not after this example, as if a man would set forth the manifold office and uses of the hand, he should declare what it doth alone: and what it doth with the help of the other hand, or with the arm, with the breast, with the knee, or with the foot, etc. What it can do with diverse kinds of tools, and what without, all manner of instruments. This order that here they affirm, they thought good to observe, they have not observed. Although, if they had observed the same: the truth and substance of the matter had been, neither the further, nor the nearer, save that the perspicuity of the order, maketh the truth of the matter more plainly appear. Otherwise (as they say) even so say we: we force not by what Method; The matter more to be respected then the method. so the same truth be plainly set forth by any man. Prove the necessity of the matter, and we will not greatly stick upon your Method. And would to God, that, which you say here of y● Method, ye would say it, The Meth. of the Learned Dis. or rather observe it, of the plain truth itself, and for the matter of the regiment concerning these offices: that except ye can hereafter show (which is yet not done) that we are bound by any commandment of Christ or his Apostles, unto this your regiment, of all, and only, these 4. offices: ye would say likewise with us, for the Government established in the Church of England, that as we control not other men's government by ours, so we would not that other men's manner of governing, should be prejudicial unto ours. A Method not to be controlled would be plain and orderly set down. But if ye will not have us control your Method; utter the same also in plain words. Our controversy is all of the government of the Church, and you tell us what Method ye will observe in describing the ministery of the Church, as by which, both the distinction and communication of all offices and services in the Church might most plainly appear. What? do ye make all offices and services in the Church to be of ministers? Or, all the offices & services to be of governors? How the distinction or communication of these may plainly appear, would have been somewhat more distinctly and plainly spoken. As touching the reason of your request, why ye would not have your Method controlled, nor other men's methods prejudicial to yours? I think it reasonable, if there were no further difference, then in the form and order of teaching of diverse men, when in matter of substance they all agree. An● yet, in such matters as these are, and so precisely urged, an uniformity not only of matter, but also of the Order and Method in teaching of them, might perhaps have made the matter less offensive. Howbeit, if they all agree in matter of substance; and the matter of substance be true, be good, be necessary, which they all agree upon; so that, they seek the truth indeed, and plainness in their Teaching: then is (as they say) it is but either for lack of wit, or through too much wilfulness, if any exclaim, there is no unity, and therefore no truth among them. But when in matter and substance, they differ not only one from another, but from themselves also: Fault found with disagreement in matter. then blame not men, nor impute it to them, that either for lack of wit, or that through too much wilfulness, they say, there is not so much unity and truth among them, as in matters so earnestly urged, there ought to be. But now to the particular view of these 4. offices. Let us then proceed in our purpose. The office of Teaching is the chief and principal office that is in the Church. The learded Dis. Pag. 15. By that we are taught to know God, and how to serve him, and what benefits to look for at his hand: without which knowledge, there can be no felicity, but only destruction looked for: according to the saying of the wise man: where prophesying faileth, Pro. 29. 1●. there the people perish. Albeit the office of teaching in these respects: as to know God, The office of teaching and how to serve him, and what benefits to look for at his hands, (as the ordinary cause, sine qua non, without which there is no knowledge, Bridges. and without knowledge, there can be no felicity, but, The office of teaching in respect of regiment, is not the chiefest in the Church. etc.) may well be said to be the chief and principal office, that is in the Church: yet in respect of the Ecclesiastical government, which is the title of all this Learned discourse (understanding the same truly and plainly, for the government in, of, or over all Ecclesiastical causes, how they should be ordained, directed, or disposed) I take it, that this office of teachers (admitting it were such a distinct office by itself, from the office of Pastors, as they would have it) is not the chief and principal office in the Church. In Christ himself are the offices of a King, of a Priest, and of a Prophet. And in that he was a Prophet, he was a Teacher also or Doctor. Which office was so necessary to reveal the will of his heavenly father: that both God the father said from heaven, This is my well-beloved son, in whom I am well pleased, hear him. Mat 17: And Christ of himself Luc. 4. did read this sentence, The spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me, that I should preach the Gospel to the poor, etc. So that, where no man saw God at any time, except the only begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father, had declared him. Io, 1: As he saith also, Io. 17. I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me, and they have received them, and believed them, etc. without the which teaching there can be no felicity, but only destruction looked for, as he said before in the same prayer. This is life eternal, to know thee to be the only very God, and whom thou hast sent jesus Christ: yet notwithstanding, the chief and principal office of governing the Church of God, was neither this high and necessary office of his teaching: nor yet that of his Priesthood, which was as necessary: yea, and higher in the actions of the office, than the other. But his royal and kingly office was, and is, the chief and principal office in him. And much mor● is it, in the outward regiment of the Church in Ecclesiastical causes: wherein Moses, was above Aaron. joshua, David, Solomon, etc. were above the high-priestes themselves. And so remains it still, except ye can show the order of these offices of the church inverted. Of which the Papists would be glad, and urge it hard: especially from Peter, wrestling thereto the threefold saying of Christ to him: joan. 21. Feed my Lamb●s: feed my sheep: feed my sheep. Meaning, not only his governing, but his office of Teaching, which was his especial feeding of them, and they drive it all to governing, advancing themselves before all Christian Princes. And yet (we grant) that in the action of their several Ecclesiastical function or Church ministry, they are above all Christian Princes, representing God unto them, teaching and admonishing them, and all other: But not above them in government of all Ecclesiastical causes. Which is the question in controversy now betwixt us on the one part, and the Papists and these our own Learned discoursing Brethren, severing themselves from us, and adhering (though not to them) yet to their error, by a new devise, on the other part. The L. D Pag. 15. The Ministry is divided into two functions: they that exercise the first, are called Pastors: the other are called Doctors or Teachers. I pray you (my Learned discoursing Masters) for my learning here again, let me ask this. When ye desired not to be controlled for your method, Bridges. differing from others: did ye include this, not to be controlled though ye differ from yourselves also: Our brothers contradictions in method and matter about Doct and speak ye care not what contradictions, both one against another, and against your own assertions? Ye say here, The Ministry is divided into two functions: that is, Pastors; and Doctors or Teachers. And when ye made this request in the Page precedent; ye said: This order we thought good to observe, in describing the Ministry of the Church, as by which both the distinction and communication of all offices, and services in the Church, might most plainly appear. Did ye mean these 2. only, whom here only ye call Ministers? Or, did ye mean all your 4. Offices, for the which ye request this immunity? If ye did: how are now these 2. only ministers? as indeed ye say here the truer of the twain, and better than your Counterpoison that saith. Christ hath expressly in his word set down sufficient ordinary Ministers, of Exhorters, Teachers, Elders, Deacons, etc. But now, as you herein do counter your Counterpoison, dividing the Ministry into two functions: Pastors, and Doctors: which I would not have forgotten, nor contraried any more hereafter: being a difference not of method, but of matter: So, I pray ye withal, remember this, that the form of the Scottish election divides not the Ministers into two distinct offices or officers: but makes them both all one. And this also is an other difference of matter or substance, not of method. Besides that, the order of the Church of England used at Geneva, maketh first the election and office of Ministers, The English Church in Geneva concerning Doctors. (whom they make to be all one with Pastors:) and after them; the election and office of Elders, & then of Deacons. And when all these 3. are at large set down, then they say: We are not ignorant that the Scriptures make mention of a fourth kind of Ministers, left to the Church of Christ, which also are very profitable where time and place doth permit. But for lack of opportunity in this our dispersion and exile, we cannot well have the use thereof. And would to God it were not neglected, where better occasion serveth. These Ministers are called Teachers or Doctors. Whose office is to instruct and teach the faithful in sound doctrine. Providing with all diligence, that the purity of the Gospel be not corrupted, either through ignorance, or evil opinions. Notwithstanding considering the present state of things; we comprehend under this title, such means as God hath in his church that it should not be left desolate, nor yet his doctrine decay, for default of Ministers thereof. Therefore to term it by a word more usual in these our days, we may call it the order of Schools. Wherein, the highest degree, and most annexed to the Ministry and government of the Church, is the exposition of God's word, which is contained in the old and new Testaments. But because men cannot so well profit in that knowledge, except they be first instructed in the tongues and humane Sciences: (for now God worketh not commonly by miracles) it is necessary that seed be sown for the time to come, to the intent, that the Church be not left barren, and waste to our posterity. And that Schools also be erected, and Colleges maintained with just and sufficient stipends: wherein, youth may be trained in the knowledge and fear of God, that in their ripe age they may prove worthy members of our Lord jesus Christ: whether it be to rule in civil policy, or to serve in the spiritual Ministry, or else to live in godly reverence & subjection. By this order of the English Congregation in Geneva: many things are different not in method, but in matter and substance, from the plat form of Ecclesiastical government, that these our Learned discoursers now set down. first, here is but three offices, as of necessity, urged, Ministers, Elders, and Deacons. secondly, The differences between our brethren & and the Eng Church in Geneva, concerning Doctors. the Ministers that have the first place are the Pastors: and not Doctors, according to the form of the new communion book, & to the Counterpoison; but contrary to these Discoursers, and to the Fruitful Sermon upon 1. Cor. 12. Thirdly, they give these Doctors the fourth place; and call them a fourth kind of ministry. But they urge them not, but say it is very profitable where time and place doth permit. Fourthly, they refer these Doctors to the Schools and Colleges, and call them the order of schools. fiftly, they tie them not only to teaching of Divinity, and to the function of the spiritual Ministry: but also to be professors of moral, civil, and politic professions. Howbeit, they make the chiefest and highest degree in these orders of Schools, and most annexed to the Ministry and government of the Church, to be the expositors of God's word, which we call Doctors or professors of Divinity. And belike, these our Learned discoursers miss-understanding these words, make them the chiefest and highest office in the Church's government. All these differences are in substance and matter: not in method only. But our Learned Discoursers here, do not only in these material things differ from the English congregation in Geneva, and from the Scottish: but from themselves also. For, if the office of teaching be the chief and principal office that is in the Church: how then is this true that followeth here? Doctor's office. The Ministry is divided into 2. functions: they, that exercise the first, are called Pastors: the other are called Doctors or Teachers. Should they not rather have said, they that exercise the first, are called Doctors or Teachers; and the other Pastors? Except we shall have another quirk● found out between these words, office and function, or between these words, first, chief and principal. For, if ye will say, ye mean by the word (first,) the first place, & not the dignity: ye neither give the Pastor the first place: and ye call the Teacher's office, to whom ye give the first place, the chief and principal office that is in the Church. But what? Do ye mean the Doctor shall overrule all the residue? No, God wots. For when it comes to the government in Ecclesiastical matters, except it be for an Ergo in the Schools, I am afraid, Master Doctor were as good come last, as first: or left clean out, or, but permitted in time and place, (as the Geneva & Scottish form do say) for any great government that shallbe allowed him. But let him shift for his share of government as he can, he is in place already, and admitted first: and now let us hear, what shallbe his office. The learned Dis. Pag. 15. The office of a Doctor is to teach, as the very name doth declare: but yet every Teacher is not meant thereby, for it appertaineth to Pastors also to teach: yet this later is distinct from the former. The office of a Doctor Sith, the office of a Doctor is to teach, (as the very name doth declare:) I marvel, that not long ago, the very name of Doctor was so hissed out both of the Schools, Bridges. and of the Church, by some of these our chiefest reformers, The name of Doctor. that it could not be named, but in disdain & reproach. And now, the very name of Doctor is not only admitted, but thus advanced, that it is named the first, the chief, and principal office in the Church. Thanks be to God, they see now more into the matter: at least, the name hath gotten greater credit. Belike, some of these Learned discoursers, or some of their favourites, are either Doctors: or could be now content to be named, Master Doctor. And (by the grace of God) as this title of Doctors is now so plausitly admitted, not only into the Schools, but into the Church: so (I hope) we shall wax more temperate and wise also, in accepting of other reverent names and titles of the Ministers, offices, and dignities, of the Church: then so odiously and contemptuously, to exclaim upon them, by that time we shall have more advisedly considered of them. But yet (say they) every teacher is not meant hereby, for it appertaineth also to Pastors to teach. Ye say well, and so it may appertain to Deacons to. Example Stephen Act. 6. and Philip, Act. 8. etc. Yet this later is distinct from the former. What mean ye by this? is the Pastor's office now again the later, that in your former words was so late, the former? Where you said but half a dozen lines before: the first are called Pastors, the other are called doctors or teachers. What a Teaching call ye this? that what is later, or what is former, The office of Teaching. neither you can teach us, nor we can learn a certainty, by this teaching. But former or later, how is it distinct? For if the Pastor not only may teach, but also it appertaineth to Pastors to Teach, and so it is a part of their office; yea, and as the form of the English Congregation in Geneva saith, The Pastors or Ministers chief office, standeth in preaching the word of God, and ministering the Sacraments: how then are these offices distinct. (& that in Teaching,) one from another? Pastors & Doctors not distinguished in teaching. Especially sith that these Learned discoursers say withal, that the office of a Doctor, is to teach, as the very name doth declare. But, it pertaineth to Pastors also to Teach: therefore it appertaineth to Pastors, to be Doctors, & that by their office: Where-upon it followeth, that these offices in the Pastors and Doctors, are not such distinct offices (as is pretended,) yea, their own repugnant confessions do confute it, But they, not so careful to avoid these contradictions, as careful to follow their purpose: proceed, and say. Almighty God being careful, The learned Dis. Pag. 15. & 16. that true doctrine should continue in his Church from time to time most wisely provided, that certain men should be appointed in every Congregation, (whom he hath endued with gifts meet for the same purpose) which should employ themselves either wholly or principally, to the study of holy scriptures: thereby to learn, to avouch the principles of true Religion, and to repress & beat down all false and strange opinions, of which, Satan never ceaseth, to sow the seeds, but chiefly where this office is not set up and maintained according to God's ordinance. Most true it is, that Almighty God is careful, Bridges. that true doctrine should continue in his Church. And so, (he be praised for it) it hath done: Doctors not necessary in every Congregation. spite of all the enemies practices to corrupt it. And his provision also (we acknowledge) is most wife. But, that he hath provided, that from time to time, certain men should be appointed in every Congregation, whom he hath endued with gifts etc. as a distinct office from the office of the Pastors of the Church: this is confidently avouched, but no so carefully considered, or as yet proved at all, of these so Learned discoursers. The English Congregation in Geneva, more carefully considering of this matter: durst not go so far, but only said, it was a kind of Ministry very profitable, where time and place doth permit. For, otherwise they saw that Christ left no such necessary and ordinary officer, appointed for every congregation, nor they saw any such practice of it from time to time in every congregation. But understanding the office not so precisely neither, (as these Discoursers do): they saw it had been in some times, and in some Congregations, but not in all, and every time and congregation. Yea, they plainly confess, of their own time and congregation, that they neither had, nor could well have it, saying: But, for lack of opportunity in this our dispersion & exile, we cannot well have the use thereof. So that, (all things considered) it is almost unpossible (I speak as to man) so to have it: nor there is any absolute necessity of it at all. Beza therefore making a difference between Pastors and Doctors: saith, Pastors are those, that govern the Church: Doctors are those, that govern the Schools. And yet see, how these our Learned discoursers make so clear a matter of it, how, carefully and most wisely god hath appointed: yea, and provided, that from time to time, & in every congregation, such Doctor's distinct from Pastors should be: and the continuance of true doctrine and Religion depends upon it, etc. But their very own words do still (and best) confute their own selves. For, speaking of false and strange opinions, of which Satan never ceaseth to sow the seeds, chief where this office is not set up, and maintained: it clearly appeareth by these words, that they themselves do grant, that in every congregation, & that from time to time, such Doctor's distinct from Pastors have not been set up, nor maintained. And yet had God his Church and many congregations, and the careful wisdom and providence of God, and his true doctrine & Religion still continued, for all Satan's seeds sown of false and strange opinions. The learned Dis. Pag. 16. These men must not content themselves with contemplative knowledged but, as by the grace of God they excel other men in understanding: so they must diligently instruct other men in the same learning, and openly confute all false doctrine and heresy: & especially they ought to take pain in the instruction of such men, as may be made meet to serve in the Church: as Pastors, and to succeed in their place, as Doctors. All this in the Schools, or in any place else convenient, that professors of Divinity, Bridges. Teachers, Readers, or expositors may be maintained, were ● very good thing. The Doctor's office. Our brothers positions of the Doctor But to tie every congregation, and that from time to time thereunto: and to make thereof a distinct office several from the office of Pastors: and to limit these Doctors only to teach & confute, and not to exhort, and dissuade, and to say, they must instruct other men, in the same learning, & yet, that especially they ought to take pain in the instruction of such men, as may be made meet to serve in the Church as Pastors: where as these our brethren discoursers, make the principal part of a Pastor's office, to exhort and rebuke, not to instruct and confute: how they can prove all these things to be true, and the last of them to hang together with itself: I refer it to their better advice, and mor● Learned discourse, and proves thereof. Their institution is set forth, 1 Cor. 12.28. also Eph. 4.11. In the former place the Apostle teacheth, The learned Dis. that they are the ordinance of God: saith he, GOD hath ordained in the Church, first Apostles, secondly Prophet's, thirdly Doctors or Teachers. In the later place he testifieth, that our Saviour Christ ascended on high, led captivity captive, and hath given gifts unto men: amongst which gifts, he accounteth the function of Teachers. Pag. 16. and 17. Who should then refuse to embrace the ordinance of God? Who should deprive us of the free gift of Christ? Ephes. 4.11. Your argument is this: The ordinance of God, & free-gift of Christ is such, as none should refuse to embrace it, or deprive us thereof: The institution of Doctors. The office of Doctors or Teachers distinct from Pastors, is the ordinance of God, and the free gift of Christ: Ergo: None should refuse it, or deprive us of the office of Doctors, or Teachers distinct from Pastors. Your Mai●r you let alone, as so clear and invincible, that nothing can be said thereto. Your Minor you confirm by. 2 places out of S. Paul, 1. Cor. 12.28. Eph. 4.11. And ●●rst, because you would carry your Mayor so clear away, without touch of breast: Let us see, how the very proof of your Minor beats it: if we should go no further. True it is, in your former proof, 1. Cor. 12. that it is the ordinance of God; and that there he reckoneth up, thirdly Teachers: but if this be named there the third, than belike there were two reckoned up before. Neither doth the text stay at the third, of Teachers; but proceedeth, saying: Then them that do miracles: after that the gifts of healing, helpers, governors, diversities of tongue's. And even so likewise for your other proof, Ephes. 4. that the function of Teachers, i● among the gifts of Christ: he reckoneth up there also, three other before it: yea, four, by your reckoning of them, if a Teacher be distinguished from a Pastor. Now then, if the Mayor of this argument may go so scotfree, what aileth this argument on the same. The Ordinance of God, and free gift of Christ is such, that none should refuse to embrace it, or deprive us thereof. But, Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, they that do miracles, the gifts of healing, helpers, Governors, diversities of tongues, are the ordinance of God, and the free gifts of Christ: Ergo: None should refuse to embrace Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, them that do miracles, etc. or deprive us of them, My Minor I prove out of these two testimonies, 1. Cor. 12.28. and Eph. 4.11. Nay, soft, (will you peradventure say) stay your proves of your Minor, till ye have proved your Mayor. For, except ye distinguish what manner ord●naunce of God, and what manner free-giftes of Christ they be: your Mayor cannot be so roundly yielded unto. No can? (say I,) are they not all the ordinances of God, and free gifts of Christ. Who then should refuse to embrace them, or deprive us of them? N●y, be not so hasty (perhaps will you say) for, we refuse not to embra●e them in their kinds, nor we deprive any of them, but allow them, as ordinances and free gifts of God: D●fference in the ordinances of God & free gifts of Christ, some perpetual some temporal. but not ordinances or gifts all alike. For, (say you) of these offices, some were temporal, serving only for the first planting and foundation of the Church among the Heathen: some are perpetual, pertaining to the nourishing and building up of the Church for ever. Is it even so? I pray you then (my Masters) turn the glass, and look here uponyour own argument. Yea, (but will you say) we speak here of that ordinance and gift that is perpetual. Do ye so? Look on your words better once again, and also on the proves of your Minor. Do ye find there any such distinction, either specified or inferred, of these two Testimonies? What though it be not: (will you say) will you deny that the ordinance and gift of Teaching is perpetual? No I deny it not, in that sense the Apostle speaks it. Nowbeit, as you would distinguish it, from Pastors, and make it a several office, and in that sort make it as perpetual as Pastor is: I may well deny it, nor you do prove or ever are able for to prove it. But the thing that in your Mayor▪ I now deny; is, that every ordinance of God, & free gift of Christ, is so perpetual, that none may now refuse it or be deprived of it. And yet properly we may well say, it is no refusal, to embrace the ordinance of god nor deprivation of the free gift of Christ, on our parts: when Christ himself refuseth to continue the ordinances and gifts in his Church, then are we no longer to urge them, or to look for them. To the Minor, that the office of Doctors or Teachers (distinct from Pastors, in such fort as is here prescribed) is the ordinance of GOD, or free gift, or any gift of Christ at all: till ye can better prove it out of these 2. places: I deny it. For these places do rather infer, that the ordinance, gift, or office of a Teacher, is not so precisely distinct from a Pastor. The ancient fathers and late writers interpretation of 1. C●r. 12. for Doctors & Pastors. Chrysost in 1 Corinth 12. The former place, 1. Cor, 12.28. not omitting the ordinances gifts & offices transitory, and coming to those that are perpetual, mentioning Teachers: (Since Pastors are Teachers also by your own teaching) doth rather infer by Teachers, Pastors: then clean omit them. And so do many both ancient and late interpreters, expound the word, Doctor, or Teacher in that place. chrysostom. Tertió Doctores: Nam qui etc. For he that fortelleth things to come; foretelleth them all by the spirit suggesting them. As for the Teacher, it often falleth out, when as his reason is of his own making. Whereupon also ●e saith in an other place, the Elders that govern well, should be honoured with double honour, especially they that labour in the administration of the word & of doctrine. Pag. 21. etc., Which sentence of S. Paul to Timothy these our Learned discoursers apply unto their Pastors. To whom accordeth Theodoret. Tertio Doctores: Nam i● quoque, etc. For they also being inspired with Divine grace, did both allege doctrine out of the divine sentences, Theodoretus in 1. Cor. 12. and also they brought forth the moral Exhortation: which these Discoursers here forbidden them, as appertaining unto the Pastor's office. Hieroms opinion of the word Doctor, or Teacher in the said place, as it is in his common places cited by Musculus▪ so the same Wolfgangus Musculus on 1. Cor. 12. saith: Non recenset Accurate. etc. He doth not exquisitely reckon up all the offices of the Ministers of Christ. For, Eph. 4, he placeth evang & Pastors after Prophets, Musculus in 1. Cor. 12. and then placeth Teachers. And it appeareth that Teachers are the same whom there he calleth Pastors. The word is apparent, that we should understand them to be Teachers, who Teach in the church. This was the office of Bishops and Presbyters, who also by a Metaphorical word, were called Pastors. Whom, the Apostles placed over the Churches that they had planted. And notwithstanding Act, 20. Paul here by the spirit of God saith, that they were placed to this end, that they should feed the Church of God. Which cannot be understood but of the Doctrine of the word. And in his common places on the title de Ministris Verbi, Musculus in Loc. come. de minist. verbii. he saith also: Pastors and Teachers are all one or the same, who also are called Presbyters and Bishops. These are assigned to feed and teach certain Churches. But by a Metaphorical speech they are called Pastors of feeding, that is to say, of Teaching. Where-upon they are also called, Teachers, (or Doctors.) But they are called Presbyters, (or Priests,) because they are Elders to other both in age and wisdom. (For, that word signifieth Elders or Seniors.) But they are called Bishops, for because that a care is committed unto them, over the people of God. But as for this, that Pastors and Teachers are all one, even as to feed and to teach, is all one thing: I suppose it is a manifest matter. The which also Jerome noteth upon that, that the Apostle saith, not some Pastors, and some Teachers, calvinus i● 1. Cor. 1●. but jointly Some Pastors and Teachers, etc. Yea, calvin himself upon this place 1. Cor. 12 saith. Between them (spèaking of the Prophets) and the Doctors or Teachers, this difference may be noted. That the office of Teachers consisteth in that, that sound opinions may be retained and continued, whereby the purity of Religion may remain in the Church. Nevertheless, this name also (Doctor or Prophet) is taken diverse ways, And here peradventure it rather signifieth a Pastor. Except perhaps, ye had rather take it generally, fo● all that are furnished with ability of Teaching. As Ac●s 18.1. where also Luke joineth them unto Prophets. Thus we see how this place by the testimony of all these, and many more learned, ancient, and late fathers; inferreth not, that this ordinance of God, or gift of Christ, or office of Doctor or Teacher, is always distinct and several office from the office of Pastors, as these our Learned discoursers so peremptorily affirm: but rather that sometimes, either they may be taken all for one ordinance, office, gift, or function: or at leastwise, though diverse in some respects; yet compatible, and coincident in one and the selfsame person. Hieroni. in Ephes. 4. As Jerome noteth on this later testimony Eph. 4. Nec Veró putandum, etc. Neither must we think, that as in the other three he said, some to be Apostles, some to be Prophets, some to be Evangelists: so also in Pastors and Masters (for so Jerome interpreteth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) he should have made them diverse officers. For he saith not, and some Pastors and some Masters: but some Pastors and Masters: that he which is a Pastor, ought also to be a Ma●ster. Neither in the Churches, although he were a saint, should he take on him the name of a Pastor, except he can teach those whom he feedeth, or verily otherwise, that one and the same prelate of the Church be Pastor and Doctor. And albeit calvin himself on Ephes. 4. dissalloweth there, in some part the foresaid father's interpretation of the word Teacher: yet is he not so peremptory. By Doctors and Pastors (saith he) some do think one office to be therefore assigned, because this disjunctive particle, is not so set as in the former, that it discerneth the one from the other. In which opinion was chrysostom and Augustine: for those things that are red in the commentaries of Ambrose, are too childish and unworthy of Ambrose. And verily in part, I do subscribe unto them, that Paul speaketh of Pastors & Teachers indifferently, or as mixed together, as though it were one and the self same order. Neither do I deny that the name of Doctor or Teacher, doth agree in a certain sort to all Pastors. Notwithstanding, still this reason moves me, not to confound them two, which I see differ between themselves. For, although it be the office of all Pastors to teach: notwithstanding there is a peculiar gift of interpreting the Scripture, that the sowndnesse of opinions may be retained, and some man may be a Teacher, that is not fit for preaching. They therefore (in my judgement) are Pastors, to whom the care of a certain flock is committed, unto whom the name of Doctors or Teachers to be given, misliketh me not. So that, in the mean while, we know, that there is another kind of Doctor or Teacher, who hath the government aswell to inform the pastors, as to instruct the whole Church. Not, but that now and then, the Pastor may be the selfsame which is the Doctor, but because the faculties are diverse. To conclude, Bullinger saith on this place. Eph. 4. Bullingerus in Eph●s. There is none that may not see, that these words are confounded together, and one taken for another. For as an Apostle, is also a Prophet, a Doctor, or Teacher: an Evangelist, a Presbyter or Priest, and a Bishop: and a Bishop is an Evangelist, and a Prophet: a Doctor or Teacher is a Presbyter or Priest and Evangelist. So that on these words thus confusedly here taken: what argument of necessary distinction of offices, especially between pastor or Teacher, can be inferred? & yet see how these Learned discoursers urge the perpetual necessity of these offices, not only to be distinct in faculty: but to be severed in several persons, and to be so continued in every congregation. And now (as they imagine) having proved out of these a places, the institution and ordinance of their Doctors: they proceed unto their office. The office of Doctors is briefly expressed in Rom. 12.7. Let him that is a Teacher, attend upon teaching, The learned Dis. Pag. 17. where also it is distinguished from other offices, and namely from the office of Pastors. For it followeth immediately, Let him that exhorteth (which is a principal part of a Pastor's office, not necessarily required in a Teacher) be diligent in his exhortation. Rom. 12.7. For the office of Doctors is only to teach true doctrine, R●m. 12.8. and to confute all heresies & false opinions, by the word of God, concerning all articles & principles of Christian Religion, without applying their teaching to any particular state of time, of persons, or places. This place (as ye say) is briefly indeed expressed, and brieflier than you do set it down: not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or he that is a Teacher. But, Bridges. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Or, he that teacheth in doctrine. Which brevity seemeth rather to infer some distinct part or action of an officers gifts or duties: The action of teaching distinguished from exhorting, inferreth no necessity of▪ distinct offices in Teacher & Exhort●r. them to express a distinguished office of a distinct officer. So that, of this action there noted by the Apost. cannot be concluded by any necessary consequent to be any distinct office of a Doctor, and much less that it is distinguished from other offices, and namely from the office of Pastors. For, how can it be namely distinguished, that is not there namely expressed? If ye say, what though the Apost. name it not? no more he doth all these words, Let him that is a Teacher attend upon his teaching: but only saith: Or he that teacheth in doctrine: nor, let him that exhorteth be diligent in his exhortation: but only this in brief, or he that exhorteth, in exhortation: & yet, though these words be not named, they are intended: or, at least, they are not contrary to the meaning of the Text. What is this to the purpose? Doth that warrant you, not only to Paraphrast thus largely on the Text, in a distinguished letter, where no such words are, & perhaps, no such meaning: but so expressly to avouch of the Doctor's office, that in this place, it is distinguished from other offices, & namely from the office of Pastors: no such distinction, or officers names, either exhorters or teachers, being there so much as named? If ye say, although, neither these words, Let him attend, nor let him be diligent, be named in the text: but either they, or some like words understood: yet are these words named there, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: or he that exhorteth, in exhortation, & they follow immediately upon the other words. They do so, But how chance ye interpret it not? Let him that is an Exhorter, etc. mought ye not aswell have said so, as to say, Let him that is a Teacher? & yet, he that Exhorteth, is an Exhorter, in respect of the action of exhortation: & so is he that teacheth, (I grant) a Teacher, in the action wherein he teacheth. Yet, as the action of exhorting giveth not to the exhorter a proper & ordinary denomination, as by a distinguished office to be called an exhorter, more than of his rebuking, a rebuker; of his admonishing, an admonisher; of his applying, an applyer: of his comforting, a comforter: & of his persuading, or dissuading; a persuader, or disswader. By all which terms, he may be well called, in respect of the parts and actions of his office: so, no more doth it follow, that he that teacheth, true doctrine, should be named a Teacher, as by a peculiar office distinguished from an exhorter, more than he that confuteth false doctrine should be called by a distinguished office, a Confuter. And yet, he is a confuter, in that action, no less, if not more, distinguished from teaching true doctrine, than exhorting to embrace true Doctrine or godly life, is distinguished from Teaching junius translation And although junius do translate the Syriake thus, Et est qui Doctor est in doctrina sua, & est qui Exhortator est in exhortatione sua: And he that is a Doctor is in his doctrine, & he that is an Exhorter, is in his exhortation. At which translation, I do some what muse: yet, doth not junius so exactly separate these, as distinguished offices: but expounds these words thus: He that hath a singular aptness and dexterity in executing these gifts. Notwithstanding, neither he nor you, can infer thereupon, that he that teacheth is always a distinguished officer from an exhorter: any more, than he that exhorteth, The signification of the word Pastor. is always a distinguished officer from a Teacher. And least of all, can ye rightly conclude heeron, that a Teacher is distinguished from the other offices; and namely from the office of Pastors. For, what is a Pastor, but a feeder? and what is more, his feeding, than his teaching? Save that, (as Musculus noted well before) Pastor is a Metaphorical and unproper term: and the proper term is Doctor, or Teacher, But (say you) exhorting is a principal part of a Pastor's office, not necessarily required in a Teacher. That exhorting is a principal part of a Pastor's office: I assent: albeit the principal part is that, whereof he hath his name, Pastor: & that principally is teaching, though the Greek name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 betoken also a Governor. But now, if exhortation be a principal part of a Pastor's office, them is it but a part, though a principal part, and not a whole several and distinguished office by itself. And if exhorting be but a part: why may not Teaching be another part also: and not a full, several, and distinguished office by itself, as exhorting is? Yea, if we shall go thus precisele to work, with all the gifts that the Apostle here setteth down, The late writers on Doct. exhorting. and of every of them make distinguished offices, and several officers.: we should not only rack and hale S. Paul's both meaning and words, clean from his purpose: but bring in more offices and officers, than these our Learned discoursers would erect: and make them still speak one contrary to another, about these offices. Doth the Note héereon in the English Geneva Testament, make such distinguished offices, of all here mentioned? Doth it not say, by prophesying here he meaneth preaching and teaching? and yet ye see, the Apostle setteth them down distinctly. First, Prophecy: then office, Deconship (or) Ministry: then teaching: then exhorting: then distributing: then ruling: and then showing mercy. And saith the Geneva Note, by office or ministry, all such offices as appertain to the Church, as Elders, Deacons, etc. And yet is every one of these, by the Apostle set down distinctly by itself, distinguished from that which he called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, office Ministry, or Deaconship. Yea, where he speaketh here first of prophesying, saying: Whether in Prophesying according to the proportion of Faith: the Geneva Note saith: By faith, he meaneth the knowledge of God in Christ, with the gifts of the holy Ghost And yet, S. Paul 1. Cor. 12. saith: To one is given by the spirit, the word of wisdom, to another the word of knowledge by the same spirit: to another is given faith, by the same spirit. As therefore it cannot necessarily be inferred, that, because they were all several and distinguished gifts of the spirit of God, they were several and distinguished offices, and so to continue perpetually several & distinguished offices in the Church, the gifts of wisdom, knowledge, faith, &c: Wisdom, knowledge, faith, languages interpretation, etc. were distinct gifts: but not distinct offices in distinct people The judgement of the late writers concerning the office of Doctors. No more can we necessarily infer it of these two gifts, Teaching and exhorting, that they must needs be in the Church, several & distinguished offices. And as we have seen the judgement of the ancient fathers: so it shall not be amiss, to consider withal, the judgement of the most famous late writers for this point. The Historiographers of Magdeburge, Magdeburg. Centur. 1. li. 2. cap. 7. pag. 509. lin. 12. noting the Primitive Church's order, for the use of these offices in the Apostles times to say: Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors, and Doctors, did not make certain degrees of persons in the Ecclesiastical regiment: but either they seem to be numbered among the Apostles and their fellows, or among the Presbyters, or the Deacons. With what moderation Calvine distinguisheth the gift of teaching & of exhorting into 2. offices: we have somewhat already heard. calvinus in Rom. 12. He that is ordained a Minister (saith he) let him exercise his gift in ministering. Neither let him think, that he was taken into the degree for himself, but for others. As though he should say: let him fulfil his office, by ministering truly, Doctors that he may answer to his title, even as straightways unto Doctors, he commendeth under the name of doctrine, whole (or sound) edification, in this sense: he that excelleth in doctrine, Let him know the end thereof is, that the Church may be instructed truly, and let him meditate that only: A Doctor is not debarred from exhorting. that he may make the Church more learned by his doctrine. For, he is a Doctor that formeth and bringeth up the Church in the word of truth. He that excelleth in the power of exhorting, let him look to this end, that he exhort effectually. But these offices have a great affinity, and also a knitting together between themselves, albeit they leave, not be diverse. No man indeed can exhort, but with doctrine: nevertheless, he that teacheth, is not strait ways endued with the gift of exhorting. Now, no man either teacheth or exhorteth, but, he ministereth. But as we see also and acknowledge in God's gifts: it is enough to be fit for the order Ecclesiastical. Thus modestly doth calvin mitigate the matter, even where he maketh them diverse offices. Not, that he which teacheth, can not, nor may exhort (as our brethren here peremptorily permit him not) but that strait ways he is not endued with the gift of exhorting. As who say, in time he may be, and many are, and it is enough, if he be fit for the Eccl▪ order of the ministery. Peter Martyr saith on these words, Petr. Mart. in Rom. 12. He that teacheth, in teaching: The Apostles gave a most fair example of this precept, when they said, It is not meet that we should leave the word of God, and minister at the Tables. For, sith they were instituted of the Lord to teach the world, their will was to be done in doctrine. Now, if this be the fairest example of this precept of Paul concerning teaching: Did not the Apostles always intermingle exhortation with their doctrine? But, let Peter Martyr proceed on these words, He that exhorteth in exhorting. These two are of very near affinity between themselves, to teach and to exhort, and sometimes both of them are granted to one man. Notwithstanding now and then, and for a great part they are divided. For, ye may see some, that can teach aptly, and clearly set forth most cunning matters, and expound hid things manifestly: and yet for all that, even the same men are marvelous cold in exhortations. Some there are whose dexterity and forcibleness is wonderful in exhortations, who notwithstanding to teach, are of all other most unfit. Out of the words of the Apostle to the Corinthians a little before alleged, we see, how the gifts of Prophecy are distinct We have in the first place, He speaketh edification, which appertaineth▪ to doctrine: Secondly, exhortation, whereby men are stirred to do good and to shun evil. In the 3. place is added Consolation. For it often cometh to pass, that some are broken with adversity: who thereupon may seem, either that they will despair, Doctor's exhorting or that they will fall away from the truth. Wherefore it is necessary, that they be helped with consolation. this part Paul here doth not prosecute: I suppose, because he comprehendeth it under exhortation. But how much, doctrines and public exhortations were in use accustomed in the Church in the ancient time, may be gathered of that chapter to the Cor. 14. Yea, Example● of the Doctors teaching with consolation these were never left off: no, not in the Synagogues of the jews, so often as the sacred assembly was. Which may be proved of that, that when Christ sat among them in the Synagogue, a book was sent to him, to expound somewhat to the people. And when Paul and Barnabas came to Antiochia of Pisidia, as is contained in the 13. chapter of the Acts, and when they came to the Synagogue with other jews, the ruler of the Synagogue said unto them: If ye have the word of consolation for the people, say on. Whereby it is apparent, that consolation being contained under exhortation: and by these examples of the Doctors and the Teachers, thus intermingling consolation with their doctrine and teaching: that although in some, excelling in one of these gifts, and not in both, yet the ordinary use was, aswell to join exhortation unto doctrine, as doctrine unto exhortation. And this doth Gualther set out yet more plain. In the 3. place (saith he) he setteth Doctors. Gualterus 〈◊〉 Rom. 12. These he willeth to be diligent and industrious in teaching: to wit, that they should instruct the people committed to their trust, diligently: and edify all in true faith and godliness, etc. To conclude, let them apply every thing unto their hearers, that they may perceive these things to be spoken unto them, and to appertain unto them. And so shall they be true Doctors, and cut the word of God aright: when they shall remember, that there is no less need of prudence, then of faith, if they will perform these things. In which words he maketh not only the doctrine of true faith, but godliness, prudence, and application to the hearers, to be necessary points: and no less needful than the other, appertaining to the office of the Doctors. In the fourth place (saith he) he setteth exhortation under doctrine. For, although these 2. may seem to be joined together, most nearly between themselves: yet are they diverse gifts. Neither is he always furnished with both of them, that hath the one of them. For, such there are, that have an excellent perspicuity and facility of Teaching, and when they come to Exhortation, those men arevery cold: especially if they light upon such as are stubborn, and such as will answer them again: and upon great personages, and on such as are advanced with public authority. Again, ye shall see others, who; when they can do less in teaching, if at any time they must dispute of darker matters: and yet are they most vehement in exhorting, and with a certain marvelous weight of arguments, do pierce even the most obstinate minds. But howsoever things are, we ought always to remember, that in the Church of God there is need not only of mere doctrine, but also of exhortations, and that for the disposition of the froward flesh, which often is wont to look back: yea, and to stay in those things, which it knoweth to be holy and wholesome. For, there is such negligence of men (saith Hemingius) yea even in the business of their own salvation: Hemingius in Rom. 12. that except they be prodded with the goads of exhortations and chydings: the doctrine remaineth uneffectual. Let therefore the P●eachers of the word in this place be admonished, that not only they should think it is their office, to teach those things that are right: but also to apply the doctrine to the hearers. Which thing is done, when as according to the example of Christ, of the Prophets, and of the Apostles, those things which they have taught, they do (as it were) instill them by exhorting, & stir up diverse motions of affections. Let him teach in doctrine, exhort in exhortation (saith Bullinger) that is to say: Bullingerus in Rom. 12. let him so teach and exhort, as godliness persuadeth, and becometh the Christian doctrine to be. Of the which also the Apostle Peter saith. If any man speak, let him speak as the words of God. In which words he maketh both these actions of teaching and exhorting, to belong to one person. Of which words also, He that teacheth in doctrine (Olevian saith:) It is said Act. 2. that the people persevered in the doctrine of the Apostles. Olevianus in Rom. 12. And what especial doctrine the Apostles urged, that Sermon of Peter, Act. 2. teacheth, to wit, that Christ died, and was raised again. And now let us show the contrary example out of the 7. of the Act. how they reprehended false doctrine. But in either of these examples, both Peter an● Stephen are full of exhortation, and application, and use not only bare teaching of true doctrine, and confuting of false doctrine. He that exhorteth, in exhorting, etc. Before he spoke of those that set their study on doctrine, as the professors in the School, and certain Doctors also in the Church: now, of those that have the office of exhorting. Sometimes, these offices are distinguished; sometimes, both of them are borne of one and the selfsame person. Thus do all these late and excellent learned writers agree, in the exposition of these words, that these gifts (or if you will so call them, offices or duties) though they be distinguished: yet not so, but that they d●● either and both of them, and well may oftentimes concur in one officer, Doct. Exhorting. whether ye call him Doctor or Pastor. But it seemeth these our Br the Learned Dis rely more on Bezaes' interpretation of this place, then upon all these. Let us therefore see also, what is Beza his judgement hereupon. When the Apostle (saith he) had generally admonished, that every one should consecrate himself to God; Beza in Rom. 12. he worthily placeth after the same, those things, that appertain to the difference of vocations, that every man should contain himself, within the compass of his own lot. Which thing now he expoundeth by the parts. And first he remembreth the Ec. functions: which he divideth into 2. sorts (or kinds) which they call subalternal, that is to say, into prophecy, & into Deaconship or ministery: to wit by the name of prophecy, comprehending those things that pertain to the gift of teaching: But by the name of Deaconship or ministery, those Eccl. gifts which the Apostles renounced. Act. 6. a. 2.3. & 4. But now because in the gift of teaching, there is not one function, but there are diverse degrees; neither in one and the same function the measure of the spirit is alike even: therefore the Apostle admonisheth the Prophets, that they should prophecy according to the proportion of the faith. That is, that every man keep the measure of his revelation: lest one should seem to himself to know all. Which thing if it had been kept in the Church, it had never fallen in those dangers, from the which, when now scarcely it hath begun to wade out, we must still take very great heed, lest it fall not again therein: except that be done which the Apostle admonished, 1. Cor. 14 f. 30.32. & 33. Otherwise, the name of prophecy is taken in a straight signification, as Ephes. 4. b. 11. & 1. Cor. 12. d. 28. And Deaconship or ministery in a larger. So that it comprehendeth all Ecclesiastical gifts. Yea also, the Apostolical fun-action: To wit, because that publicly andprivately we must all minister unto God, as is abovesaid. Cap. 11. b. 13. Acts. 6. a 4. & 12. d. 25. In ministering, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Erasmusin administration. Which interpretation though I refuse not: yet I put it back. For, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the former place, signifieth the gift itself: and in the later the very function of the gift. Which distinction the old Interpreter, by the gerundive mood, me thinks did better express, then, he that teacheth: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Or as the vulgar translation and Erasmus; or he that teacheth. But in that Paul altered the kind of his speaking: I see, it wrong diverse, who yet seem not to have known the cause of that matter. For these things are wont (of the the most part of the Interpreters) to be so expounded, as though the Apostle reckoned 5. divers kinds of Eccl. functions. Which, I suppose not, neither doubt I, but that they will assent unto me, whosoever shall more attentively consider this place. I therefore think, that Paul first of all (as I have before said) revoketh the Eccl. functions that are perpetual (for the other that are temporary, he worthily omitteth) unto 2. kinds, after the example of the Apost. Act. 6. a 2.3.4. (as a little before we have said) that is to wit, to prophecy, & to Deaconship (or ministery.) which distribution also, our Apostle followeth. 1 Tim. 3. making mention only of Bishops & Deacons. Afterwards, to divide every of those 2. kinds, into 2. sorts: that is to wit, Prophets into Pastors & Doctors: but Deacons, into those that distribute alms, into Governors, and them which served to care for the poor of the Church, who for the most part were widows, of whom is treated severally 1. Tim. 5. b 9 and that this distinction might be better understood (my opinion is) the Apostle changed his kind of speech. In teaching, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the vulgar and Eras. in doctrine. Which interpretation (as doubtful) I refuse. For, to the Latins, (for the most part) it declareth the thing itself, the which is taught. Whereas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, signifieth the gift itself of teaching. But the Apostle calleth him Doctor, who studieth the only interpretation of the Scripture, in the Church, that the pure & sincere doctrine may be retained. As the most learned interpreter in the Institution of Christian religion, (he meaneth calvin) most truly taught, etc. But he calleth him an Exhorter, which otherwhere is called a Pastor, as 1. Cor. 12. d 28. and Ephes. 4. c 11. And now & then also, a Prophet. as 1. Cor. 4. f 31. that is to say, him that joineth doctrine, with admonitions & exhortations: yea, and that with the administration of the Sacraments. This is Bezaes' interpretation on this place. Whom, howsoever in the L. for my part (as I trust all other godly do) I honour as an holy, learned, & reverend Doctor himself, & with admiration praise God, for his great and manifold gifts in him, to the edification of his Church: notwithstanding if it be lawful for Beza so freely herein to dissent from all the holy, learned, Dissent from Beza. and ancient Fathers, and from all these already named (as ye see) & from many other such excellent interpreters, and Doctors of our own age, (the proportion of faith, and bond of charity always reserved:) may it not be as lawful for another, upon the more attentive consideration of this place, (which himself here requireth) finding his reasons not to be of sufficient weight, against all these old and new writers, to dissent herein likewise from him. For what sufficient proof is here alleged, that S. Paul here only speaketh of perpetual Eccl. offices, & those to be always distinguished by diversities of persons? What sufficient proof of this general division and subdivision? That first Paul divideth all generally into two subalternal kinds: Prophecy, and ministery or Deaconship: (although therein some of these late writers agree with him) and then, that prophecy must be taken larger here, than it is 1. Cor. ●2. and Ephes. 4. where he likewise speaketh, of diversities of gifts & offices in the Church, so well as here he doth. Why may it not be taken there as large as here? Or rather here as strict as there? And what sufficient proof is here alleged, that prophecy is here to be subdivided into these 2: Doctors & Prophets? Or that ministers or Deacons are again subdivided, into other 2. sorts: to wit, into those that distribute alms: into Governors: and those that serve the Church in caring for the poor, such as for the most part were the widows? And why are these called the ministery, more than the other, that minister the word and Sacraments, and so are more properly to be called Ministers? And if we call them Deacons, how are Governors called Deacons, so well as the distributers of the alms, to whom that name more properly was attributed? Or if the name must be distributed into these two: whence riseth this third, or out of which doth it result? And why is it rather put with Governors, than with distributers of alms, being called showers of mercy: and the name of alms, derived rather of mercy, than of Governors? And if these Governors be the signory so much contended for: why are the Deacons distributers, placed before the Deacons governors? And what sufficient proof is here alleged, that these prophetical Doctors must only be interpreters of the Scripture? He appealeth to Caluines Institutions. But I appeal to the Scripture itself. Doth not S. Paul manifestly 1. Cor. 12.29.30. distinguish between Doctors and Interpreters? Are all Apostles? are all Prophets? are all Doctors? are all powers? Have all the gift of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? And also if Doctors be Prophets (in the large sense of Prophet) so well as Pastors: doth not S. Paul even in that sense of Prophet, distinguish between Interpreters and Prophets? 1. Cor. 14.5. He is greater that prophesieth, than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret it, that the Church may receive edification. & v. 27.28.29. And if calvin be here appealed unto, as the most Learned Interpreter, in his Christian Institution: why is he forsaken even in the very interpretation of this place? 1. Cor. 12. and yet, doth he not say in the same place, in his Institutions, where he handleth this matter? Quòd si, etc. But if we shall join Evangelists to Apostles: Cap. 8.39. there will remain unto us two pair, in a manner answerable the one to to other. For look what likeness Doctors have with the old Prophets: the same have Pastors with the Apostles. The Prophetical office was the more excellent, for the singular gift of revelation, wherein they excelled. But the Doctor's office hath almost the same reason, and altogether one end. The Doct. applied their interp●etations. But which of all the Prophets can ye reckon, that was but only a bare and mere Interpreter of the Scripture? And this better appeareth by calvin in the place which followeth that, which I cited before, upon, 1. Cor. 12.28. But why I assent not to them, that include all the office of a Prophet in the interpretation of the Scripture: this is the reason. Because Paul prescribeth the number of 2. or 3. that ought to speak, and that in order. Which would not agree, with the bare interpretation of the scripture. To conclude, I thus think, that they may be called Prophets, who by applying the fortellings, the threats, the promises, & the whole doctrine of the scripture, rightly & cunningly unto the present use of the Church, do make open the will of God. If any man think otherwise: I easily suffer him. Neither will I raise up brawlings for that matter. For it is a difficult thing to judge of the gifts & offices, of which the Church hath so long while been destitute: save that steps only or shadows, do yet appear. Thus modestly speaketh he of these things, to whom Beza refers himself. And withal, calvin is to be noted in this, that where he thus denieth, the Prophet to be all one with Interpreter: yet he doth it not absolutely: but he doth it in this sense (that you urge) that he should only interpret, which he calleth bare interpretation: but he would have application joined thereto, and so he admitteth him for an Interpreter. Yea, he saith, if interpretation come thereto, 1. Cor. 14.5. (meaning, to the speeaking with tongues) than it is phophecie. Of which, we shall (God willing) see more afterwards. In the mean season, calvin retaineth the old interpretation of the word here, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 calling it Doctrinam, Doctrine, as also Peter Martyr doth. Albeit, Beza reproveth the vulgar, & Erasmus his interpretation, for calling it doctrine. For (saith he) doctrine betokeneth that thing itself, that is taught. Whereas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth the office of teaching. And if it do so; then, in docendo, In teaching, (which Beza followeth) is not the true interpretation, neither. For these words, in teaching, signify rather the action or exercise of teaching, than the office of teaching. And that is the point that Paul driveth all his exhortation unto. That they should exercise themselves therein. And take away this interpretation, in doctrine, that is, the thing itself, the which is taught: then what letteth, but the Doctor's office may stretch further than doctrine or teaching, even to exhorting, comforting, applying, etc. As well as the Pastors may? Yea, if Beza may say of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that in the former place, it betokeneth the gift or office itself: but in the later the function or exercise of the gift or office: which distinction (saith he) the old interpreter (me thinks) did better express, by the gerundive mood: then, why may not likewise, (for any thing here alleged) by the same reason and proportion, if not the doctrine, yet the action exercise or function in teaching, (being by Beza also translated) by the gerundive mood be so expounded, in teaching rather than expounded, the office of teaching? But, beit action, gift, function, office, or what ye will call it: if (as Beza saith) the word prophecy signify a general subalternal kind, which is divided into these 2, Doctor & Exhorter: how may not the Doctor be called as well a Prophet, as may the Exhorter? And this rule holding, Membra dividentia non debent ●onfundi, if the Exhorter may labour in doctrine, so well as exhortations and admonitions why may be not he called, and be indeed, Edification and have the office of Doctor or Teacher: so well as of Exhorter, which ye call Pastor? And then, how do not both these offices, concur in one person: he having the gift, Doctor's may be Pastors as well as Pastors DD. and exercise also of the Doctor? And so all this devise of so precisely, necessarily, and perpetually distinguishing these degrees into several officers, is clean confounded and confuted, even in their Pastor's office. And if it be so in Pastors: what reason is here alleged, why Doctors on the other side, may not be called, and be Pastors, so well as Pastor's Doctors; and deal, (besides the interpretation of the scripture) with exhortation, admonition, consolation, application, etc. so well as Pastors may with teaching and interpreting? But when all is done, both calvin & Beza standing upon their (puto:) I think so (saith calvin) and yet with such a lowly modesty, as ye have heard: and Beza, I suppose thus, or, The modesty of Calvin and Bezaes' supposal. I think not thus: and shall we now upon these 2. reverent Fathers only thinking and supposals, be pressed with plain assertions; or rather, oppressed with the necessity and enforcing these things upon us? For here these Learned discoursers come not in, (as calvin and Beza) with puto & opinor, I think it, I suppose it: But resolutely they determine the matter, saying: For the office of Doctors is only to teach true doctrine, and to confute all heresies, & false opinions, by the word of God, concerning all articles and principles of Religion, without applying their teaching to any particular state, of time, of persons, or places. This is a very precise and straight limitation, of this supposed old lost, No example of any one Doctor restrained f●om applying in all the old & new Testament and prescribed new found (or rather) upstarted Doctor. Neither, as I think & suppose, (to use Caluines and Bezaes' moderate terms herein) can they show in the old or new Testament, any such one Doctor, that was thus restrained, that he might use no application of his doctrine or interpretation, to his hearers. Doth Saint Paul speak of such interpreters? Although he distinguish Interpreter from Prophet: yet (saith calvin, upon 1. Cor. 14.29.) In disputing, the interpreter was in place of a Prophet: As I showed also before, in Caluines' comparison of Christian Doctors, to the jews Prophets. And therefore, the name of Prophet comprehending alike both Doctors and Pastors, by Bezaes' own opinion; when S. Paul declareth, 1. Cor. 14.3. the use and end of prophesying: he that prophesieth, speaketh to men to edification, exhortation and consolation: though he distinguish, ratione, (as we say) in consideration ot the diverse gift or use thereof, between these things: yet, re, he joineth them altogether in the Prophecy. Which prophecy (as he said, Rom. 12.) must be according to the Analogy or proportion of faith. Faith properly in respect of the matter it relieth upon, appertaineth unto doctrine: howbeit, not so strictly, that it goeth no further then, it is here bounded: only to teach true doctrine, and to confute all heresies & false opinions by the word of God, concerning all articles and principles of Christian Religion, without applying their teaching, to any particular state of time, of persons, or places: But as Paul saith here in plain words, to all these ends & uses, to edification, exhortation, & consolation. Whereupon (saith calvin) to speak to edification, Calui●●. is to speak that, that containeth doctrine fit to edification. For I take this for doctrine, whereby we be instructed to godliness, to faith, to the worship & fear of God, and duties of holiness & righteousness: because that oftentimes, we have need of proddes or goads: & other are pressed with afflictions, or labour through imbecility; he addeth unto doctrine, exhortation, & consolation. And hereunto accordeth Beza himself. Beza in 1. Cor. ●4. ver. 3. Aedificationem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. That is, those things that further men in the knowledge and study of godliness. On which words also saith P. Martyr. Aedificationem loquitur: hoc maxim, etc. This most pertaineth to the confirmation of the faith, to the purity of opinions & sincerity of religion. Ambrose expounding this place, said, the church to be edified, because the dissolving of questions may be had. He speaketh exhortation & consolation, because generally, we exhort men, that they be heedful to their salvation, and according to their strength strive thereunto. But consolation is, when singularly we exhort them, that they should not be broken for adversities, nor discourage their mind but have it erected & unfearful. And either of these things cometh to pass by setting before their eyes, the profit & the damage that will follow. And to declare further, that Doctors are here understood by these Prophets; Musculus saith: Musculus in ●. Cor. 14. But this sentence (I suppose) doth enough declare, of what kind of Prophet he doth speak: to wit, of him, by whom the Church is taught & instructed He saith not: he that prophesieth foretelleth things to come: for here he speaketh not of foretellings. But; he that prophesieth, speaketh to men edification, exhortation, & consolation. But this do the Doctors of the Church, who with the word of doctrine, exhortation, and consolation, do edify the people of the L: those Prophets therefore that in the Church do teach, are more to be made of: then if by a miracle they fang; or prayed with tongues. But mark the brief & clear description of this Prophetical office. He that prophesieth (saith he) speaketh to men edification, exhortation, & consolation. The parts therefore of an Eccl. Prophet are, to edify, exhort, & comfort. Edification is a Metaphorical word, set for doctrine. He that teacheth the ignorant & rude, doth edify them to the building of the Lords house. Hereunto appertain all those things that concern faith & godliness, to be planted in the hearts of the elected▪ By the which, upon the foundation (that is Christ,) we are builded into the temple of God, as living stones, etc. The 2. part is exhortation, in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, hereby the Prophet diligently exhorteth those that already believe & profess the religion of Christ, that in faith and true godliness they should constantly go forward. Doctors & Prophets. And as it were by name, he calleth on them: even as those that are wont to be cried upon, who being set on a journey, either stray aside, or go forward more slowly. This part of prophecy is chiefly necessary for them, who have known the truth of Christ & all godliness; but in study & conversation of life, do not express it, as it were meet they should. This part the Apostle diligently executed▪ Who when he was at Ephesus for 3. years, he ceased not day & night, with tears to admonish and exhort every one of the faithful, Act. 20. The 3. part is consolation in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is, to speak lovingly to those that travel, are afflicted, are sad: Such as are the poor, the desolate the captives, the distressed, especially for Christ: And to lay before them such things, whereupon they may receive consolation, & be confirmed in the spirit of patience. This study to comfort pertaineth to all Christians, especially to Prophets, the ministers of gods word. The people of Christ gathered together, hath ignorant, hath sluggish & slow, hath afflicted persons. The gift of prophecy is therefore given to the Church: whereby the ignorant should be taught, the sluggish admonished, & the afflicted receive consolation. Bullinger in 1. Cor. 14. Bullinger also saith of these Doct. He understandeth prophecy, not the foretelling of things to come: but the interpretation of the holy scripture. For saith Ambrose, by Prophets he understandeth, the scriptures interpreters. (which you say are your Doctors) for as a Prophet foretelleth things that are not known: so also he is said to prophecy, while he openeth the sense of the scripture that to many is hidden etc. For the church hath nothing greater, & more profitable than Christian doctrine & the interpretation of the scripture, etc. And again: he that prophesieth, studieth on every part to profit his Church. For he that prophesieth, performeth that for which cause the assembly is gathered together. For, he speaketh unto men edification, exhortation, & consolation. To wit, while he expoundeth the secrecies & mysteries of the scripture, and out of them doth either exhort to the study of godliness, or else comforteth those, whom faint heart, or terror, or despair, or impatience of travail, hath almost broken. And this it is, to speak to edification. That is to say, by speaking to endeavour & tend thereto, that thou mayst profit the hearers. But, of this place it is clear, that a Prophet is the same with Paul, that unto us is a Doctor, a Bishop, a Preacher, or an Evangelist. To this agreeth Aretius, and saith: Hereupon it appeareth, A●etius in 1. Cor. 14. that most great are the profits of interpretation, whose parts are so bright. And saith Gualther upon the same place: Gual●er in 1. Cor. 14. Hereupon Doctors in the scriptures, are called Edifiers. And for this cause the Apostle called himself a Master builder. It pertaineth to these men before all things, to care, that they lay a good foundation, that is to wit, even Christ, which otherwher is called the foundation of the Proph. & Apost. And then that upon that alone they build, nor mingle any stubble, hay, wood, or aught else strange from Christ. Moreover, that diligently they ply the work, & with all care: lest sathan with his mines secretly wrought, do undermine it; nor that it be over-turned with the whirlwinds & storms of tempests; nor finally, that any (as sand without lime) of their own voluntary, slide and fall away. Ministers also must remember, that there is need of continual & perpetual building. Partly, because the infirmity of the believers requireth daily anew renewing: partly, because new stones must often be laid upon this holy edifice: that more may daily be gathered to Christ, and his kingdom be enlarged perpetually. But in this place is evident the craft of Satan: who, that he might make all men more remiss and slothful in this study, devised certain edifices of Temples, Towers, Colleges, and Chapels, that are called eternal, and are builded with great charges, the spiritual Temple of the Lord being in the mean time neglected, which lieth there almost altogether in ruin, where this frantic lust of building reigneth. For either there are no builders at all, or they are treacherous. Who (as the scripture speaketh of the Priests of the jews, having rejected that precious stone of the foundation, do declare that all their help of salvation, is in things improfitable & pernicious. Let them take heed therefore of their examples, that will speak edification. The other head of the eccles. ministery, is Exhortation. Exhortation. There is need of this, for those, who do not straightway obey, when they are taught those things, that are necessary to attain salvation. For by nature we be more slow to heavenvly things. And (that is more hurtful) we are delighted with sins and errors. Wherefore there is need of rebuking our sins & errors, need of reproving & exhorting. Whereof we have most grave examples in the Prophets, whom God in old time commanded, as watchmen to blow the trumpet of his word, that they might stir up all men to do their duty. The Apostles each where followed these, (to say as now, nothing of Christ) whose most grave exhortations are read in the Evangelists. Therefore they do very greatly err, that at this day will have none of this to be done, but as though the naked and simple doctrine might suffice, do take most grievously all rebuking and exhorting. But how necessary these are: the licentiousness of most cruel wickedness daily increasing, and the most corrupt manners of all men, abundantly beareth witness: but because the Church hath many that are exercised with tentation and all kind of afflictions, there is added a third head, consolation. Consolation. To the which appertain those things, that in Ezechiel are spoken, of the office of the good & faithful Pastor: when as the Lord promiseth that he will be he, which will require the lost sheep, reduce the expulsed, bind up the wounded, & strengthen the weak. And in consideration of these things, the ministers of the Churches ought so to behave themselves, Application. that they always remember▪ they shall then at length be faithful to God: if that (being intentive with all their mind, on the people's studies & manners) they set forth all these things most diligently, according to the consideration of the hearers, and of the times. To this aught to be referred those things, that S. Paul to Timothy writeth: of cutting aright the word of God. And the things that Christ delivered under the parable of the Steward, 2. Tim. 2. Matth. 24. Zuinglius on the 24. verse of the same chapter, Zuinglius. briefly knits up all the matter, saying: To prophesy is to teach to admonish, to comfort, to reprove, and to rebuke. And Peter Martyr upon 1. Sam. 10. ver. 9 Pet. Martyr. But in the Primitive church, when Prophecy flourished: what difference was there between a Prophet and a Doctor? I answer, that although the office of them both were all one, yet were Doct●rs instructed by Masters: but Prophets spoke on the sudden, being moved by the inspiration of the holy Ghost, without any help of man. Thus do all these, and many more late and notable learned writers (agreeing with the old Fathers, and almost with all the interpreters of the Scriptures) accord, that by this Prophet here mentioned he meaneth a Doctor or Teacher: But withal, that this Prophet, Doctor, or Teacher, communicateth in his teaching and interpreting of the Scriptures, in all the parts of a Pastor's office, without restraint, any more than the Pastor is restrained from any part that appertaineth to a Doctor. Yea, as Peter Martyr noteth on the same chapter, verse. 6, on these words: What shall I profit you: except I speak unto you, either by Revelation, Petr. Mart. in 1. Cor. 14. or by knowledge, or by Prophecy, or by Doctrine? chrysostom thinketh, revelation, prophesy, science, and doctrine, to signify the same thing. And that Paul by a certain circumlocution, expressed * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. a gentle diminution, that might easily be perceived of the hearers. Other believe, that these are diverse gifts, by which the Church might be edified: and some do fit these words thus: that revelation should be joined to prophesy: for Prophets do not treat or speak but that thing that is revealed to them. And likewise they will, that knowledge should cleave to doctrine. For no man teacheth right, but that which before he knew. Whereupon also it appeareth again, that we said before, the estimation of the gifts are to be esteemed according to the profit & edification of the church, Musculus i● his Commentary o● 1 Cor. 14. which is set in the confirming of faith & religion. And Musculus to the same purpose saith. Wherefore even as he there said he that prophesieth speaketh to men to edification, exhortation, and consolation; so here also, when he had said, except I speak to you: he addeth, either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesy, or by doctrine, etc. Or by doctrine, (saith he) he that speaketh by revelation, or by science, or by prophesy, Examples of Doctors. serveth to inform us in our faith and understanding of things, either hid or to come. But he that speaketh by doctrine, serveth to compose our life, and frame our manners. Thus far I think this term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place, may not unfitly be separated from the general doctrine, by the which all things in the word of God are taught. Jerome also thinketh so, for he expoundeth it with this paraphrase: except either I interpret it unto you, or make plain those hidden things of the law that I know, or expound prophecies, or teach you moral institutions. I know that Ambrose divides not these things. For he saith, all these signify one thing. For none can teach, except it be understood: Ambros. neither indeed can they be Revelation, knowledge, prophesy, and doctrine: except they be understood. Wherefore, to speak by Revelation, by knowledge, by prophesy, or by doctrine, is altogether to speak with understanding. And so doth Ch●●sostome expound it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉▪ etc. But that which he faith, is on this wise: Except I shall speak that, Chrysost. which may of you be easily conceived, and is clear. Notwithstanding, in the mean time, he forbiddeth not, that we may not by a fit division, and pertaining to the purpose, distinguish between these things, and give to every one his proper sense. For as, when he said before: he that prophesieth, speaketh to men to edification, to exhortation, and to consolation, he expressed the profit of general prophesying: so here he setteth down certain parts and instruments thereof, or rather fountains. For that, whereby, is one thing: and that, whereunto, is another thing, that the Prophet speaketh in the Church. Gual●eru● in 1. Cor. 14. And therefore (saith Gualther) Paul setteth doctrine after these things, which apply every one of them to the hearers, according to the consideration of the places and times: that they may serve for the instruction of every one. And to conclude for the amendment of their life and manners. And this is that part, wherein the edification of the Church, and of every member thereof, doth chiefly consist, etc. And to this purpose, speaking of these gifts, as instruments to edification, Paul bringeth in the similitude of musical instruments. Whereon (saith Gualther) we will not think, Gualterus in 1. Cor. 14. that Paul doth rashly use this similitude, For very well and elegantly, it shadoweth out the use of the Ecclesiastical ministery, and office of the Ministers. The Pipe admitteth many and diverse ways of tuning: and the Citheran or harp consisteth of diverse chords and strings: and even so the manner of preaching the word of God, is not one: but often in one Sermon, with a marvelous harmony, do concur, doctrine, admonition, exhortation, rebukings, threatenings, and consolations. etc. This was Saint Paul's doctrine for a Doctor, (whom here he calleth a Prophet) and for prophesying. And which yourselves call teaching, Pag. 15. saying; The office of teaching is the principal office that is in the Church. By that we be taught to know God, and how to serve him, and what benefits to look for at his hand. Without which knowledge there can be no felicity, Gualoerue in 1. Cor. 14.24 but only destruction looked for: according to the saying of the wiseman, Where prophesing faileth, there the people perish. So that as yourselves confess also, that by prophesying is meant this your first office of Teaching, which is indeed (being used as it ought to be) an excellent office. But (as Gualther saith, on the verse, 24.) concerning the use thereof: it is not a simple reciting and interpretation of the scripture (as you would make it) But (as we have heard in the beginning of this chapter) such another, as is applied with exhortation & consolation, to the edification of the whole Church, and of every one. And therefore it ought so to be exercised: that it should pierce into the minds, and convince them of sin (which property, Christ said should be the work of the Holy-ghoste in the Apostles.) And to conclude: that it so work, that all may perceive that they are spoken of. But of this chapter you give more occasion to note hereafter. Only this now at large, for the office of Doctors or Teachers of Doctrine, called here Prophets and interpreters of Scriptures: that they were not thus limited, only to teach true doctrine, and to confute all heresies & false opinions by the word, concerning all articles and principles of Christian Religion, without applying their teaching, to any particular state of time, of persons, or places. And now let us see how ye can prove this by examples. The example or practice of this office, The learned Dis. Pag. 17. is set forth Acts. 13.1. where it is recorded by S. Luke, that Paul and Barnabas (before the Holie-ghoste commanded them to be separated for the work whereunto he called them) were in the number of Prophets and Doctors, with Simeon Niger, Lucius of Siren, and Manahen in the Church of Antiochia: where they continued in that office a whole year, in which City the Disciples were first called by the name of Christians Act. 11.26. Act. 11.26. Likewise, Apollos which was an eloquent man and mighty in the Scriptures, first at Ephesus but afterward being more perfectly instructed in the way of GOD, by A●uila and Priscilla in the Church of Achaia, exercised the office of a Teacher, with great profit of them which had believed, and to the great confusion of the stiffnecked jews, while he proved plainly by the Scriptures, that jesus was the Christ, Acts. 18.28. Acts. 18.28. For the practice mentioned in the Scripture, Bridges. this might suffice that is noted by saint Paul, in this chapter 1 Corinth. 14. with the judgements of all these writers: yea▪ of themselves, concerning these prophets that were Doctors, and of the manner of their teachings. But now, because for this practice and example hereof, these our brethren the Learned Discoursers, have here set down some other examples also, Our Breath. examples of Doctors. to prove this practice: let us follow and peruse the same. And first note this, that these examples here alleged, mention no perpetuity, much less prove it: nor any prescribed rule unto themselves, much less to others. And because of all the persons here named, Act. 13. Barnabas is first, and Paul is last, the other have little record save the bare names: let us look upon this first and last, as the more notable, by whom we may level the others as less known. And here at the entry, in plain and express term, we meet (in all these people) with those that are entitled by the name of Teacher or Doctor, on which title our brethren take hold. And albeit the Text setteth it down not in the name of Doctor only, but calleth them Prophets and Teachers or Doctors: yet that makes no matter. For, as (speaking of teaching) they alleged prophesy before; so here they take these names 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as diverse names betokening one matter. For, if they do not so, either they speak contrary to themselves: or nothing to the purpose. Contrary: if the Doctors intermeddle in other men's functions, distinguished from theirs. Nothing: if they mean not, they were such Doctors, as here they take upon them to prove unto us: whose office is only to teach true doctrine, and confute all heresies and false opinions, by the word of God, concerning all articles, and principles of Christian religion, without applying their teaching to any particular state of time, of persons, or places. But it followeth: The example or practice of this office is set forth, Acts. 13.1. etc. So that their meaning is, to prove all these here recorded by Saint Luke, to be such, and no other sort of Doctors. To which purpose, how truly these example's fit; let us see (besides the conference of the Scripture) how they contrary (in these examples) the Doctors, that their selves most esteem. calvin upon these words, Acts. 31.1, calvinus in Act. 13.1. writeth thus: What Doctors differ from Prophets (at the leastwise in my judgement) I have expounded on the fourth chapter to the Ephes. 11. And on the twelve of the former Epistle to the Corinthians, 28. In this place these two are synonyms, (that is, diverse words signifying all one thing) that Luke might signify, there were many men in that Church, endued with a singular grace of the spirit, for to teach. Truly I see not how it agreeth to take prophets, for those that excelled in the gift of foretelling. But rather I suppose, The Doct. mentioned Act. 13. were exhorters. it is noted that they were excellent interpreters of the Scripture. But such did exercise the gift of teaching and exhorting, even as Paul doth testify, in the fourteenth of the former to the Corinthians, 29. We must regard the drift of Luke: Paul, and Barnabas, were ministers of the Church of Antioch: from thence God now calleth them to another place. Lest any should think, Doctors. that Church to be stripped naked, of good & fit Ministers, that God provided for others with the damage thereof: Luke prevents it, and teacheth, that there was such plenty, that helping the need of others; notwithstanding it had a residue left, so much as was enough for the use of itself. Whereupon it appeareth, how liberally the grace of God was powered on that Church: from whence Rivers might be drawn, hither and thither. So also doth God enrich certain Churches, above others in our time, that they might be Seminaries, to spread abroad the doctrine of the Gospel. By which judgement of calvin it appeareth, that those Prophets of whom we have spoken, 1. Cor. 14. were these Doctors, being Interpreters of the Scriptures. Howbe it, not bare interpreters, but such as joined the gift of exhorting with their teaching. Gualther saith on the same place, Act. 13.1. Gualterus in Act. 13.1. But they are called Doctors, who do publicly instruct the Church, and do orderly apply the holy Scriptures, to the institution of all, These Doctors were appliers of their doctrine. whom at this day we call either Pastors or Ministers of the word. Therefore, there was not at Antioch only a Church, but also a School, out of which the learned Ministers were sent to other Cities, etc. Beza also upon the second verse. Act. 13. Beza in Act. 13.2. When as they ministered, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, while they exercised their office, to wit, of teaching, & of prophesying. For a little before he had said, they were Doctors & Prophets. Therefore chrysostom rightly interpreting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, while they were ministering, that is, saith he, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, while they were preaching. Whereupon saith the Geneva note. The Geneva note. The word signifieth to execute a public charge as the Apostleship was, so that here is showed, that they preached and prophesied. While they preached (saith Bullenger) while they red holy things, interpreted and taught others, Bullingerus in Act. 13.2. and while they were occupied with holy things. For holy things are preaching, the reading of the Scripture, interpretation, doctrine, and such other matters. So that by all these learned men's judgements, and by the appearance of the very text itself, concerning the example and practice of this office: it appeareth how untrue this is, that the office of Doctors, is only to teach true doctrine, and to confute all heresies and false opinions, by the word of God, concerning all articles and principles of Christian religion, without applying their teaching to any particular state, The example of Doctor Barnabas. of time, of persons, or places. But to see this practice better, by these particular examples: let·us begin with Barnabas, which in the text is first named. And whose very name (saith Saint Luke, Acts. 4.36.) is the son of consolation. On which Beza saith, they that are skilful of the Chaldie derive it from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bar, which is, Son, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nephesh, that is, Doctor Barnabas. Soul, as though ye would say: he that refres●eth the Soul. Vatablus saith: Full of consolation, that is, one most apt to comfort. Vatablus. And (trow ye) this Surname, given him of the Apostles, (for otherwise his proper name was loses, Barnabas his name. or as some copies have it joseph, even as Christ had given surnames to some of the Apostles, as Peter, signifying a Stone: and Boanerges, signifying the sons of Thunder,) was given him by them for any greater cause, then for his comfortable and effectual kind of Teaching? And if it were so: can we suppose his Teaching was without application and exhortation? But let us not stand upon conjectures, nor on his name, but on his doing. Doth not the text expressly say? Acts. 9.26▪ When Saul was come to jerusalem, he assayed to join himself unto the Disciples, and they were all afeard of him, believing not that he was a disciple: but Barnabas took him, and brought him to the Apostles, and declared to them, how he had seen the Lord in the way, and that he had spoken unto him, His application. and how he had spoken boldly at Damascus in the name of jesus. Can we conceive that Barnabas could do all this, (or be-it that Paul did declare some part thereof) without application of the particular state, of the time, of the persons, of the places? But what say you to this place, containing the four verses, 22.23.24. and 25. immediately precéeding that place, that is cited by yourselves, Act. 11.26. Then tidings of those things, (to wit, that a great number in Antiochia, believed and turned to the Lord,) came to the ears of the Church, which was in jerusalem. And they sent forth Barnabas, that he should go to Antiochia. Who when he was come, His exhortation. and had seen the grace of God: was glad, and exhorted all, that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord: for he was a good man, and full of the Holie-ghoste, and faith. And much people joined themselves unto the Lord. Upon these words, they sent Barnabas: (saith Bullinger) for consolation and for help. Bullingerus in Act. 11. calvinus in Act. 11. Moreover (saith calvin) this was the cause of sending Barnabas. The Apostles did then sustain the whole burden of the kingdom of Christ. It was their parts therefore, every where, to form (or frame) the Churches, & what company of the faithful were any where, to retain them in the pure and holy consent of faith, Wheresoever there was any number of the faithful, to ordain Ministers and Pastors. The sleight of Satan is known, so soon as ever he seethe a door opened to the Gospel, by all means he laboureth to corrupt, that that is sincere. Whereby it hath come to pass, that straight ways with the doctrine of Christ, diverse heresies have boiled forth. Wherefore, with how greater gifts every Church excelleth: it ought to be careful so much the more, lest Satan mingle and disturb any thing among the rude, and such as are yet but little established in the faith. For nothing is more easy, than the corn to be corrupted in the prime grass thereof. To conclude, Barnabas was sent, that he should advance higher the rudiments of the faith: that he should compose their matters into a certain order: that he should give a form unto the edifice new begun: that it might be a lawful state of a Church. So that, the end whereunto Barnabas was sent, was not only to teach the principles of religion, without applying his teaching to any particular state of times, of persons, or places: for; no doubt, this his applying his teaching to the particular state, both of the time, and of the persons, & of the place, was one of the greatest parts of his office in his commission, and causes of his sending thither. And if it were not; he had done greatly amiss, and been an intruder into another man's office: and so, not answerable to his high commendation that is given him, that he was a good man, and full of the Holie-ghoste and faith. And being full of the Holie-ghoste, the comforter: no doubt his teaching was correspondent to his name, and not void of consolation. And even so expressly saith the text, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and he exhorted, or befeeched, or comforted them all, that with purpose of heart they should continue in the Lord. Hear (saith Marlorate) he brought no new doctrine into the church of Antiochia: Marlorate. but rightly and simply encourageth and confirmeth them, being instructed in Christ jesus: that being constant, they should persever in that purpose to clean unto the Lord. last of all (saith calvin) the exhortation of Barnabas is to be noted. Now, calvinus. we have beforesaid, that Barnabas to the former doctrine which they had embraced, did subscribe. Howbeit, lest the doctrine should slip away, it is necessary, that the same should throughly be fixed in the minds of the faithful, with continual exhortations, for when as we must have continual battle, with so many and so mighty enemies, and our minds are fickle; except every one do diligently arm himself: he will straightways fall away. And that do infinite numbers declare to be too true, by their daily revolting. And here Marlorate addeth Bullingers' note: Marlorate. We gather also with how few laws the apostles being contented, did bend all the force of their mind on this, that those which are set in the way of the Lord, they might retain them, Bullinge●. and very far set them forward in the s●me. For, except we travel in the way which we have entered into, 〈◊〉 have begun the journey to no purpose. For he that setting his hand to the Plough, shall look back; is not fit for the hingdome of GOD. Luke. 9 verse. 61. And by these continual exhortations of Barnabas, God wrought so effectually in this people (who before were taught by others) that (saith S. Luke:) A great multitude was added unto the Lord. Doctor Paul. Whereupon, saith calvin: Where the number of the faithful was already plentiful, Luke saith it increased by the coming of Barnabas. calvinus. Thus doth the building of the Church go forward, when one helps another, with mutual consent. This addition therefore of the faithful, (saith Marlorate out of Bullinger) is the effect of Barnabas his preaching. Marlorate. So that he did not only teach: but withal he preached, he exhorted, he comforted, he applied, etc. So clean contrary is the practice of Barnabas example, to this imagined office of a Doctor. Whereunto these our Learned discoursers, apply the same. And as we thus most evidently see, for Barnabas, before he sought out Paul to help him, in that place: The example of Doctor Paul. so likewise for Paul, both before this his coming to Antiochia, and jointly with Barnabas being there, and always after, for the manner of his teaching, joined with applying, exhorting, rebuking, etc. For, Paul, Acts. 9 being replenished with the Holie-ghoste, after he had tarried certain days with the Disciples at Damascus, he streightwaies preached Christ, that he was the son of God. Here the principal point and ground of his Treaty, was Doctrine. But did he barely teach it? No, saith the text, he preached Christ, and that was done with such persuasion and application to the hearers, that saith Luke ver. 21. All that hard him were amazed, and said: is not this he that destroyed them, that called upon this name in jerusalem: and came hither for that intent, that he should bring them bound unto the high Priests? Came this astonishment among his hearers, of bare teaching? Trow ye, Paul did not as earnestly exhort them to embrace Christ; as he did breath out threats before, against all those that professed Christ? If he had done the one earnestly, and the other barely, without all applying and alleging of himself unto them for a lively example, of the mighty power of Christ, that had beaten him down and converted him: could his bare teaching of Christ, have moved such amazement in them? calvinus in Act. 9 No, (saith calvin,) he that of late rushed with a furious onset against Christ, doth not only mildly submit himself at his commandment; but even as a standard bearer to recover his glory, doth fight even to the extremest danger. True it is, that he was not so soon informed by the labour of Ananias; but when as he had received the rudiments by the mouth of man, he was by divine influence exalted to higher matters, etc. And he increased (saith the text) more in strength, and confounded the jews, etc. ●●●reon saith calvin: Hear Luke not only commendeth the zeal of Paul to be strong, in confessing the faith of Christ: but he teacheth also, with how mighty reasons he did fight, by which he convinced the jews. He waxed strong, that is, he was on the over-hand in disputing, and his confession had a force and efficacy joined therewith: because, forsooth, he being furnished with the testimonies of the Scripture, and other helps of the Holie-ghoste, did (as it were) overwhelm all his adversaries. For the word (of disturbing them) that Luke useth, doth signify, that when Paul pressed them beyond measure, they were so dashed, that they were not their own men. The manner of his disturbing them is expressed, in that Paul confirmed jesus to be Christ. For the sense is: when the jews chiefly would strive against it, they were notwithstanding overcome and confounded. So that Paul by experience proved, that it was most true which he pronounceth, that the Scripture is profitable to reprove. 2. Tim. 3.16. And he performed that, which in another place, The manne● of a Bishops and a Doctors teaching. he required of a Bishop and a Doctor. For he was armed with the word of God to avouch the truth, Tit. 1.9. And indeed Luke comprehends two things that Paul in disputing was a Conqueror, in such sort, that he made the jews to fall. And yet their stubbornness was not so broken and tamed, that they would yield unto the truth. Because for all this, their consciences turmoiled within them, and being dashed down from the degree of their false opinion, they never a whit submitted themselves to Christ. Therefore, so often as heretics do arise to oppugn the right faith: so often as the wicked do enterprise, to shatter all godliness; so often as naughty persons do obstinately withstand: let us remember from hence to fetch our armour, etc. Thus doth calvin lively express the vehement moving of affections, to astonish the hearers, that S. Paul used in his teaching, and making it all one office in the Doctor and in the Bishop, and applying his precepts to Timothy and Titus, to this doing of Paul, and to the duty of all true and zealous Teachers. Gua●terus in Act. 9 And héeréupon also doth Gualther gather this general rule: This place (saith he) admonisheth, that the doctrine of the Gospel ought to be preached. In which point the opinion of many is, that they think a simple and full explication of the mysteries of salvation doth suffice, and that they labour in vain, A D●ct●●● explication of doctrine, though simple and fu●l sufficeth not. and are intolerable authors of dissensions, which reprove the tyranny of antichrist, oppugn superstition, and publicly undertake to enter into controversy with the professed enemies of the truth. True it is, that the simple doctrine of the truth mought have sufficed, except there were such, as would endeavour to lap the same in errors and darkness, and withdraw the unheedful out of the path of truth: but sith there have been such both in times passed, and at this day may commonly be found: it behoveth the faithful to be admonished, that they should not give ear unto them. Which thing you shall never bring to pass, except ye make an evident proof, that they err all the world over. Again, when the impudency of many breaketh out so far, that openly they dare gainsay the truth, they are publicly also to be confuted▪ lest by their rashness they should make the cause of the truth suspected. We read, that not only the Apostles, but Christ himself did either of these things. Whose example all these worthily aught to follow, whosoever will be called and counted the Ministers of his Church. Which is the cause, that Paul would have such kind of Doctors, which cannot only instruct the rude in sound doctrine, but also convince those that speak against it. Titus. 1. And he testifieth also that the Scriptures are given to the same end, that they may serve for rebuking of the adversaries, 2. Timoth. 3. Which seemed to the Holie-ghoste a matter of such importance, that he would not only have the deceivers of that age to be reproved by the Apostles, but he would have us also to be admonished of those, that in the last times should molest the Church. By which general rule of Gualther, agreeing with calvin hereupon, it appeareth, that Paul applied his doctrine, and joined admonition and redargution, as well as exhortation and consolation, to his Teaching. And that this Teaching is so little distinguished from the Pastor's office: that it is common with the office and duty of all Bishops and Ministers of the word. And that except these applications be joined thereunto: the simple declaration of the truth, although it be fully set out, doth not many times suffice, to overthrow the malapert importunity of the adversaries. And as Paul thus, not only for the occasion of that time, but for the example of our and all times, made this introduction into his office of Teaching: so he continued in such fervency, till he met with Barnabas at jerusalem, after three years travel in Arabia, and all in this City of Damascus, that the jews (no doubt, exasperated by his laying so hardly their errors and obstinacy to their charges:) went about to kill him. From th● which danger being escaped, and come to jerusalem, after Barnabas had exhorted the Disciples to admit him into their company: He was conversant (saith Luke, verse. 28.) with them at jerusalem, and spoke boldly in the name of the Lord jesus, and disputed with the Grecians. But they went abou● to slay him. Belike he was still more earnest in reproving them, than all the residue. For the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, signifieth, not omelie that he spoke boldly or confidently, but frankly and freely, and that with liberty and reprehension. Whereupon the Geneva Margin noteth, The Geneva note. making open profession of the Gospel. And saith calvin; calvin. In which words, Luke praiseth his fortitude in professing the Gospel. For among so many hindrances, he durst never have hissed: had not his breast been endued with a rare constancy. In the mean season, all are prescribed what they ought to do, to wit, every one according to the measure of his faith. For although all be not Paul's; nevertheless, the faith of Christ must breed so much confidence in our minds: that when it is needful for us to speak, we wax not altogether dumb. We must (saith Marlorate here) be always ready, to render a reason to all that ask it, Marlor●te. of the hope that is in us. And is all this freeness, of Saint Paul's teaching, and example to all men, without any application, etc. that so moved the adversaries, that they still went about to murder him? Lo (saith calvin) for zeal: fury. Neither can it be otherwise, Caluin●. than that superstition should be fierce & cruel▪ Indeed it beseemeth the godly, to be kindled with an holy anger, when they see the pure truth of God to be corrupted with false and naughty opinions: but so, that they moderate their zeal, that they determine nothing, except the cause be throughly viewed, that they may reduce them that err, into the way. last of all, if they see their frowardness to be passed hope: yet may not they snatch the sword: because they should know that revengement is not of GOD committed unto them. And therefore Paul peaceably avoideth from them, whom he had thus provoked by his earnest teaching, etc. Therefore (saith Luke) the Churches throughout all jury, and Galilee, and Samaria had peace, and were edified: and they walked in the fear of GOD, and were replenished with the consolation of the Holie-ghoste. Whereupon (saith calvin) Luke signifieth, that the presence of Paul was a grievous provocation to the enemies of the Gospel. For why did peace so suddenly shine unto the Churches by his departure: except that even the sight of him, did provoke the fury of the enemies? Neither is this turned to him for a reproach, as though he had been as it were a Trumpet for a battle: but Luke rather setteth down this for his commendation, that he drove the enemies to a rage, even with the only smell of his approaching near unto them. For so would Christ triumph in him, that he should sprinkle upon the Church no less molestation, than renown. Wherefore, by this example we are admonished, that they are not straightways to be condemned, who do more enflambe the rage of wicked men, than other do. Which admonition, is not a little profitable. For as we are too soft and loving of our own quietness: so now wax we angry with the best and most excellent servants of Christ, if by their vehemency, we think the evil will be stirred up to hurt us. But by this means, we be injurious against the spirit of GOD, whose force and breathing hath kindled all this flame. Thus as we still see the zealous manner of S. Paul's teaching: so when afterward, Act. 11.25.26. Barnabas being also an other Teacher and exhorter, and having such an excellent gift therein, (as is aforesaid) and yet knowing he was in these things, especially, in the vehemency of exhortation, application, and persuasion, nothing comparable to Paul, (as appeareth Act. 14.12. Where the Licaonians called Barnabas jupiter, and Paul Mercury, because he was the chiefest speaker): yet Barnabas sought out Paul, and found him, and brought him to Antiochia. And they were conversant with the Church (saith Luke) a whole year, and taught much people: in so much, that the Disciples were the first called Christians, in Antiochia. Shall we now think that Barnabas having begun so soon; Paul in his Doctorship, changed not his manner of teaching. to join exhortation to his teaching, and that Paul being more vehement in exhorting, than he: they both of them left their former trade of teaching, and all that whole year fell to a new trade, to teach only without exhorting, admonishing, rebuking, comforting, and without applying their teaching to any particular state of time, of persons or places? Neither is it any thing likely: neither the text infers it: neither doth any learned writer so gather on the text, that I have yet seen: neither doth it accord with such a fruitful sequel. Their preaching (saith Marlorate) was so effectual and so fruitful. So that their continuance the whole year in teaching, was in such teaching, as was preaching, which consisteth much in exhortation, admonition, application, etc. and appertaineth to the office of a Pastor. Whereupon, saith Gualther: Gualther. Let the Ministers of Churches follow this example. And while they persuade perseverance to other, they themselves persever constant in their office: neither let them glory in the bare name of a Pastor, but let them do that, which becometh true Pastors. Lest they seem to be followers and successors of that foolish pastor, that is described in Zacharie, the eleventh chapter. So that S. Paul, practising all that whole year at Antiochia the office of a Doctor, This place Act. 13. wrested for any other Doctors, than for such Doctors as are examples to Pastors. (as these our Learned Discoursers say) and this Doctor preaching, and showing an example for Pastors to follow: how is this any example for such, as must not meddle with the Pastor's office? But neither here, nor at any time else, (that I can find) Saint Paul ever practised the office of such a Doctor. But look, as he began, so without any alteration, for this point of joining exhortation, admonition, & application, to this doctrine, he still continued. For as I noted before on these words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, While they were ministering unto the Lord, that is, (as Beza, and the Geneva Margin noteth) while they were preaching: and calleth it a public charge, as the Apostleship was, and the Apostles were not tied to such an office, as taught without exhorting or applying. so doth not the Holie-ghoste say here, Separate me Barnabas and Saul into another office, than they were in before: but, for the work where unto I have called them. Which work was still the same, that it was before, though done in other places. For Paul changed not here his office, as though he had been but a Doctor ●ntill now, and now was made an Apostle: for, as he continued a Doctor s●ill, so he was an Apostle before. S. Paul's teaching still after the same manner And look what manner of Teaching he used after, he used before: And as before, so he still continued in his teaching. Whereupon saith calvin: But here Luke saith, that Paul was ordained by voices, which seemeth not to be agreeable to Paul's words, Gal. 1.1. Where he denieth that he was called either of men, or by men. I answer: calvin. he was created an Apostle (and that, not by any men's voices) long before, that he was sent unto the Gentles: And had already exercised his Apostleship for many years, when he was called to the Gentiles by a new Oracle. Wherefore, in that respect, that he had God the author of his Apostleship, he doth not unworthily exclude men. Neither doth he now command him to be ordained of the Church, that his calling should depend of the judgement of man: But that decree, that was known as yet, but to a few, God doth now set forth the same by a public edict; and command it to be sealed with a solemn subscription of the Church. The sense therefore of the words is: Now is the time that Paul must spread the Gospel among the Gentiles, and pulling down the wall, Ephes. 2.14. Collect a Church out of the Gentiles, who before were strangers from the kingdom of God. For although hitherto, God used his travel at Antiochia, and in other places: this peculiar point is added now at length, that God would adopt together the Geneiles into the self same inheritance of life with the jews. Howbeit, if he had been created Doctor thus even from the beginning, neither yet then had he been called by man. For when as the Lord pronounceth that he was called of him: what remaineth for the Church, but obediently to subscribe thereto? For neither is here the judgement of man placed between, as in a doubtful matter; neither have the voices freedom. But we must hold that which I said, that Paul and Barnabas are not now at length, ordained in the order of Doctors: but an extraordinary office is enjoined, Paul and Barnabas not made here such Doctors as our Brethr. imagine. that they should begin to set forth at large the grace of God in common to the Gentiles. And this do the words sound when it is said; separate to the work: for (no doubt) it signifieth a new work, and as yet unaccustomed. But how is Barnabas joined here a companion and colleague with Paul: whom we never read to have exercised the office of teaching? Yea, who always himself holding his peace, yielded the parts of speaking to Paul? I answer: he had many occasions enough, of speaking offered him in Paul's absence: that there was business enough for them both; for one could not be always present in all places. There is no doubt, but that he faithfully went about the parts that God commanded, nor was a dumb looker on. Neither is there any cause that we should marvel, why the Sermons that he made, are not in plain words expressed of Luke: sith that he scarce reciteth the thousand Sermon, of those that Paul made. Thus saith calvin. Whereby it appeareth, that as Paul's Doctorship and Apostleship, was all one, both before and after: the difference being only this commission, of doing the same thing in common to the Gentiles, the which also was foretold before, both to Ananias that baptised him, and to himself in his trance at jerusalem, as he declared after in his Sermon, Act. 22.21. But here it was enjoined unto him. And being a Doctor before he was here made the Doctor of the Gentiles: even so, his manner of teaching, and executing this doctor's office, was ever one and the same manner: that is to say, ever joining exhortation, admonition, consolation, rebukeing, or some kind or other application to his doctrine. And this appeareth, even in the selfsame 13. chapter, verse. 14. etc. But when (saith Luke) they departed from Perga, they came to Antiochia of Pisidia, The Doctors, reading the Lectures of the Law & the Prophets, joined exhortation calvin. and went into the synagogue on the Sabaoth day, and sat down: and after the Lecture of the Law and of the Prophets, the rulers of the synagogue sent unto them, saying: ye men and brethren, if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on. Hear (saith calvin) is no mention made of prayers, which notwithstanding (it is certain) were not omitted, nor neglected. But because Luke's purpose was to rehearse the Sermon that Paul made there: Act. 13. it is no marvel, if he only mention those things, that appertain to the order of teaching. But this is a notable place, out of which we learn, what was the manner of treating on doctrine among the jews in that age. The first place was given to the law and the Prophets. For it was not lawful to propound any thing unto the Church, which was not drawn out of that fountain. Hereupon also we gather, that the Scripture was not suppressed among a few, but all were indifferently admitted to the reading thereof. After this, they that excelled in the grace of teaching and exhorting, The interpreters used teaching & exhorting. had the second parts, as interpreters of the Scripture that was read. Notwithstanding, last of all, Luke doth show, that all were not permitted to speak: lest of that licence, confusion should spring. But the office of exhorting was committed unto certain men, whom he calleth the princes of the synagogue, or the Masters. Paul therefore and Barnabas, do not by and by, shove themselves forth to speak; lest they should disturb with too much haste, the accustomed order: but they modestly expect, Licence to exercise their office. until leave be given them for to speak, and that by the permission of those, unto whom the authority thereof by public consent belonged. We know how corrupt the state of that people at that time was: and Luke at length in the end of the chapter will declare, how these Antiochians in refusing the grace of Christ, were more than proud & froward. And yet notwithstanding this goodness remained among them, that their assemblies were ordered comely and honestly, etc. Which saying of his is worthy to be the more considered, for that diverse of these our brethren, do make an argument of proportion, for the offices and orders of the Church under Christ, correspondent to the offices and orders of the jews Synagogs', under Moses. That for their sacrificing Priests, we have Pastors: for their Levites, The Counterpoison. Pag. Doctors of the Law, we have teachers, doctors of the Gospel: for their rulers of the Synagogs', we have Governors: for their levitical lookers to the treasury, we have Deacons: for their presbytery we have Elders, etc. Which enumeration and proportion, though it be very disordered and confused, and the argument thereon more weak and faulty: yet to make the best of it that mought be, it appeareth (if we go no further than this place) that these jews observing their ordinary custom, were not acquainted with such a kind of Doctors, as used no applying, nor exhorting in their teaching, but such as still joined these together. For what did they else mean in this demand: The jews knew no Doct. but that were exhorte●s. If ye have any word of exhortation: But that they took it to be the office of a Teacher, to use to the people, the word of exhortation, with the word of Doctrine? But perhaps they did this of ignorance of their own orders, and had not been acquainted with such Doctors. But whatsoever they thought, or conceived, or demanded aright or amiss herein; let us see (as we began) calvin's judgement. Doth he mislike it? No This speech (saith he, calvinus in Act. 13. ) doth betoken that whatsoever grace is in men to edify the Church, it is, as it were pawned unto them. Although the particle, in, (if there be in you any word of consolation) according to the Hebrew phrase, may be superfluous: and therefore I urge not stiffelye that matter. Because the sense may be plain, if you have any exhortation, The Doct. office in exhorting and applying with teaching. that is apt and profitable to the people: howbeit, exhortation excludes not Doctrine. But this name seemeth to come of the common use that was received among them. For properly the office of a Doctor is, The jews Doctors. not to bring forth any new thing of his own sense, but the Scripture, wherein all the wisdom of the godly is comprehended: and to make it fit unto the present use of the people. By this means they do not so much teach, as they apply the doctrine taken from another matter unto the edification of the Church. Which I suppose to be noted by the word exhorting. What can be spoken of the office of a Doctor, more plain than this? And how plain withal, this judgement of calvin (both for the Doctors of the jews, and the Doctors of the Christians) is clean contrary, to these Discoursers distinguishing, and limiting of a Doctor's office from a Pastors, by exhorting and applying; I refer me not only to any Doctors, but to any godly Christian readers judgement, be he never so simple, yea (almost) be he never so much affectionate. And withal, let the Reader mark the Geneva note herein: The Geneva note, on Act. 13.15. This declareth the Scripture is given to teach and exhort us, and that they refused none, that had gifts to set forth God's glory, and to edify his people. Belike than they regarded not the nice distinguishing of the persons office, but only respected these ends in him, God's glory, and their edifying. To which ends they required, not bare teaching, but teaching and exhorting: whereunto, they thought, the Scripture to be given them. But whatsoever they thought: did S. Paul satisfy their demand, being now appointed to become the Doctor or Teacher of the Gentiles? as h● calleth himself, 1. Tim. 2.7. And would he join exhortation to his teaching? Yea, the very first words of his Sermon are an Exhortation to them, to give him audience, verse. 16. And although he proceed from th● 16. verse, S. Paul's application. until the 26. verse, all in doctrine: yet he entereth again into application, and useth, not only a most grave exhortation an● reprehension: but (returning to matter of doctrine) knits up all his Sermon with an application, and a dreadful admonition to the despisers of his doctrine. And the next day again, both Paul and Barnabas, as they begin with persuasion: so afterward reprehending the obstinate jews, and comforting the believing Gentiles, they conclude with Doctrine. And this order, to join and interlace these things together, was always the manner of Saint Paul's teaching, being the Doctor and Teacher of the Gentiles. And this manner of teaching he constantly observeth, S. Paul to Timothy concerning the office of teaching. in all his Epistler, and willeth other Teachers so to do. For, charging Timothy, to give attendance, to reading, to exhortation, & to doctrine, 1. Tim. 4.13: And willing him to teach and exhort, 1. Tim. 6.2: And bidding him to ordain Teachers; doth he limit it only unto doctrine? No. But saith he, 2. Tim. 2. What things thou haste heard of me by many witnesses, commend the same to faithful men, which shall be able also to teach others. And what was that? All and only doctrine? No. S. Paul's precepts of teaching. But doctrine intermingled with exhortation, admonition, reprehension, consolation persuasion, or still some kind or other application. These things (saith he) admonish, etc. ver. 14. and 15. study to show thyself an approved workman before God: and one not to be ashamed of cutting aright the word of truth. 24. Moreover the servant of the Lord must not strive, but be gentle towards all men, apt to teach, suffering the evil men patiently, instructing them with meekness, that are contrary minded: proving, if at any time God will give them repentance, that they may know the truth. Lo here the duty and office of a Teacher. And doth he not herein most plainly insinuate, that he should teach them so, that with exhortation, persuasion, application, and all gentle means, he should assay to win them? and doth not this Doctor of the Gentiles, to this purpose, set out himself an example hereof, 2. Tim. 3. ver. 10. saying: But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of living, purpose, faith, long suffering, love, patience, S Paul's example in teaching. etc. 14. but continue thou in the things, which thou hast learned, and art persuaded thereof, knowing of whom thou hast learned them, and that thou hast known the holy scriptures of a child: which are able to make thee wise unto salvation, through the faith which is in Christ jesus. For the whole scripture is given by inspiration, and is profitable to teach, to improve, to correct, and to instruct in righteousness: that the man of God may be absolute being made perfect unto all good works, cap. 4. I charge thee therefore before GOD, and before the Lord jesus Christ, which shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and in his kingdom: preach the word, be instant in season and out of season, improve, rebuke, exhort, with all long suffering and doctrine. S. Paul's admonition to Titus for teaching. Hitherto always wish teaching doctrine, Paul joineth exhortation: and willeth Timothy to join application of these things with doctrine. and the like he doth to Titus. Tit. 1.9. Holding-fast the faithful word according to doctrine, that he may be able to exhort, with wholesome doctrine, and improve them that say against it. If now it be replied, that here he speaketh of a Bishop, and Paul was an Apostle, and Timothy and Titus Bishops: not only the text maketh them Teachers or Doctors: but what office or degree of the ministery of the word soever they had, S. Paul doth always so join these together, that calvin on, 2. Tim. 3.16. saith▪ He setteth doctrine in the first place, Calvin on 2. Tim. 3.16. as in order it goeth before all other. For he should exhort or reprove to n● purpose▪ except ye should teach before: Teaching going before & exhorting joined after it. but because doctrine is cold by itself: he addeth improving and correcting, etc. and on 2. Tim. 4.2. he wills him to be instant in reproving, rebuking, exhorting: by which words he signifieth, that there is need to drive us on with many proddes, S. Paul's precepts of teaching that we may proceéde in a strait course: for if there were that docility in us that ought to be, the minister of Christ might draw us with his beck only. But now, no, not moderate exhortations (I say not, sound counsels) do suffice to shake off our sluggishness: except a greater vehemency of reprehensions and chydinges do come thereto. With all lenity. A very necessary exception. For, reproving even with the very push of them do fall away, and vanish into smoulder, except they be strengthened with doctrine. For as well exhortations, as reprehensions are helps only unto doctrine. And therefore without it, they are of small force. Example whereof are they, which excel only in fervency and eagerness, but they are not defenced with sound doctrine: for they stoutly tire themselves, they make loud cries, and make a turmoil, and that without profit, because they build without a foundation. I speak of goodmen otherwise, but too little learned, & too much fervent. And on Tit. 1.9. But what meaneth he by this, according to doctrine? Teaching of doctrine is to be referred to godly life. To wit, such an one as is profitable for the edification of the Church. For, whatsoever is learned or known without any fruit of godliness, Paul is not wont to account it in the name of doctrine. But rather he condemneth for vanity all speculations, that bring no profit, although otherwise they be never so witty. So to the Rom. the 12. chap. 7. He that teacheth let him do it in doctrine: that is to say, let him study to profit his audience. To conclude, this is the first point, that a Pastor must be furnished with the knowledge of doctrine: but the second is, that he must retain the confession thereof, with a firm constancy of mind, even to the uttermost. The third, that he apply his manner of teaching in edifying: Doctrine is to be applied. nor fly about by subtleties of frivolous curiosity, but al-onely seek the sound profit of the Church. Thus doth calvin not only in a Bishop, Pastor, or any Minister of the word, show how these two, Doctrine & Application, cannot conveniently be disjoined, without the hindrance of edification, doctrine is cold and moves not men without these helps: and yet they help not without doctrine: but also one of these very places, which these our Learned Disc. and other of their mind do chief urge for Doctors, calvin on Rom. 12.7. Rom. 12.7. calvin speaking of Pastors, applies it to them, & to their duty. And simply expounde● it thus: he that teacheth, let him do it in doctrine: that is to say, let him study to profit his hearers. As who say, let him even in this sort as I have said of Pastors, not stand upon mere speculation of doctrine, which moveth coldly of itself, by reason of the hearers dullness or hardness, but let him join such application thereof unto his doctrine, as may best redound to their profit and edification. And now, as this was Paul's continual teaching, both by mouth & writing, and moving all others to do the like, even the Doctor, so well as th● Pastor, as appeareth in all his Epistles: D. Apollo's. so Barnabas (if the Epistle to the Hebr. be his, & not rather, as it is commonly accepted, The Epistle to the Heb. taken of some to be written by Barnabas. S. Paul's) though the argument stand most of doctrine above all the other epistles: yet doth he still among the greatest points of doctrine, inserte application & adjoin sundry & singular exhortations, admonitions, reprehensions, consolations, etc. to his doctrine. And the like doth Peter both in all his preachings, recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, & in both his Epist. And john & james, & Jude, & Stephen, Act. 7. etc. For, they all learned this order of jesus Christ the chief Doctor, and both their & our M. of all our doctrine, & of all our teaching of it: Who ever joined exhortation, application, etc. to his doctrine. And sent out both his 12. Apostles, & his 72. Disciples, to keep the like manner of teaching: and never taught, or enjoined other to teach in other order. Which is even as much, as so to sever the letter & the spirit, The danger and absurdity of our Br. doctrine. in severing the doctrine from all application of the same, that the lively and quickening sense thereof is damped. neither only to say, that a man may do so upon occasion, or in time & place, as some Doctors in the schools, & in their lectures now & then: but to make a rule thereon, & a several office, of such Doctors, & that ordinary & perpetual, distinct from Pastors: and that they must not exhort, nor rebuke, nor comfort, nor apply, but only teach without all these things; and that such Doctors must be in every congregation, & must so teach the common people, who, of all other are most moved by affections; and that if the Doctor should persuade or apply he is an intruder into other men's functions, & a confounder, and breaketh off the ordinance of Christ: Counterpoison. I do not only see how this is not yet sufficiently proved, but that (as me thinks, and I will speak it under correction of better proof, than is yet brought, either in the Fruitful Sermon on, 1. Cor. 12. or in the Counterpoison, or in this Learned discourse): I take it not agreeable to the Apostles precept, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to cut aright the word of God; nor fit for the man of God, which is his minister; The right cutting of Cod's word. nor according to the effectual working of his word; which is the power of God to salvation to all that believe it: which is written to our consolation; which is profitable to reach, to improve, to correct, to instruct, etc. which is, lively, and mighty in operation, and sharper than any two edged sword, and entereth through, Hebr. 4. even to the dividing asunder of the soul and the spirit, and of the joints, and of the marrawe, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. All which, and all other principal virtues thereof, are no less wrought by the apt and right application, then by the true interpretation of the same. And thus much for these examples of these Doctors teaching, or rather (never teaching) without applying of their doctrine. But soft we have yet another example, that if all these will not prove it (as on the contrary they plain confute it) to see, if that, will yet at length infer it. Likewise Apollos, which was an eloquent man, and mighty in the Scriptures, The learned Dis. Pag. 18. first at Ephesus, but afterward being more perfectly instructed in the way of God by Aquila and Priscilla, in the Church of A●haia, exercised the office of a Teacher, with great profit of them which had believed, and to the great confusion of the stiffnecked jews, while he proved plainly by the Scripture that jesus was the Christ. Acts. 18.28. Acts 18.28 Apollo's was an eloquent man, (I grant) but can you (my Learned Masters) with all the eloquence and learning ye have, Bridges. prove this; that Apollo's did exercise the office of such a Teacher, Apollo's no such D. as they urge. as you have here described? Which if ye could do; yet, one swallow would not make a spring. But even this example of Apollo, maketh as much against you, as the residue. For, Apollo's being so eloquent, and mighty in the Scriptures, so servant in the spirit, and so diligent in his teaching, (as Luke testifieth,) do ye not see, how all these things do manifestly infer, that he used application & persuasion with his teaching? He was excellently well learned, which he calleth mighty in the Scriptures: which point more properly indeed doth appertain to doctrine, and he was diligent also in his teaching which thing likewise belongs to doctrine: and yet was not he so mighty in the scriptures, Apollo's eloquence. for all his diligence in his teaching, but that he was (God w●t) a very mean and insufficient Teacher, till he was taught further, even by a poor mean learned handiecraftes man, and his wife. So that his Eloquence was more in persuasion then in doctrine: and his fervency of the spirit to move affections; as much as his diligence in his teaching. And what (I beseech you) were the matters, he taught? Were they not those things that are of the Lord? And is not life and manners, and exhortation thereto, & dehortation from the contrary, pertaining also to the way of the Lord? But only the teaching of the articles of religion, and the confutation of the contrary? And what was the doctrine that he only knew and taught? Apollo ministered the Sacrament of baptism Is it not here named john's Baptism? And did he not then administer the Sacrament that he taught? Yea, was not the Sacrament of Baptism that john used: unto repentance? And did not john in ministering it exhort and apply, saying: Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand? Did he not apply, when he pointed out Christ with his finger? When he sent them to Christ, that came to him? Did he not apply, and exhort, and rebuke, even in particular, almost all sorts of persons: when they came to be baptized of him? And doth not the name of john's Baptism comprehend all his ministery? And how was Apollo then such a Doctor as is here imagined, without all ministering of the sacraments, or preaching, or exhorting, or applying? But now, when Apollo was instructed more perfectly, and was minded to go into Achaia, and the brethren exhorting him thereunto, wrote to the Disciples to receive him; when he was come he helped them much, Apollo. who had believed through grace. For, mightily he confuted publicly the jews, Apollo's mighty teaching. with great vehemency (saith Luke) showing by the scriptures that jesus was Christ. Now, as though he did nothing there, but only teach and confute, you leave out these words (mightily, and with great vehemency,) and thrust in another of your own, plainly as though he had used nothing but plain teaching. Which words left out by you, Beza notwithstanding Beza doth especially observe, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, For with great contention: I would use this Periphrase, to express the forceablenes of the Greek word: whereby is signified, that this eloquent man stretched all his sinews, to overcome the jews. The vulgar, and Erasmus, call it, vehemently, that is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Moreover a little after, they do not seem sufficiently to have expressed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they overcame. For the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, increaseth the signification, as in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thoroughly to endure, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an exquisite, perfect, knowing, or doing of a thing: and in such like. And therefore I translated it, he did more and more convince them. As who say, he did more by his vehement, eloquent, and zealous exhortations and admonitions, on the one side, confirm and strengthen them, that had before believed, and were taught the principles, and grounds of Religion by others: than he did by teaching. So that, though he taught them also by the Scriptures, that jesus was Christ, which is the foundation of our doctrine: yet, he did this greater help unto them, in confirming of them by application and exhortation in his teaching. And even so against the adversaries: he did mightily convince them with the scriptures. But this mightiness, this vehemency, and so exquisite convincing of them, could not be done; without a singular application, and great reproving of them. And to this (besides that calvin doth agree;) Gualther gathereth a general rule of this teaching of Apollo's, saying: Gualterus 〈◊〉 Act. 18. This example also doth admonish, what manner of teaching aught to be retained in the Church. First there is need of zeal and fervency of spirit, that all men may perceive the matter is handled even from the heart. For except this zeal be joined thereto, the doctrine will serve but for ostentation. Even so, that Christ did burn in zeal: Feruens Doctors. his study of teaching (which was never wearied,) and that fervent spirit in reforming the temple, do abundantly declare. Neither shall those lukewarm Doctors, or Teachers be ever allowed of him, when as Christ would have, no not so much as private men in the cause of religion, to be lukewarm. Look Apocal. ●. And then, it is necessary that diligence be added both for the slowness of our wit, which receiveth not matters that are divine, and also for the corruption of our nature, which always is wont to strive against th● commandments of God. To the which also cometh the wicked industry of Satan our common enemy, whose suares to meet with, by continual industry, it behoveth the faithful ministers day & night. And therefore Paul commandeth Timothy, whom he knew to be trained up in the study of the Scripture from his childhood, to apply reading. 1. Tim. 4. and the same Paul will afterwards exhort with most grave arguments, the Pastors of the Ephesians, to watchfulness and diligence. Thirdly, it behoveth the ministers to be endued with a freeness of speaking, lest they should dissemble any thing, being deceived either with fear or favour. Thus doth Gualther declare, that this teaching of Apollo's, was not a peculiar kind of teaching in Doctors without applying and exhortation: but such as was the office in common of all ministers, and namely Pastors. And upon this, that he profited the faithful, and convinced the jews, (saith Gualther): Further, this place admonisheth us of many things necessary to be observed. Gualier. For first, we are taught, that there is need in the Church not only of institution, but also of confuting of the adversaries: for it cannot be that they should profit the Churches much, that endeavour not with chief diligence to root out false opinions: as neither husbandry can be fruitful which suffereth shrubs, or unfruitful darnel to grow up. jeremy therefore is bidden to pluck down, and root up, & then to build and plant. And Paul would have a Bishop to be such, as should be able also to convince the gainsayer. Tit. 1. but that, that is spoken of false Doctors, who must utterly be confuted: that also ought to be understood of those, that are openly wicked livers, ad evil doers, which are wont to be offensive to the weaklings. For against these also, the faithful ministers with the sword of the spirit ought to fight: except they will lay open the Church, to be spoiled of wolves. Greatly therefore do they err, who at this day would have the Gospel so to be preached, that we should not withstand wicked doctrines and corrupt manners. Besides, we are admonished, what weapons in the Church we mu●t fight withal, to wit, with the scriptures, which (Paul teacheth in another place,) to be inspired from God, and to be profitable to teach, to reprove, to exhort, and to rebuke, 2. Tim. 3. Thus doth this example of Apollo's, not serve for such a Doctor, as may not do the actions of a Pastor: but may as well deal with life a● doctrine, and may as well apply, exhort, and rebuke, as teach and confute. And yet, to the further consideration hereof, let us note even the place itself, & the office of a teacher, (that ye say) Apollo in Achaia exercised. Which as it appeareth, cap. 19.1. even in the next words following to your own quotation: (and it came to pass, ●hile Apollo was at Corinthus) conferred with this 18. chap. by you cited for Apollo's teaching: this Apollo succeeded Paul, who had planted a Church to Christ before at Corinth: after this (saith Luke v. 1. etc.) Paul going from Athens came to Corinth; so that Apollo's was Paul's successor in that place. And even by that term doth calvin call him, ver. 28. calvin. This is rightly to be attributed to the providence of God, Apollo was Paul's successors to the Corinthian● that while Paul is forced to go from Ephesu● Apollo is sent in his place, who might recompense the loss of his absence. And it is to purpose, to note, in what sort this man's beginning was, sith he was also Paul's successor among the Corinthians, and behaved himself so excellently, and employed so faithful and earnest travail, that Paul commendeth him honourably, as his singular colleague, or one sent in the same commission with him, 1. Cor. 3.6. & 4.6. etc. So then, this Apollo succeeding Paul in place & office; by Paul's exercise in the same place and office, we shall see Apollo's: except Apollo did not his office, or were inferior in execution of the same: where Paul preferreth him even above himself, in the point that we are now in hand withal. And how did Paul teach at Corinth, and at Ephesus: in which places this Doctor Apollo did succeed this Doctor Paul? He disputed (saith Luke) in the Synagogue every Sabbath day, and exhorted the jews and Grecians. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, therefore, that is, to persuade (saith calvin) I take it for that, that is by little and little to induce. For in my judgement, Luke signifieth, calvin. that when the jews did coldly and foolishly handle the law: Paul spoke of the corrupt & lost nature of man, of the necessity of grace, of the promised redemption, of the manner of obtaining salvation: that he might awaken them. For this was a sit & an apt preparative unto Christ. Then, when he joineth under it, that he was straightly driven in spirit to teach jesus to be Christ: the sense is, that he was stirred up with a greater vehemency, freely and openly to dispute of Christ. So that, we see, Paul brought not forth all at once, nor at one time, but tempered his doctrine according as occasion served. Prudent Doctors. And because at this day that moderation is profitable: it behoveth faithful Doctors prudently to weigh, from whence they should make their beginning, lest a preposterous, and a confused manner do hinder the course of the doctrine. And was this done in him, or may be done in any, without application? Or consisted it all in doctrine, and nothing in exhortation, where exhortation, or persuasion is as expressly named as disputation? Beza on this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith, Beza. that it signifieth such an ardency of Paul, that altogether forgetting himself, with an heroical force, he was carried forth to preach Christ. He watched (saith Gualther) the Sabbath days, & the sacred assemblies, that (according to the manner in ●hose days) were gathered together. And first he prudently did temper his doctrine, applying himself unto the capacit●e of the hearers: Which ●e in an other place confesseth, while he writeth, that he nourisheth them with milk. Because, as yet they could not brook stronger meat. Apollo's insinuation to the hearer's minds. That doth Luke express in the word of persuading. To declare that he insinuated himself aptly unto the minds of the hearers. least he should even in the very threshold, (as they say) offend any. And truly it is credible that he proceeded in the same order, that otherwise he was accustomed to do, etc.▪ And afterward when the jews resisted and blasphemed, he renounced a most dreadful threat against them, ver. 6. and turned from them unto the Gentiles there: among whom he abode teaching the word of God a year and 6. months. From whence he departed to Ephesus, where, in what fort and manner he taught, is not here so largely set down: as afterward in the two next Chapters following, persuading, exhorting, admonishing and applying. So that Apollo's succeeding Paul in this commission of teaching in these places: it followeth, that Apollo's teaching was not without these things. And no doubt, he had with such eloquence, and his persuasions so moved the Corinthians, and he was grown thereby into such estimation: that sects and contentions springing among them, S. Paul 1. Cor. 1. 12. & 1. Cor. 8. noteth, how one said, I am of Paul: and another I am of Apollo. Paul planted, Apollo watered. Whom he rebuketh saying: Are ye not carnal? who is Paul then, and who is Apollo: but the ministers by whom ye believed? And as the Lord g●ue unto every man. I planted, Apollo watered: but God gave the increase. And again, These things brethren, have I figuratively applied to mine own self, & to Apollo, for your sakes, etc. By all which, it is manifest, that Apollo was of so great fame, that he was comparable, in many men's opinions, to the chiefest Apostles. And shall we think that all his eloquence, and might, and vehemency, was only in teaching, and planting the articles and principles of Christian religion, without applying his teaching to any particular state of time, of person, or places? Nay rather, S. Paul (in this comparison, and as in time he was before him, in those places) takes that to himself. And saith not, Apollo plants, and Paul waters: but Paul plants, and Apollo waters. As though he had (not figuratively) but in plain words said, I am rather the Teacher and the Doctor of the Gentiles, as he also calls himself, 1. Tim. 2.7. But (saith he) Apollo waters: he cometh with his flowing streams of eloquence, and watereth that, that Paul had planted, If Paul the Doctor and planter be so eloquent: was Apollo the D. and watererwith out persuasion? to confirm and strengthen them by exhortation and persuasion, as Paul there saith, ver. 10. I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. Now, if S. Paul liken himself (for teaching) to the Planter, and layer of the foundation, who notwithstanding spiceth all his teaching with so manifold figures of surpassing eloquence, full of exhortation, admonition, reprehension, consolation, and all kind of persuasive application, to whom all Orators may give place: shall we think of Apollo this eloquent waterer, whom Paul so highly advanced, whom the Corinthians so greatly esteemed, Doctors. whose zeal and labours God so mightily blessed and prospered, to his glory, his Church's benefit, and his enemy's confusion; that he used no exhortation, no admonition, no reprehension, no consolation, no application to any particular state, of time of persons, of places, in his teaching? No testimony of Scripture for this furmised Doctor. But the Text in all these points is plain contrary. This therefore is a mere surmised kind of Doctorship, that is here pretended, nor any one testimony of the Scripture as yet alleged, nor any one of these, or any other examples in the Scripture, doth enforce it. And as this Doctorship cannot be proved by these examples, but rather that they were Presbyters or Priests, whom you call Pastors: so the compilers of the Ecclesiastical history of Magdeburge, Centuria 1. Lib. 2. cap. 7. fol. 508. Colum. 2 do say: In the Church of Antioch, for a time, were Paul and Barnabas, who are called Apostles, and Prophets, and Doctors: whom it is lawful to call Priests or Presbyters. And so like wise the same writers, speaking of all the Doctors of that age, do further say, fol. 509. Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors and Doctors, did not make certain degrees of persons in the Ecclesiastical Regiment, but they seem to be numbered either among the Apostles & their fellows, or else among the Priests or Deacons. So that there was no several degree, or any ordinary appointed office distinguished in persons, by reason of these diverse gifts at that time. Which Centuriographers also in the same book and chapter, fol. 510. De ratione & forma Gubernat. do say: These were the works in common of the Apostles, and Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors, Doctors, Priests, Deacons: they taught the Church purely and sincerely, concerning all the points of Christian doctrine, etc. They interpreted the Scriptures. etc. They delivered the Catechism, etc. They preached repentance, etc. toward the obstinate they were more sharp, etc., they exhorted those that were justified, etc. To conclude, they had Schools no doubt and teachers in many churches: and while they taught, they employed their diligence in teaching, as S. Paul willed, He that teacheth in teaching. But that those Teachers might not exhort, nor apply, and that if they so did, they encroached upon the office of the Pastor: this is not yet, (nor I think will ever be) proved. & the foresaid Collectors of the Ecclesiastical story, of that first century or hundredth years, Chap. 10. in the title of the Doctors of the Church, reckon up indifferently, all the Apostles, the Evangelists, Barnabas, Agabus, Timothy, Titus, Silas, Silvanus, judas, Barsabas, Aristarchus, Aquila, Prisca, Archippus, Alexander, Andronicus, junias, Crispus, Chloas, Carpus, Apollo, Zenas, etc. And of this Doctor Zenas they writ, saying: Paul mentioneth once only, of one Zenas together with Apollo, and he calleth him a Lawyer. As, Tit. 3. Bring Zenas the expounder of the Law, and Apollo diligently, that they lack nothing. But it is likely, that in the increasing of the Gospel, he sustained the same office that Apollo did. As Jerome witnesseth these things of them both, in his declaration of the 3. Chapter of the Epistle to Titus, rehearsing it in this manner. Apollo's was a man of Alexandria extraught of the jews marvelous eloquent and perfect in the Law, Zenas a Doctor. the Bishop of Corinthus: who is thought to have sailed over with Zenas the Doctor of the Law, unto Creta an Isle neere-hande, by reason of the dissensions that were at Corinthus, & to have returned to Corinthus after that, by the Epist, of Paul the dissensions sprung at Corinthus were appeased. But who this Zenas the Doctor of the Law was, we cannot by any other place of Scripture, tell: but only this, that he also being an Apostolical man, had that work in hand, of building up the churches of Christ, that Apollo exercised. Which by the way declareth, that this Doctor Apollo's was also a Bishop: and that this Doctor Zenas, did join exhortation and application to his teaching, as is before showed Apollo's did. And so the writers of this century, proceed on in the lives of the Doctors of that age, taking Manahen by the way, cited by these our Learned discoursers for one of these Doctors, Manahen a Doctor. that may neither exhort nor apply. Of whom they say: Who also without doubt was among them, that first converted the Antiochians unto the acknowledging of Faith in Christ. After whom these Centuriographers descend to Gamaliel. Who because he was a Doctor of the Law among the jews, I would note also their testimone of him out of the Scriptures, the rather, that we may the better perceive what was the manner of the Doctors teaching among them. Because some think, this office of only teaching, was ordained in the Church, to be correspondent to the manner of teaching, i● the Synagogues and assemblies of the jews. Gamaliel (say they fol. 621. was borne at Tharsus, a worshipful Doctor of the Law. Act. 5. Of whom Paul declareth before the tribune at Ephesus, Act. 22. That he was at his feet instructed in the Law of his Fathers. Where-upon Athanasius in the book of the passion of the image of the Lord, calleth Gamaliel the Doctor of Paul, which was the Doctor of the Gentiles. whenas the multitude of the jews being stirred up at jerusalem, against john and Peter, took counsel to kill them: Gamaliel with very prudent counsel, did withdraw them: which thing Luke declareth in this manner. A certain pharisee (saith he) in the counsel by name Gamaliel, a Doctor of the Law, Doctor Gamaliel his exhortation and application, Act. 5. honourable among all the people, arising up, commanded the men, for a little while to be put forth, and said unto them: Men of Israel, take heed to yourselves, what ye are about to do, concerning these men. For, before these times, rose up Theudas boasting himself, to whom resorted a number of men, about four hundredth, who was slain, and they all that obeyed him, were scattered and brought to nought. After this man arose up judas of Galilee, in the days if the Tribute, and drew away much people after him. He also perished, and all that obeyed him were scattered abroad. And now I say unto you, refrain yourselves from these men, and let them alone. For, if this counsel or work be of men, it will come to nought, But if it be of God, ye cannot destroy it, lest ye be fou●de even fighters against God. Unto whose council that he declareth, that all the multitude agreed, and having beaten the Apostles, sent them away. Did not this Doctor here also among the jews, both exhort, & apply to the particular state of time, of persons, and of places? And as this Doctor Gamaliel, so no doubt, (opportunity serving) did all the other Doctors of the Law. Yea, Esdras himself did not teach the Law unto the jews, without exhortation and application to them. Esdras a Doctor. And as it was thus before Christ's time among the jews, and in all the age of Christ, and of his Apostles: So, for the ages succeeding them, as the Churches had their Doctors or Teachers, so did those Doctors continue aswell in exhortation, and application of their doctrine to their audience, as in teaching of them. To which purpose, The Catechists Doct. and their order of teaching in the Primitive Church. in steed of particular examination of all the Doctors that succeeded in three or four Centuries following, I will note the only collections of Hyperius De Catechesi, which was the especial office of the Doctors and Teachers: as Beza testifieth even in his distinction between Doctors and Pastors. Confession Christiana cap. 5. Artic. 26. For the Doctor's office is simply to declare the word of GOD, that the true sense may be drawn forth: and especially, to instruct the learners of the Catechism: Which office Origen enjoyed in the Church Alexandria. In the old time (saith Hyperius) they delivered the Catechism to the rude. They did it, whosoever were endued with sufficient doctrine. Hyperius de Catechesi cap. 2. fol. 445. There is no doubt, but Peter the Apostle expounded the whole doctrine catechistical (or teaching by voice the principles of Faith) in the house of Cornelius the Centurion, before that he baptised any. Act 10. Likewise, Philip in the city of Samaria: and declared forthwith in the way before the Eunuch, the principal head points of Christian Religion. Which the Scripture signifieth briefly, saying: That he preached jesus unto him. Act. 8. Hear is Peter the Apostle a Doctor, and Philip the Deacon a Doctor, and their Catechising is preaching. But (saith Hyperius) in success of time, even as the Apostles rejected from themselves the office of baptizing, being drawn away with greater, and more difficult matters, so was it expedient to commit unto others the business of expounding the Catechism. When the Church began to increase, it was necessary for the variety and weight of businesses, which a few were not able to sustain: that offices should be distinguished, and the same to be enjoined to diverse persons: even as Ambrose expounding that place of Ephesians the 4. doth well teach: And he gave some to be Apostles, some Prophets, and some Pastors, and Teachers, to the renewing of the saints, etc. Grave men therefore, notable for the sincerity of their life, and such as beside had a grace of teaching, and a prudence joined thereunto, were chosen to the office of Catechising: for to instruct those that were aliens from our religion. Verily, it behoved such to be chosen, who, not somuch in their speech, as in the actions of their life, should even bow down their minds to love the Gospel of jesus Christ, and his sincere Religion. Certes, to persuade one in speech and words to embrace Christ, to invite him to godliness, to open the way to faith: but in doings to drive him from Christ, to give an example of doing wickedly, to bring forth no fruits of faith: is no other thing, then, as much as the day before thou buildest up, so much the day following to pull down: and with Penelope, to untwiste the web again, which thou wast minded to have gone through. moreover, before them whose condition is of very diverse sorts, & wits are not all like; The Teachers applying his doctrine to all sorts of learners. to temper the manner of teaching, to the profit of each one of them, is need of singular prudence.. Hereunto therefore appertaineth that which Clement writeth in his first epistle to the brother of the Lord: They that Catechise, that is to say, they that instruct beginners with the word, it behoveth that they themselves be instructed. For, it is a matter of the soul. And it behoveth him that teacheth and enstructeth rude souls, to be such an one, that he may be able even to proportion or fit himself, and direct the order of his word, according to the capacity of the hearer. He therefore himself, must especially be very well learned and skilful, blameless, ripe, unfearful. And S. Augustine at large teacheth, how a Catechist, or Teacher, aught to rouse up oftentimes his mind to diligence and labour, to break of all irksomeness in the difficulties that he meeteth with. How furthermore it should be his special endeavour, to frame his speeches, according to the diversity of the persons. And to deal otherwise with those that are of the Gentiles: Otherwise with those that come to the Church, from among the jews: Otherwise also, with those that are of the city, and politic men: Otherwise with those that are husbandmen, and altogether untrained up: Otherwise with those that are grammarians, Orators, or Philosophers: Otherwise, with those that are unlearned: otherwise, with those that have been before accustomed to foul offences: and to treat on all things otherwise, with them that are thought to live unreprovable. Besides this, there are many that feignedlie and not from the heart, come to hear the doctrine; some desire diverse places of Scripture, and obscure questions to be expounded unto them. From whose minds, except the scruple be in time removed: it is to be feared, least at some time, they leap back again from their holy purpose. Therefore, these men which were called to the office of catechizing or teaching, had not only need of learning, but also of no mean wisdom. Of which things Augustine teacheth in his book of Catechizing the rude, in the third, the fift, and in eleven chapters following. And against Faustus the Manichaean, the thirteenth book, the seventh chapter: and so forth unto the ending. And out of doubt such an other was Panthenus, the first Doctor of the Ecclesiastical school after the Apostles, & Master of the Catechisms, (or of these manner of Teachings) in Alexandria. Whom Clemens in his first book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (of his scatterings or straw) witnesseth that he learned all of the Apostles. Of whom S. Jerome writeth, that he laboured much in the Chruches with his lively voice. Such an other was Clemens of Alexandria the successor of Panthenus in either function. As also besides Jerome, Eusebius witnesseth, in the first book, the tenth and eleventh chapters of the Ecclesiastical History. Such an other was Origen there succeeding in the third place. Examples of the ancient Teachers. Such an other was Heraclas, unto whom Origen delivered up the school. Such an other was Dyonisius the Catechiser or teacher of the people of Alexandria. Of whom Eusebius, in his Ecclesiastical History, the 6. book, Chap. 16.19.22. speaketh. Moreover, such another at Jerusalem was Cyrillus: of whom, mention is made before. To conclude, such an other at Carthage, was that godly man Deogratias, whom S. Augustine greatly doth commend. All this noteth Hyperius of these ancient Doctors, Teachers, or Catechists. Whereby we may perceive these Doctor's Teachings, and much more by their own works and treatises, to be full of exhortations & applications. Yea, some of their Catechistical books, are called by the name of exhortation, as that of Clemens Alexandrinus his oration exhortatory to the Gentiles. etc. Neither herein did they invade the office of other men: For, it specially appertained to their own office, as Hypperius further noteth, 499. For those, which for the confession of the Christian truth, The teachers animating unto constancy. were detained captives, or led to punishment, he was wont (speaking of Origen, and likewise of cyril) with reasons brought forth out of the holy Scriptures, to comfort them, and to animate them unto constancy, and to many the children of the heathen, (unto whom with the rules of Grammar, he had studiously beat upon the points of religion) to them was he an author to embrace Christianity. etc. And in the 3. Chap. (what doctrine, and points of Religion should be taught in a catechism) fol: 472. he saith. The 4. head is of doctrine: but in the name of doctrine I take all those things, Exhortation to newness of life, contained in doctrine. which were proposed to them that were newly baptised, and are exacted to be severely kept. That is to wit, of the new life & innocency of the regenerate. For, it beseemeth him that is baptised, to become even a new man: and by all means to die to sin,, to live afterwards only to righteousness: and to show himself to be such in all the actions of his life, that it may be understood, he used the mysteries truly, and with fruit. Of the which newness of life after Baptism Rom. 6. Know ye not that so many of us, as are baptised, we are baptised into his death, we are buried together with him, by baptism into death: that even as Christ was raised from the dead, by the glory of the Father, even so we should also walk in newness of life: For, if we be grafted with him, to the similitude of his death, even so shall we be to the similitude of his resurrection. Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. etc. Also to the Eph. 4. This therefore I say and testify by the Lord, that ye walk not hereafter, as the residue of the Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind, etc. And a little after, of the doctrine succeeding baptism. But you have not thus learned Christ, if so beye have heard of him, and have been taught in him, even as the truth is in jesus. To lay aside, according to the former conversation the old man, which corrupteth according to the lust of error. But be ye renewed in the spirit of your mind, and put on the new man, which is created according to God, by righteousness and holiness of truth. The like things thou readest Col. 3. & 2. Pet. 2. In which the doctrine of new obedience, and of the fruits of faith, which ought chief to be regarded in the late baptised, is (as it were) in a painted table, set before our eyes. Doctrine stretcheth not only to Faith, but also to charity & good works. And we see the Apostle, in the most of his Epistles, proceeding in that order, that in the former part he treateth of the Faith of those that are to be justified: where all things run to this head, of faith in God, and of Baptism the Sacrament of Faith: but in the later part, of the faith, and charity, or works of those that are justified. To wit, where he handleeh the offices of a Christian life, and all things that are there expounded, are rightly referred to that head of doctrine, that followeth Baptism. To conclude therefore, all the precepts, the exhortations, the rebukings, which are extant in the Apostolical writings, concerning the charity, justice, innocency, purity of those, that are by faith justified & baptised, were comprehended: and such (teaching) as in times past, was in the fourth place expounded before the learners. What is here left out for the Teaching of the Pastor, that is not common with him unto the Doctor? And in the 4, Chapter of the manner of this Doctors Teaching. After he hath again at large declared,: how, The teacher's Exhortations. having his audience of all kinds of persons, he must apply himself unto them every one: fol. 488. He saith: To conclude, if there were among the hearers, some learned, as Philosophers, Rhethoricians: they were gently warned that they should not despise, nor hear with loathsomeness, the doctrine of the gospel. Which in show, and in the manner of the delivery, seemeth base and somewhat rustical. Nor, that they attribute more than is right to man's wisdom, and to the books of the Philosophers, that they were before enured withal. But that they should more attentively consider the matters themselves, and the reverent largeness of the mysteries. And that they should religiously examine all their rules, by the squire of the holy Scripture. And if they had red over any good authors, they should constantly cleave fast unto them. But unprofitable and stained with evil opinions, they should in time lay them out of their hands. And if any things were more at length and groselye expounded, they should not be grieved thereat: for that was not for them, who already partly by private reading, partly by conference with godly men, were prettily entered: but ought many times to be done, for the ruder sort: And if they seemed to require a more full explanation of any certain Chapters: it was by the way declared unto them, the reading of what writers was able to satisfy them, Which things, that they were wont thus to be done, S. Augustine in his book of Catechizing the rude, in the 8. and 9 chapters, doth declare. According to this manner therefore, did the Catechists or Teachers, when they did publicly teach, apply themselves wholly unto all men. And as the Apostle said, to become all unto all, to the intent to win the most part unto Christ: and to give no man occasion of starting back, of erring, or so much as staggering. And if moreover, they perceived it were expedient: oftentimes they asked the Bishops themselves; to the end, that of some certain more difficult points, or more needful to be expounded; they might also publicly & more fully preach unto the people. Whereunto no doubt those things are to be referred: because the fathers oftentimes, do intermingle in their Sermons, exhortations, etc. 497. Again, speaking of their diversity in teaching of children, and those of riper years, he saith: For, children also, the same form of sound words is well used: which in little books that are borne about, we see prescribed. But with those that are elder, there must be a frecer course of speech, and place, by yielding to examples, similitudes, descriptions, amplifications, The Rhetorical manner of the doctors teaching. and to the movings of the minds. If at any time any vices are to be reckoned up, and reprehended: (which must needs be done in the expounding the ten commandements) those things in children shall be noted, and chastifed with gentle words, which we know are familiar to that age. In young & old persons, verily, it is meet that other vices be cured with another medicine. And even as these things fall out more and more in the eyes of men; so must the reprehension be tempered: for they are able to sustain a sharper reprehension. In Exhortations, the like moderation must be used, and duties prudently prescribed, that are agreeable to every age, and persuasive arguments aptly applied unto them. What need many words? Whatsoever shall be offered to tender minds: that must be, as though it were milk or delicate pulse. Those things that shall be distributed to them of full age, they must express (after a manner) the nature of strong meat. Generally, the Catechist or Teacher must often admonish all his hearers, that they often deeply in their minds consider with him, what they once promised to God, & to the Church, in their baptism. What confession of their faith they made. How haighnous a thing it is, for those that have given their names, to fall from their Emperor Christ. What life Christ requireth of those that are his. finally, by what bait, art, prudence, and counsel soever he can, he shall diligently study to draw them to the true fear of GOD, and love of virtues, and hatred of vices. And thus much of the manner of his teaching in public. All this at large, and much more writeth Hyperius of these Doctors and Teachers: which in the Primitive Church were called Catechistes, because of the sounding of their voice in their teaching. And other Ecclesiastical Doctors than these, from the Apostles times: (except the Deacons Priests, Pastors or Bishops) I have read of none in all the Church of Christ. But what Teachers soever have been; none have been debarred, (till now) of exhorting, and applying of their doctrine. No, not the best of the Doctors, Teachers, Readers, or Catechists, what name soever they shall be termed by, that God in these our last days, hath raised up in his Church, to reform the same: and to restore the true Teaching of the Gospel, which the enemies had suppressed: No, not one that I can yet read or hear of, but that now and then he exhorteth, rebuketh, or applieth in his teaching: as appeareth in all the works of Luther, Zuinglius, Oecolampadius, Bucer, Musculus, Martyr, Bullinger, All the later Doctors in the ●eformed Church's manner of ●eaching. Simlerus, Gualther, calvin, Danaeus, Zanchius, Hyperius, Olevianus, Vrsinus, Sadeelus, Beza, Tremelius, junius, or any other learned, godly, and famous Doctor, Teacher, Catechiste, Reader, interpreter, Expositor, &c: but in their teachings by mouth, you should have hear● and in their teachings by writing ye shall find more or less, erhortations, reprehensions, admonitions, consolations, and applications, etc. Only the nearest that me thinks (I speak it under correction) do draw to this imagined Doctor, that these our brethren and Learned discoursers would set up: are the Scholastical, Thomisticall, scotistical, The new urged Doct. are likest to the schoolmen. sorbonical, Cherubinical, Seraphical, (or call them what ye wit,) the Speculative and contemplative doctors. They of all other, used a kind of teaching and confuting, much like this manner, for the most part, without applying their teaching, to any particular state of time, of persons, or places. As for all other examples of the practice of Doctors, both before Christ's time, and in Christ's time, and in the time of the Apostles, and in the time next after them, and so continuing till these Schoolmen began, and from them, until God raised up better Doctors among us: and among us, of all these, and other godly learned Doctors, not so much as one appeareth, that thus precisely was limited, only to teach, but had liberty to exhort and apply, and yet, exceeded not his office, But now, having considered the institution and practice of this Doctor thus far forth let us return to our Learned discoursers collection hereupon. Therefore, if we purpose to have the Church to flourish in true knowledge, we must provide that this office be restored, The learned Dis. Pag. 18. both in the universities, and in as many other places as may be, aswell for the better instruction of all men, which are desirous to learn, as especially for the information of those, which should occupy the rooms of Pastors. Of which sort there ought to be a great number always in good towardness, to take charge of so many several flocks, as must of necessity be in so great a Church as this is. By this kind of Doctors that is here urged, the Church would sorily flourish: restored that cannot be, which never was. Howbeit, Bridges. to have Doctors or Teachers more especially, though not only to dedicate themselves to teach true doctrine, Doctors in the Universities and in as many places, as may be. and to confute all heresies and false opinions by the word of God, concerning all articles of true Religion, both in the Universities, and in as many other places as may be: Is not thus far said amiss. But this far differeth, not in method, but in matter, and that in one of the principal points thereof, from that which before was urged: that hereunto God had provided that certain men should be appointed in every congregation. But here ye are well fallen, from every congregation, to the universities, and as many places as may be. This draweth near indeed, to the English form at Geneva, and to the Scottish. But the nearer to any of them: the further from yourself. And as ye were too peremptory in that point, which here ye mitigate: so there, where ye said, they should employ themselves wholly or principally to the study of holy scriptures, etc. Which word principally, being also a gentle lenitive of the word wholly, is clean contrary to itself, and to your last assertion, that the office of Doctors, is only to teach true Doctrine, and to confute all heresies, etc. Which again is another difference, not from your brethren, but from yourselves; nor yet so much in method, as in matter. Neither can I see, how this also doth hang together, that the especial end of these Doctors is for the information of those, that should occupy the room of Pastors; and the Pastor's office is not only teaching, but exhortation is the principal part of their office: And should the informers and Teachers of their offices, not deal at all with exhorting and applying, which principally pertaineth to Pastors, but teach only? So indeed, they might make them Learned Doctors, like themselves, but sorry Pastors, with whose office, they have not to meddle. Me thinks it were better said of the twain, (these offices being thus distinguished) if Pastors did inform Pastors and Doctors too: since they may both Teach and exhort: and Doctors may not exhort, but teach only. But of these things, I willbe glad to be myself a learner, when I shall get a Doctor, that can more learnedly discourse upon them. In the mean season, let us now leave both these imagined, and other Doctors, not to every congregation, but rather to the Universities, and other fit places for them, as Cathedral and Collegiate Churches, etc. Where (I trust) some good Teachers and Doctors be. And now let us come, to view the Pastors. The Argument of the 3. book concerning the 2. Tetrarke, called the Pastor. Pastors. first, for the titles and names of Pastor, Elder, Priest, superintendant, Overseer, and of Bishop: Of the indifferent usage of the names of Pastor, Elder, and Bishop: Of one or many Bishops in one City: Of their equality in dignity, and authority: Of those Bishops, that S. Paul called together to Miletum: Whether the name were not made peculiar to one in the Apostles times: Whether Timothy and Titus were not such Bishops: How the Apostle calleth them Bishops at Philippos. Of the Superiority among the Apostles, and whether james were Bishop of jerusalem. Of the name and office of Priests, and Bishops in the Primitive Church: and so continuing, till Aërius moved the first question hereof: and of the Fathers, opposing themselves against him. Of Ieromes reasons for the occasions and ends thereof. Of the ancient Father's interpretation of the former places; and of the continual practice hereof in all Churches. That this order was no way to Anti-christes' pride, and tyranny; but the stop there-of. And of the original and state of the Church of Rome: and of the schism made therein by Novatus a Bishop of a new making, and of his Puritanisme. BEsides Doctors, there must be Pastors ordained in every congregation, which have diverse appellations in the Scripture. As, The learned Dis. Pag. 19.20.21. & 22. Ephes. 4. they are called by the name of Pastors, because they ought to feed the several flocks of God's sheep committed to their charge. As it appeareth Act. 20.28. 1. Pet. 5.2. They are called also Elders, not always in respect of their age, but of their office and gravity. For, Timothy was but a young man, & yet had the office of an Elder. This name was received of an ancient custom of the people of Israel, who used so to call those that were rulers or officers among them, Pastors and their titles. Act 20.28. 1. Pet. 5.2. Numb. 21.16 as it appeareth by many places both of the old and new Testament, but chiefly in Num. 11.16. Where god ordained seventy ancients, to assist Moses in his government, who were also endued at the same time with the spirit of Prophecy, from which time it became an ordinary office and name of Governors in Israel. Wherein we have to note against the Papists, that the Ministers of the Church, are never called in the new Testament, by the name of sacrificing Priests, which were under the Law: but often are called Elders of the similitude of those ancients, that governed the people of GOD. Whereas, if they had been appointed of God to be sacrificers: the similitude and name of sacrificing Priests, would a great deal better have agreed unto them. But whereas both these names, were usual amongst the jews, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the one signifying sacrificers, and the other Elders, the spirit of GOD doth often call the Minister's Elders: but evermore very precisely avoideth to name them Sacrificers, or Priests (as we use the term:) yea, though they succeed them in one principal part of their office, Mal. 2.7. that is to say, in teaching, as is written. The lips of the Priest should preserve knowledge, and men shall seek the Law at his mouth. Heb. 7.12.24 The cause where-of is evident, to be this, that the sacricing Priesthood of Aaron, is wholly translated unto Christ: in whom only it resteth, & passeth from him to none other. But by the name of elders, the Pastors are called, Act. 14.23. Act. 14.23. Where Paul and Barnabas ordained Elders by election in every congregation. And Act. 20.17. Act. 20.17. Paul sent for the Elders of Ephesus to Miletum. 1. Tim. 5 17. Also he affirmeth those Elders especially which labour in preaching & doctrine, to be worthy of double honour. Which place also testifieth of an other kind of Elders, of whom we shall have occasion to speak more hereafter, whose office consisteth only in government and not in public teaching moreover, Tit. 1.5. he showeth that he appointed Titus to ordain Elders in every City, and afterwards describeth what manner of men, he would have to be chosen into the office. Also S. james cap. 5.14. jam. 5.14. willeth, that if any besicke, they should call for the Elders of the Church, who being endued with the gift of healing at that time, should pray for the diseased, and anoint him with oil, 1. Pet. 5.2. and he should be restored to his health. Finally, S. Peter as a fellow Elder exhorteth the Elders to employ all their diligence to the feeding of the flock of God. Bridges. THis Discourse (as saith the marginal note in the beginning thereof) is of Pastors and their titles: as though this name Pastor were the chiefest, and more usual name, than any other of these Ecclesiastical offices, and all other were but titles appendent to Pastors. Whereas, not only (as I have declared) Musculus saith, that the name of Pastor, is but a Metaphorical name; signifying feeder of feeding, and is in right English commonly called a Shepherd, not a Pastor. But also, these our Learned Brethren discourses themselves do here confess, that they are called by the name of Pastors, because they ought to feed the several flocks of God's sheep committed to their charge. But, as the people of God are called flocks of sheep improperly, and only by similitude: So are the Ministers of God's word and Sacraments; and none otherwise called Pastors. Now, this their pasturing or feeding, being their teaching: The name of Pastor seldom used in the new Testa. the Pastor (as Musculus saith) is the Teacher, or Doctor. And this word Pastor albeit (as is aforesaid) improperly taken, though it be somewhat more used by some of the Prophets in the old testament: yet (in the new Testament (save, where it is ascribed only unto jesus Christ) it is rare or never to be found, directly ascribed to the Ministers of God's word and Sacraments, as it is in this place here quoted. Ephes. 4. Upon which we have already spoken. And as for the other quotations, Act. 20. & 1. Pet. 5. do rather insinuate them than call than by the name of Pastors. The name of Doctor or Teacher more proper and significan● than the name of Pastor. This Metaphorical name therefore of Pastor or shepherd, or feeder, is no more (if it be not much less) significant, for the office of the Minister of god's word and Sacraments: then is the name of Doctor, or is any more proper name of this Ecclesiastical office, then are the other which here be reckoned up. Whereof, as these our brethren the Learned discourses do first name the title of Elders: so in this example that they bring thereof, Numb. 11.16. Where God ordained 70. ancients to assist Moses in his government, who were also endued at the same time with the spirit of Prophecy, from which time it became an ordinary office and name of governors in Israel. This is so hardly brought forth, for the applying of this name unto the spiritual Pastor or Minister of God's word and Sacraments, that their-selves both here do rather apply it to the name of Governors, which name they give unto their Seniors, that are not Pastors: And also, pag. 88 saying: That Pastors seem to have borrowed this name of Elders, especially in respect of their Government. Whereas, it is apparent for those Elders (for all their prophesying) that their government consisted no white in Ecclesiastical, but in civil and temporal matters only. So, that those Elders were nothing like either these Elders, which they call Pastors, nor like the Elders that they call Governors, which they would have not only to govern (though, some civil and temporal, but chiefly) all Ecclesiastical matters. but of these 70. Elders, we shall see more hereafter. Now, concerning your note against the Papists, that the Ministers of the Church are never called in the new Testament, by the name of sacrificing Priests, which were under the Law. Which, as it is true: so that which followeth, but often are called Elders, of the similitude of those ancients that governed the people of God, I take, not to be so true, Elder. or so necessarily proved to be true, that the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, came of the similitude of those 70 ancients, The minist. of the new Test. have neither name nor office from the Elders their manner of government of the people of God; being so different and contrary. True it is, that those ancients are by the 70. interpreters called by that name, but so they call also both Abraham and his wife, and his man, and Lot, and the Sodomites, and the Elders of Pharaohs house, and all the ancient men of the people of Israel, beside and before they so call those 70. ancients. And of the office that they were called unto, saith, calvin, on the same place, Numb. 11.16. Numb. 11, 16 calvin on Numb. 11. For, before the Law was set forth, Moses was bidden to take 70. persons with him, who should conduct him into the mountain, that they might be eye witnesses of the glory of God. In the mean season I deny not, that there were 2. more above the number of 70. But only I show why God determined this number, to wit, that he might restrain the guides and heads of the people, to the family of jacob, which was the beginning of the nation, and the name. Yea, it seemed before, when as Moses to take the tables at the hand of God, ascended into mount Sinai, that he did lead with him threescore and ten Governors. Where-upon is gathered, that even then were chosen in that number, such as did excel in honour. Albeit the province of governing whereof mention is now made, was not as yet enjoined unto them. And it is likely, that those selfsame men which before were created Captains, were called to this new and unaccustomed office. Which also the words declare. Indeed, certain it is that whereas the jews returned from their exile in Babylon, because it has not lawful for them to create a King, they imitated this example, in ordaining a Counsel or session of Senators So great honour was given to the memory of David and of the Kings, that out of their stock they choase their 70. Governors, unto whom appertained the chiefest power of all kind of matters. Thus saith calvin of them. so that, the office of these 70. being mere lay, and nothing like to the government of the Ministers of God's word and Sacraments: and the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being indifferent to other aswell as to them, and that, both before and after them: it hath no likeliehoode, that the ministers of God's word, are called Elders of the similitude of those seventy ancients. True it is, that they are so called, and that often in the new Testament, and never, sacrificing Priests. But what is this to the name priest? Can you say, The spirit of God never calleth them priests? The spirit of God (say you) doth often call the Minister's Elders, but evermore precisely avoideth to name them sacrificer, or priests. Yea, doth it so? How doth it then often call them Elders? Priest. when that which we name in English Elder, Priest and Elder all one is in the very term of the spirit of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉? Of which very word the English term priest by contraction is derived. Do ye think this is a sufficient warrant, to come in with this Parenthesis (as we use the term)? And (I pray you) what an usage call ye this? Before, ye called them sacrificing priests, and made your argument all on sacrificing priests: And now ye come in with Sacrificers or priests. Priests and sacrificers not all one. Not making these sacrificers or priests to be terms disjunctive, & distinguished offices: but as betokening all one office or thing, that to be a sacrificer, is to be a priest: and to be a priest, is to be a sacrificer. and that sacrificing priest is all one. As we use the term (say you) they are all one. As you use the term (say I) you use it greatly amiss, and very far from the usage of the spirit of God, and from the usage of all the writers, both of the old testament, and the new. And if both these names (as you confess, were usual among the jews, Reformers of names should mark not so much how things are used, as how they should be used. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the one signifying sacrificers, the other Elders: then to use these words one for another, (as you here do) is a foul error and abuse. Especially, where we would, or should of purpose speak properly, and distinctly of these things. For we must not think, to scape here with this saying, every thing as it is used, or taken: but what it is itself, and how it should be taken. Namely here of you, going about to reform things and terms, that (you say) have been abused, and to reduce them to their first original use, and institution. Now, the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 howsoever the spirit of GOD used it in the old Testament, and yet most commonly different from the sacrificer: but especially in the new Testament, never for sacrificer, but chiefly for the Minister of the word and Sacraments: Our English word priest being derived from the same greek word, as also, the Latin, the French, the Italian, the Spanish, the high and low dutch, do all derive their names of this office, from this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: as Presbyter, Prestre, Presté Prete, Priester, even as we say, Priest: And many such words we have as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Episcopus, Euesqué, Vescove, Obispo, Bischoff, and we say, Bishop: and as the French, Eglise, etc. of the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and we Ecclesiastical on the same: and Church, which the Northern English calleth Kyrke of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Deacon, of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and a number of our English words are derived. But, if now the Papists, have afterwards abused this term Presbyter, which we commonly call priest, for sacrificer: Is it not lawful for us, to reduce this word, unto the same use, it was then, and long time after, in good sense used? Since, when soever we use the same for the Ministers of the Gospel, Pastors. we protest to use and understand it in no other sense, than the new testament doth. And if we wanting a fit term for Sacrificers, the word Priest hath been ill applied unto Sacrificers, hath not the word Bish. Deacon, Clerck, Church, Sacrament, Ceremony, Baptism, eucharist, Cross, Image, Saint, Doctor, Gospel; and a number terms more, been most shamefully, abused? and yet doth not their abuse debar our liberty of using these terms, understanding them in the true senses of them. And although I for my part do not mislike the name Elder, (being the true English of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as likewise shepherd or feeder, is of the word Pastor) if this word Elder had been in our English tongue more ordinarily used, Why the name of Elder though the more natural English, is not so fit a term, as Priest for the minister of the word. and more properly applied to the Ministers of God's word and Sacraments, whereas the word Priest, being derived from the Greek, and arrived here, is at the most but a free denizen: yet, since this free borne Elder, is so freely used to so diverse senses, that not only yourselves use it, for another kind of Elders: and because also it is more usually taken for those that be mere Politic officers: & for all that are more ancient than others, and so, ye here call the 70. ancients: and ordinarily, we use it for Elders in years and for those that have lived & died long before our times: therefore (me thinks) the term Elder, is not so fit a term (having so many, profane senses) to be applied to the Ministers of God's word and Sacraments, as is this our indenized word, Priest. And as also Pastor is another word forreyner borne, and yet yourselves had rather use that term: yea; and make it your especial proper term, than shepherd, or feeder: because the word shepherd is, although the righter and plainer English, yet properly betokening base persons, and feeder too generally applied to profane uses. Howbeit Brethren, without too earnest strife for these terms, this is but my simple opinion, a little declining from your Learned discourse upon this title of Priest. notwithstanding, as far from all allowing, or liking the popish sacrificing Priesthood, or any other of their errors, or superstitions, as (thanks be to God, you our Learned brethren, or any other reformed Churches are. As for the Latin word Sacerdos, as who would say, a giver of holy things: albeit indeed Sacerdos is no more the true exposition of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, than priest is of Sacerdos: Yet is not this word so utterly left out of the new Testament, but that S. Paul saith Rom 15.16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. To this, that I might be the minister of Christ, among the Gentiles, sanctifiing them to the Gospel of God. Wherein he 〈◊〉 alludeth to the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that Feguernekinus in his promptuary of Marl. saith in the title of Pastor. pastors quo sensu sacer. dicuntur. In what sense Pa. are called sacerdotal priests. But for the use thereof, as either the penury of the tongues permitted, or the use prevailed: so the Grecians (though having otherwise a tongue most copious) retained still their old name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and the Latins, Sacerdos. Wherefore (saith Kemnitius confuting the Council of Trent about the Popish sacrificing Priesthood: Neither do we strive for names. Kemnitius. contra Trid. conc. tom. 2. pag. 1140. Paul by a general name calleth the ministers, Doctors, Pastors. In the Scripture of the new testament, the name Sacerdotum, of Sacerdotal Priests, and Sacerdoty, of Sacerdotal Priesthood, is no where ascribed to the ministery of the new Testament: but by the use of Ecclesiastical writers, it is grown in custom, to call the ministery priesthood, and the Ministers Priests. So chrysostom calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, whatsoever pertaineth to the ministery of the new Testament. August. de Civitate Dei, Lib. 20. saith, Aug. decivit. Dei. lib. 20. Bishops and Presbyters (or Priests) are now properly in the Church called, Sacerdotes, Sacerdotal Priests. If therefore the Papists minded only this, that there should be in the new Testament an external sacerdotal Priesthood: that is to wit, an external ministery of the word and Sacraments, as we have already declared: there should be no controversy, nor troubles should be moved, for the name of Sacerdotal priesthood: so that the matters that be true and necessary, may be safe. And even thus as Kemnitius saith hereon: so say we. But although our brethren, and we agree herein, against the adversaries of the Gospel, that the Sacrificing Priesthood (understanding it as Kemnitius here said for the external function and action of real sacrificing) be translated unto Christ and resteth in him only: For otherwise, spiritually he so communicateth both his kingdom and priesthood, to his whole mystical body, that all the whole is an holy priesthood, as Peter saith 1. Pet. 2. and all the parts thereof, Kings and Priests in him: Apocal. 5. yet can not our Brethren here justify this, to be the cause, why the spirit of God avoideth in the ministers of the new Testament, the name of sacrificers or Priests, because the sacrificing priesthood of Aaron, is wholly translated unto Christ, Aaron's priesthood not wholly resting in Christ only. in whom only it resteth. For (as they here confess their selves) the ministers of the new Testament succeed the sacrificing priesthood of the old Testament, in one principal part of their office, that is to say, in teaching: as it is written, the lips of the Priest should preserve knowledge, and men shall seek the law at his mouth. If then, the sacrificing priesthood resteth wholly in Christ: we should have no external public teaching of God's Law. And therefore our brethren must correct their words in that point. Neither sufficeth it to say, they mean it only in respect of their sacrificing: For, the sacrificing priesthood consisted not only in sacrificing, i● teaching were a principal part thereof. And was not prayer another principal part thereof also? And both distinguished from the real external sacrificing part? Yea, if our brethren separate exhorting from teaching: as they said before, page. 17. exhorting is a principal part of a Pastor's office: and those sacrificing Priests were Pastors: and are oftener so called in the old Testament, then in the New: if then, in so many, and all principal parts of that priesthood, the ministers succeed them, although not in the sacrificing part: then is neither this true, that the sacrificing priesthood resteth wholly and only in Christ: neither is this any cause, that though the name of Sacrificer be avoided in the ministery of the New Testament, the name also of Priest (signifying Elder) should be, or is avoided. Which indeed it is not. For they are often called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Presbyters or Priests, in the new Testament. As for the places here by our brethren cited, because they are afterward recited, upon more material occasion of questions between us, and be here only referred to the use of the name: I defer them to their particular answers of them. another name they have in the Scripture, which is Superintendentes, The learned Dis. Pag. 22. & 23. or Overseers, because they ought to be vigilant and watchful, to oversee the flock, and every member thereof. Which name is never used in the Scripture, for such Bishops as claim and exercise dominion, and authority over whole Regions, & all the Pastors of the same, but only for those that be Pastors of every several congregation, having no superiority over their fellow Pastors, but be all of equal dignity and authority. So are they named Act. 20. where Saint Luke in the 17. verse, calleth them Elders of the Church of Ephesus. S. Paul in the 28. verse, calleth the same Overseers; saying: Take heed to yourselves, Act. 20.17. and to the whole flock, over which the holy-ghost hath made you Overseers, to feed or govern the Church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. In this place all the three appellations concur: namely, of overseers plainly, and Pastors inclusively in the word flock, and in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifieth to feed, or govern as a Pastor doth his sheep. We are now come to the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which in our vulgar English we call Bishop, Bridges. which name likewise by our Brethren, is almost as much shunned, The name of superintendant or Overseer nothing so fit a name as Bishop. as the name of Priest, and called rather by the names of superintendant or Overseer. And although these terms (where they are better known, and properly used for this office) are not to be misliked: yet because the word superintendant, is not derived of the word so often used by the spirit of God, but is only a signification or exposition of the same; Superintendents and Overseers. howbeit, so dark and strange to the Learned, that they are not so well acquainted therewith, as with the usual name of Bishop: and the name of Overseer, though it be English plain enough: yet, being used for many mean and worldly offices, as the Overseers of works, the Overseers of wills, etc. I take it therefore not to be so proper and apt a name, as the usual and peculiar name of Bishop, being the very Etymology of the Greek name, that the spirit of God useth in the scripture. But say our Brethren, this name is never used in the scripture, The use of the name Bishop. for such Bishops as claim & exercise dominion and authority over whole Regions, and all the Pastors of the same: but only for those that be Pastors of every several congregation, having no superiority over their fellow Pastors, but be all of equal dignity and authority. This is said only, and not proved, either out of any place, before, or here alleged. As for this present, Act. 20. ver. 17. & 28. neither nameth, nor inferreth any such thing. But argueth rather of twain the clean contrary. For, what meaneth this confused collection thereupon? That in this place the three appellations do concur, namely, Our Breath. confused collection of these names out of Act. 20.17.28. of Overseers plainly, and Pastors inclusively in the word flock, and in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth to feed, or govern, as a pastor doth his sheep. Where is here the concurrence of the three appellations? Here are two appellations by you named, Overseers plainly, and Pastors inclusively. Where is the third appellation that ye speak of? If ye mean in the Greek verb following, when ye say, and in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, call ye that also an appellation, because ye say it signifieth to feed or govern, as a Pastor doth his sheep? And how chance than ye add not the 3. appellation, and of governing also, call him a Governor? Fury add only, as a Pastor doth his sheep. And why not also as a Governor doth his people? For else, the term of Pastor might have sufficed. What, do ye shun of purpose the appellation of Governor here also included, and give the appellation of Governor to your other Elders, whom ye call (as it were) by their proper name Governors; and pull it from Bishops: lest you might seem (perhaps) to overthwarie yourself, and infer (by giving them the name also of Governors,) that they exercised Dominion and authority, yea, perhaps over whole Regions, and all the Pastors of the same? Which is the thing that of all other ye cannot brook. But let the proof of that fall out after as it shall: out of this place, as ye prove nothing to the contrary; so, if ye mean, by these three distinct appellations either plainly spoken or included, that Bishops are Overseers, are Pastors, and are Governors: than it followeth, that these three several appellations have three several respects. Bishop. Oversight or superiority of viewing and examining the states and duties of them, whom they oversee, as Overseers: feeding, by preaching the word of GOD, and ministering the Sacraments, the food of the soul, as they are Pastors: and government, which, what it implieth, besides these two former, I referr● to every indifferent concluders judgement. If now, ye would contain this third under the other two, ye should both confound yourselves, and these three concurring appellations. So that, the exercise of dominion and authority, of jurisdiction and discipline in the Church of God, appertaining to the office of Bishops, is either plainly or inclusively to be inferred of this place: even by our own observation thereon. Which exercise of authority and dominion, how farce it reached, whether over whole Regions, and all, or any the Pastors of the same: shall more and more appear by further discussing that which followeth. Where is to be noted, that Bishops or Overseers of one City were many: The L. D Pag. 23. which plainly argueth that they were none such, as nowe-adai●s are commonly called Bishops, which can be but one in one whole Diocese, much less many in one City. Although we need not greatly stand on this, whether those Bishops, that were called together by Saint Paul, Bridges. were at that time more, than one there continually resiant, being so head and famous a Church as Ephesus was, Whether there were many that properly were called Bishops in one City. and so in that point were different from bishops nowadays: yet may they well be such, in many other more necessary, material, and nearer points, to the point now in hand, though in this or some other point, they were not such. Would to GOD, all in Christendom, that have the name and office of bishops nowadays, differed no more but in this. The Popish Bishops differ in many more and far greater. And yet all, in all the offices of a Bishops differ not, though they all abuse their office diverse ways. As may an evil Prince, and a good Prince, and yet both Princes. As Aaron and Caiaphas, both Bishops: as Peter and judas, both Apostles. And so may there be both Doctors, Pastors, Governors, and Deacons, so well as Bishops, good and bad. And much less difference: being both good, and differing only in number of the persons, and not in the principal substance of their office. In which point is not so great difference, as these our Learned brethren ween. For diverse times there have been two or more Bishops at once in one see. Whereupon such were in the ancient time named 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & Coepiscopi, as Clemens, Linus, and Cletus, by diverse men's opinions, all Bishops of Rome together. And as Jerome Catalogo scriptornm Ecclesiast. telleth of Alexander, Bishop of Capadocia coming to Jerusalem where Narcissus was Bishop: he was made Bishop jointly with him, suffragan & coadjutor Bishops. and both of them together ruled the Church of jerusalem. Although this have the séeldomer happened, and orders since ●aue been made to the contrary, as at the Council of Nice, etc. to avoid emulations and contentions: and the imitation of suffragranes, yet to this day testifieth the same. Now although this be plain enough, to be no such material matter. To conclude, that Bishops, be it, they be more together in one Diocese, or in one City, have no authority over other Pastors, but that all Pastors are of equal dignity and authority: The question is of the equality of all Pastors. yet if this were denied (I mean for this place here alleged Act. 20.) can it be necessarily inferred thereupon? The text itself (say you) plainly argueth it. So are they named Acts, 20. where S. Luke in the 17. verse calleth them Elders of the Church of Ephesus. What say ye (my Masters?) dare ye avouch these words, Our Breath. wresting the words of the Text. Acts. 20.17. for the text itself in deed, and in distinguished letters? Read the text better, and you shall find these words: Wherefore, from Miletum he sent to Ephesus, and called the Elders of the Church. Doth this of necessity infer, that they were the Elders of the Church of Ephesus? Meaning by Elders, only the Pastors or ministers of the word and Sacraments, to the which purpose ye allege it, and not the Elders that ye call Governors (which, as ye afterward say, meddled not with teaching) for them ye, should allege it clean amiss for Pastors. And I pray you, do ye think there were then, (the Church there being so lately founded) many Pastors or ministers of the word and Sacraments, What likelihood of many Pastoral Elders in Ephesus wh●n S. Paul came to Miletum. abiding at that one Church of Ephesus? It is not likely, considering that time. For in the Chapter before save one, Chap. 18.19. is the first mention made of Ephesus, how Saint Paul coming thither, entered into the Synagogue and disputed with the jews, who desired him to tarry a longer time with them: but he would not consent, but bade them farewell, etc. After whose departure came Apollo's, as is aforesaid, verse, 25. The same was instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke fervently in the spirit, and taught diligently the things of the Lord, and knew but the baptism of john only. And he began to speak boldly in the Synagogue, etc. After whom Cap. 19 ver. 1. Paul returning came to Ephesus, and found certain Disciples, and said to th●m: have ye received the holy Ghost, since ye believed? And they said unto him, we have not so much as heard, whether there be a holy-Ghost, etc. And all the men were about twelve, ver. 7. So that, all this while there was yet no great number of sufficiently instructed Christians, much less of Pastors, (and all in the Synagogue of the jews) at Ephesus. But it followeth in the text of their increase. ver. 8. Moreover he went into the Synagogue and spoke boldly for the space of three months, disputing, and exhorting to the things that appertain to the kingdom of God. But when certain were hardened and disobeyed, speaking evil of the way of God, before the multitude: he departed from them, and separated the Disciples, and disputed daily in the school of one Tyrannus. And this was done by the space of two years. So that all they which dwelled in Asia, heard the word of the Lord jesus, both jews and Grecians. So that although Saint Luke say, on the occasion of the miracles following: verse 20. So the word of God grew mightily and prevailed: yet all this while here is no store of Pastors ordained in this Church of Ephesus that we read of, during Saint Paul's abode among them. Now (saith Luke ver. 21.) when these things were accomplished: Paul purposed by the spirit, to pass through Macedonia, and Achaia and to go to jerusalem: saying: after I have been there, I must also see Rome. So he sent into Macedonia two of them that ministered to him, Timotheus and Erastus. But he remained in Asia for a season. And the same time there arose no small trouble about that way. For a certain man named Dometrius a silver Smith, etc. And so Luke entereth into the declaration of that sedition, which to have pacified, ver. 30: When Paul would have entered in unto the people, the Disciples suffered him not. Certain also of the chief of Asia, which were his friends, sent unto him, desiring him, that he would not present himself in the common place. Whereupon it followeth in this 20. Chapter, verse 1. Now after the tumult was ceased, Paul called the Disciples to him, and embraced them, and departed to go into Macedonia. So that, here is described by Luke all the state of the Church of Ephesus, from the time that it first received the faith of Christ, till Saint Paul in his return towards jerusalem, having passed by Ephesus, because he would not spend the time in Asia, being come to Miletum, (sayeth Luke:) Wherefore, from Miletum he sent to Ephesus, and called the Elders of the Church. By all which conference it may appear, that there were not at that time many Pastors of the Church of Ephesus. And that (though the word of God grew mightily there and prevailed) yet we may perceive, that the most part of the City remained Idolatrous: so that the greatness of this Church, was but in comparison of other lesser Cities. And if it were as calvin observeth, on Act. 14. verse 23. calvin on Act. 14.23. And when they had ordained them Elders, by election in every Church, etc. I interpret Presbyters, (Priests, or Elders) to be here called those, unto whom the office of teaching was enjoined; for that there were some, that only were correctors of manners, appeareth out of Paul, 1. Tim. 5.17. Now where Luke sayeth, that they were placed over every Church: hereupon is gathered the difference betwixt their office, and the Apostles. For the Apostles had no certain station; but oftentimes ran about hither and thither, to found new Churches. As for Pastors, (as placed in holds) were addicted every one of them to their proper Churches. If this now, were the Apostles disposing of these Pastors, every one of them to their proper Churches: that is, singular men, in singular Cities: (besides, that by the way, he maketh the office of the Pastors to be teaching:) is it likely, there were many having pastoral cure, in this one Church of Ephesus? For, we find not in all Paul's abode there, of diverse congregations or Churches among them. Who may not therefore (if we confer these things together) plainly enough perceive; that where the text saith not, from Miletum he sent to call the Elders of the Church of Ephesus: but, from Miletum he sent to Ephesus, and called the Elders of the Church: that it should rather seem, he meaneth the Elders both of the Church of Ephesus, and of other Cities of Asia, bordering thereabout. For, as Luke said before, Chapter, 19 ver. 10. All they which dwells in Asia, heard the word of the Lord jesus, both jews and Grecians. And again, verse 3. Certain also of the chief of Asia, which were his friends, sent unto him, desiring him that he would not present himself in the common place. So that, it might very well be, that hearing of his approach, and (belike) thinking, he would have come thither, or of some other occasion being there assembled, as to the chief City, and greatest Church of all those coasts, he sent thither for them. And yet the words drive not so straightly neither, that he sent thither for them: but only that, he sent to Ephesus, and called the Elders of the Church. So that, they might be called as well from other places, as from thence. And the words of Paul unto them apparently stretch further than to Ephesus. Who when they were come to him, (sayeth Luke,) he said unto them: Ye know from the first day that I came into Asia, after what manner I have been with you at all seasons. These words being directly spoken to these persons whom he called for, and expressly saying, he had been with them, from the first day, he had been in Asia: and he had been long before in Asia, in his first peregrination: which these our brethren mentioned before, out of the 13. Chapter: that he and Barnabas were by the holy-ghost severed out to travail thither: wherein he had been at Perga, in Pamphilia: at Antioch in Pisidia; at Iconium, Derbe, Lystra in Lycaonia and Attalia, all Cities of this Asia the less, where Ephesus was the chiefest of them all: Saint Paul with Barnabas, having planted the Faith, and ordained Elders in every Church, as is aforesaid: in his second peregrination returning with the Apostles decrees, to confirm these foresaid and other places: and being again in Asia, till he was (Acts. 16. ver. 9 and 10.) called by the Lord to preach the Gospel in Macedonia: which done, departing from Corinth, he came first to this City of Ephesus, at what time he tarried not, Act. 18.20. till in his return from jerusalem, Act. 19 ver. 1. he came again to Ephesus, where he remained two years and a quarter. Howbeit, the most writers call it two year, including the three months that Luke speaketh of before, ver. 8. for the time he taught in the Synagogue, with the time that he taught in Tyrannus his school. And this (sayeth Luke) was done by the space of two years, S. Paul includeth other Churches besides Ephesus. ver. 10. but Saint Paul in this Oration saith to them, verse, 31. By the space of three years, I ceased not to warn every one, both night and day with tears. So that he plainly includeth with them other Churches of Asia, where he had likewise travailed. Which also he had before as it were expressed, ver. 25. And now behold, I know that hence forth, ye all through whom I have gone, preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my face no more. By all which we may safely conclude, that these Elders, (were they Bishops or Pastors, or any other ministers of the Church, few, or many,) were not only of this one City of Ephesus, but of diverse besides thereabouts. Neither is this my conjecture only, although if it (were, I hope the indifferent marker not of men but matter, shall find it carrieth probability, Gualther on Act. 20. ) but Gualther also is herein of my opinion. For (saith he) he calleth out even unto Miletum (which is about thirty or forty miles distant) the Elders or Bishops of the Ephesians, and of the Cities adjacent: and taketh order with them for weighty matters in a general Synod. But now, let us presuppose that all these Pastors, Priests, or Elders were only of the Church at Ephesus; doth it follow necessarily thereupon, that because Saint Paul calleth them all by the name of Bishops, they might not hear be Metaphorically called, or rather in some respect: then as the name might afterward, and even in the Apostles times, be more properly restrained, to some Pastors, that had some superiority over their fellow Pastors? So that, all were not of equal dignity and authority, though these at that time were. For as this name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉▪ came from the heathen, so when it was first borrowed of the sacred writers, and began to be used in the Church of God, it might be used more indifferently. As also the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The divers senses of the name of Bishop. etc. Which names are not always understood in the Scripture, in like proper sense, as since they have usually been and be accepted. And yet to this day, we do not so restrain this name Bishop, but (in respect of that the nature of the word implieth) we may not only use it still, Ecclesiastical titles and offices. for every Pastor or Minister of the word and sacraments, but also (as we commonly say) every man is a Bishop over his own family: and families also are sometimes called Churches. As, The name of King and of Priest in some sense, general. Col. 4.15. and every faithful man is called even a sacrificing Priest, as you translate it, and a King, Apoc. 5. But all this debarreth not, but that these words may in other places, be taken in other senses, and may more properly be applied to some especial offices. And so is the name of Bishop both ways taken. And to show this more manifestly, as we allow not any of the errors or abuses of the Popish Bishops, or other their ecclesiastical orders or offices, any more than any of our most zealous brethren do: so, if we peruse even their own assertions, and the ancient Fathers, both for this title of Bishops, and other titles, orders, degrees, dignities, and differences of the state ecclesiastical in the Primitive Church; we shall find sufficient proof and warrant hereof. The writers of the Centuries, Cent. 1. lib. 2. cap. 7. pag. 507. in their title of the policy or government of the Church, Historiae Magd. Centur. 1. li. 2. cap. 7. Pag. 507. do say: Among the persons that governed the Church in this age, these differences do occur. For some are called Apostles, Eph. 4. 2. Cor. 12. And not only those twelve Disciples of Christ are noted by that name, The titles of the Eccl. offices in the scriptures. but Paul every where in all his Epistles, calleth himself the Apostle of Christ: and Act. 14. Paul and Barnabas are called Apostles. Epaphroditus is named the Apostle of the Philippians. Philip. 2. Andronicus and junias, are notable among the Apostles, Rom. 16. Other: Prophets, Ephesians. 4. 1. Cor. 12. By this name, both they were called that were famous in the gift of prophesy, and also they that interpreted the Prophets, that is, the Scriptures, Act. 11. etc. Act. 13. Other: Evangelists, Eph. 4. He gave other to be Evangelists. By this name they not only appear to be called, who wrote the history of the Gospel, as were Matthew, Mark, Luke, john: but they also which every where did teach the Gospel. For Philip one of the seven Deacons, ordained in the beginning at jerusalem, is called an Evangelist, Act. 21. And Paul bids Timothy do the work throughly of an Evangelist. 2. Tim. 4. Other, Pastors, Ephes. 4. Other, Doctors, Ephe. 4. and 1. Corin. 12. Other, Elders, 1. Pet. 5. or Bishops, for Bishops and Elders are taken for the same, Act. 20. Paul saith to the Elders of Ephesus; the holy Ghost hath placed you Bishops to govern the Church of God, Tit. 1. I have left thee in Creta that thou shouldest in every town ordain Elders, etc. For a Bishop must be blameless, etc. jac. 5. Here even as you would have it these Centuriographers, do distinguish between the persons that, were Pastors, and that were Doctors. And also they made Elders and Bishops to be all one. But they make Elders or Bishops to be distinguished from Pastors. And how agreeth this with that you here avouch, that by the name of Elders the Pastors are called: and that Bishops be Pastors: and that the names of Pastors and Overseers do concur? Neither agreeth this with you, that they say, after they have reckoned up Deacons and waiting Ministers, or attendants on the Apostles: Meminerunt, etc. They remember only three degrees: Apostles, Presbyters or Bishops, and Deacons. All which three were found in some Churches, while as the Apostles were yet alive. For in the Church of jerusalem, in the beginning, there were twelve Apostles, who exercised the ministery of the Church. But the number of the Church increasing, and when necessity required, a more diligent care of the things that were common, seven Deacons are chosen and ordained, Act. 6. There are also in the same Church, Prophets, Act. 11. There are Apostles and Elders, Act. 15. They were received of the Church and of the Apostles and Elders. When Paul came last of all unto Jerusalem, he found there james and the Elders, who are said to have come together, Act. 21. In the Church of Antiochia, for a time were Paul and Barnabas, who are called Apostles and Prophets, & Doctors, whom it is lawful to call Elders. If now, the sacred writers of the New Testament, do remember but only three degrees: Apostles, Elders or Bishops, and Deacons: which all three were found in some Churches, while the Apostles were yet living, (which is the time that you prescribe, and which is the time whereof these men said in the beginning of this matter, Our Breath. tetrarchy dissolved. that in this part, no age is to be compared hereunto,) where is then become the Ecclesiastical government of all these four persons, Doctors, Pastors, Governors, and Deacons? Where are here your Governors, if ye include them in the name Elders, they express what kind of Elders they were: Elders or Bishops. As you here say, and ye call them Pastors; and they say, that those whom we may call Elders, were Apostles, Prophets, and Doctors. So that your other governing Elders, that were neither Apostles, Prophets, nor Doctors, are excluded, and your distinction also between Elders and Doctors, is removed. Neither do even your own examples, which immediately follow, any whit help you. In the Church of Phillippos' are Bishops and Deacons, Phil. 1. Paul and Barnabas are said to create only Elders, Act. 14. Paul biddeth Titus to make Elders or Bishops in every town in Creta, Tit. 1. He prescribeth to Timothy what manner of Bishops and Deacons he should ordain, 1. Tim. 1. Paul sendeth for Elders out of Ephesus, whom he calleth Bishops, to come to Miletum unto him, Act. 20. Thus do they diligently search the Scriptures: and examine the church's state; and construe the word Bishop as you would have it for Elder, or Minister of the word; and say, that these were the Elders of the Church of Ephesus, that Paul sent for: and yet all this will not help to find out one place recorded in the Scripture, while the Apostles lived, where the government Ecclesiastical, was directed by all these four kind of persons joined together, and one distinguished in office from another, as you (by the examples of the Apostles) would prescribe. But since they cannot do it: I beseech you do it, and set down the place where all these four concurred. And yet if ye so did, and no rule prescribed, for all to do the like: may not we plead also to be the church of Christ, though we have no such priests, Elders, Governors, nor such Doctor's distinct from pastors, as these Churches had not in all the Apostles times? To conclude, say these writers of the Centuries. The tetrarchy again overthrown But how many persons exercised the ministery in every church, is not noted in the histories, nor is any where commanded, that they should in every place be a like many. But as the fewness or the multitude of the assembly required: so were fewer or more admitted to the Church's ministery. They appointed Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors and Doctors, not to be certain degrees of persons in the Ecclesiastical regiment, but they seem to be reckoned either among the Apostles and their fellows, or else among the Elders or the Deacons. So that, as still these your Governors are not mentioned; so, still your quadrible distinction of these persons and their offices, is overthrown, and no number commanded or prescribed. Thus do these setters forth of this first century (or hundredth years) of the Apostles time, and of the Primitive Church, even where they make for you, concerning the title of Bishops, make clean against you for your Doctors, for your Governors, & for your Deacons, whom they make to be Teachers also: saying of them Pag. 508. These men's office was to Minister to the table at Jerusalem, while the community of the goods was there, Act. 6. Deacons taught. But notwithstanding that they taught also and wrought signs, appeareth by Steven, Act. 6, and by Philip, Act. 8.23. And in other Churches every where, it was the Deacons office to teach & minister. Mention is also made of women Deacons: for, Ro. ●6, Women Deacons. Phoebe is called the minister of the Church of Cenchrea. The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, calleth them by a general name, the Ministers of the Church, Heb. 13: Obey your Rulers. Thus writ they of the office of Deacons: so that, they were Doctors or Teachers also of the word, and had the cure of souls, for so it followeth in the foresaid text. And submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls: all which is clean contrary to your prescription. Kemnitius also in his second Tome aforesaid, before he come to the Treatise of the equality or superiority of Bishops, Kemnitius 2. tom. contra Trident con. confuting the decree of Trident council, for their seven degrees of orders; saith at large on this wise: as for the matter, thus it stands; because many duties (or offices) do appertain to the ministery of the Church, which in a great assembly of believing people, cannot all and every one of them conveniently be dispatched of one man or of a few: that therefore all things should be done in order decently and to edification, the assembly of the Church being multiplied: those duties or offices of the ministery, began to be distributed into certain degrees of Ministers, the which they called after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ordinances or orders, that every man should have as it were a cerieine station, in the which he should serve the Church in certain offices of the ministery. So the Apostles in the beginning, attended on the ministery of the word and Sacraments, and also on the contribution and dispensation of the alms. But afterward the number of the Disciples increasing, they commended that part of the ministery which pertained to alms unto other, whom they called Deacons. And they allege the reason that they so do, to wit, that they might travel in the ministery of the word and prayer more diligently, without any withdrawings of them from the same. Act. 6. And this first beginning of degrees or of orders of the ministery of the Apostlicall Church, declareth wha● ought to be the cause, what the reason, what the end of such either degrees or orders: to wit, that according to the consideration of the Ecclesiastical assembly, all offices which appertain to the ministery, may be executed more commodiously, rightlier, more diligently, and in order, with some gravity to edification. And because the Apostles out of those Deacons, did assume them, which were tried afterwards into the ministery of teaching, as Steven, and Philip: it is gathered, this also to be the use of these, either degrees or orders, that they should be prepared before, and proved in the lesser, that afterward the more weighty offices of the ministery, might the safelier and with profit be commended unto them. And this is that that Paul saith, 1. Tim. 3. Let them first be tried, and so let them minister. Again: They that have in the Deaconship ministered well, shall get to themselves a good degree. So in the Liturgy of the Church of Antiochia, Act. 13. There were Prophets, and Doctors: of whom, those did either foretell things to come, or expound the more difficult places of the Scripture, 1. Cor. 14. These did set forth unto the people the principles of Christian religion, Heb. 5. Paul and Barnabas do assume Mark to be a Minister, Act. 13. Not only that he should Minister corporal things unto them: but that they might commend to him certain parts of the ministery of the word, as Paul expressly saith, Act. 15. How contrary this is to your doctrine, both for the general considerations of making degrees in the ministery on these aforesaid causes: and namely, how flat against your assertions for Deacons, Pag. 108: I refer to the conference of the Reader, till we shall come to your Learned Discourse thereon. Now to proceed on with Kemnitius. In the Church of Corinthe, there were Apostles, Prophets, Doctors, certain that spoke with languages, certain that interpreted: some had Psalms, some prayers, blessings, and thanksgivings; not in private exercises, but in the public conventicles of the Church, 1. Cor. 12. & 14. Certain degrees of the ministery, Ephes. 4. are reckoned up. First, Apostles, which were not called to any certain Church: neither by men but immediately of Christ. And had commandment to teach every where. And were adorned with the witness of the spirit, and of miracles, that they erred not in doctrine, but that their doctrine was divine and Celestial: to the which all other Doctors should be bound. secondly, Prophets: who either had revelations of things to come; either who interpreted languages, and the Scriptures: for those that were more grown: for these things are attributed, 1. Cor. 14, to the Prophets of the new Testament. thirdly, Evangelists, who were not Apostles, and yet they were not assigned to one certain Church, but were sent to diverse Churches: that there they might teach the Gospel, but chiefly that they might lay the first foundations. Such an Evangelist was Philip, Act. 21, Timothy, 2. Tim. 4, Tichicus sylvanus, etc. That also there were such Evangelists after the Apostles times: Eusebius testifieth, lib. 3. cap. 37, etc. fourthly, Pastors: who were placed over a certain flock of the Church, as Peter showeth, 1. Peter. 5, and did not only teach, but also ministered the Sacraments, and had the view of the hearers, as Ezechiel. 34. describeth the office of the Pastorship. fiftly, Doctors, unto whom the chief government, and view of the church was not commended, but only to set forth doctrine simply to the people, such as afterward were Catechists. So, Rom. 2. Paul calleth him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, A Teacher of Infants: and so, in this signification is the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to Teach, expressly used, Heb. 5. Here Kemnitius seemeth to make greatly for your dinstinguished Doctors, and that they might not exhort. And yet mark that place better, where S. Paul saith, Hebr. 5.12. For whereas concerning the time, ye ought to be Teachers: yet have we need again, that we teach you the first principles of the word of God, and are become such, as have need of Milk, and not of strong meat, etc. And ye shall see, that S. Paul even in those words, very oratoriouslie doth move them. Besides, that the Epistle hath many and singular exhortations and applications, etc. And if ye further mark, ye shall find all contrary to you: even where your Eldership and Bishopric is also made all one. For it followeth; but all these degrees the Apostles comprehend in the name of Eldership or Bishopric. So that your Elders that are Bishops, are not only Pastors (as you would have them) but your Doctors also are Elders, that are Bishops: clean contrary to your distinguishing of them. Now and then also by a general name they call them Deacons, unto whom the ministery of the word and Sacraments is committed. Col. 1, 1. Thes. 3, 2. Cor. 3. & 11, Ephes. 3. Paul himself also, did sometimes so regard the ministery of the word, that he commended the administration of the Sacraments unto others, 1. Corinth. 1. Christ sent not me to Baptize, but to preach the Gospel. And 1. Tim. 1, he mentioneth two kinds of Elders (or Priests) of whom some laboured in the word and doctrine, some were set over the ecclesiastical Censures: of which kind of Priesthood (or Eldership) Tertullian also recordeth, in Apologet. ca 39 These are almost the degrees, into which the offices of the Ecclesiastical ministery in the time of the Apostles are read to be distributed. And that distribution hath the examples also of the old Testament. For David 1. Par. 23, and in the chapter following, distributeth the ministery of the Temple into certain degrees and orders. There were also in the synagogue, Readers, which only read the text of the Scripture. But beside, there were Doctors which interpreted the Scripture, and applied the text to exhortations, Luke. 2, Act. 15. And this was the difference between the Scribes and Phariseis. Whereby we see also, that these Doctors that were interpreters of the Scriptures, Doctor's exhorting & applying. both before the time of Christ, and his Apostles, here in earth, and after in all their time, were not so to teach and interpret the principles of religion, but that withal they applied the same to exhortations. Now upon all these degrees and orders, Kemnitius gathereth these general rules. But for this present disputation, this admonition is to be added. first, that it is not in the word of God commanded, which, or how many, or that such orders ought to be. And here I beseech you good Learned brethren, note this admonition well, and I think, this one admonition may suffice, to answer all your Learned Discourse. For, The principal question between us, how many Ecclesiastical order are commanded. the principal question between us, is not, what orders and degrees were in the Apostles times, of the Ecclesiastical ministery; but whether those orders and degrees, or such orders or degrees, and how many of them are commanded; and so of necessity ought to be retained, yea or no. secondly, that in the time of the Apostles, there were not in all churches, and always, the selfsame, and so many degrees or orders. The which thing is manifestly gathered out of the Epistles of Paul, written to diverse, Churches. Not all places alike for Eccl. orders, nor all times in the Primitive Church. And this is also another notable admonition, to be well pondered, yea all the poise of our principal question, lies again héereon. For as before, if there were no commandment or prescribed rule to all ages; so here, if there were no universal practice in all Churches, in the Apostles times: or where there was a practice of these orders and degrees, it continued not then always, but changed: how are we now bound to an universal and perpetual practice of those degrees and orders? Neither do we find in Paul's Epistles this diversity of practice, for other orders or degrees only; but even of Pastors, whom ye call Bishops, not mentioned 1. Cor. 12, where so many are reckoned up, and among other; Governors, whose office (ye say) consisteth only in government, and not in public teaching. And S. Paul, Ephes. 4. where he mentioneth Pastors, omitteth these Governors: and yet in both places of purpose he handleth the orders of Ecclesiastical ministery. And in the latter, where he omitteth these Governors, that you urge, he setteth down without any mention of them, the end of these orders to be, for the gathering together of the Saints, for the work of the ministery, and for the edification of the body of Christ: till we all meet together in the unity of faith, and knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, and unto the measure of the age, of the fullness of Christ. And would we have a more fullness than this? And yet are your Governors clean left out. This (I say) would be substantially noted for these orders. And albeit, Kemnitius here do withal gather, that in the Church of Ephesus, there were also Elder-governors, somewhat like such, as you prescribe: yet by this Epistle to the Ephesians, and by Kemnitius admonition, it appeareth, they were not there always. Nor the words to Timothy do necessarily infer, that there were there, and then, any such kind of Elders. But whatsoever they were, all Churches were not alike in these orders. thirdly (saith Kemnitius) there was not in the time of the Apostles, One man executed divers Eccl. offices in the Apostles times. such a distribution of those degrees; but that more often one and the same man did sustain, and execute all those offices that appertained to the ministery. The which thing is manifest by the Apostolical History. This third note again, clean overthroweth all your Learned Discourse, and fully answereth all the bitter outcries of our Brothers Fruitful Sermon (as they term it) on the 1. Cor. 12. for encroaching, confounding, The unfruitful terms of our Brothers Fruitful Sermon, on 1. Cor. 12. foolish & pernicious shuffling together, of diverse duties. Which terms savour of more zeal (to say the best thereof) then of charity or knowledge. Now, saith Kemnitius upon these three admonitions: These ordinances therefore, in the Apostles times were free (consideration being had of order, comeliness, & edification) save that at that time, certain peculiar gifts, as of tongues, of prophesy, of Apostles, and of miracles, were given of God to certain persons. As for these degrees whereof we have hitherto spoken, were not any thing beside and without the ministery of the word and Sacraments, but the same and the very offices of the ministry were distributed into those degrees, for the causes now declared So that all this that is before spoken, is not so much to be noted for the extraordinary offices; as for these that you make ordinary. Now, upon this liberty of the Apostles times, how the Primitive Church next succeeding them, did follow or alter any of these orders: Kemnitius still proceedeth saying: That example of the Apostles, the Primitive Church with the same reason, and the like liberty did imitate. The Primitive Church's liberty in th●se things after the Apostles times. For the degrees of the offices of the ministery, were distributed. Howbeit, not altogether by the same reason, as in the Church of Corinthe, or in the Church of Ephesus: but according to the reason of the circumstances of every Church. Whereupon is gathered what a liberty there was, in the distribution of those degrees. And this requireth, no less to be marked, than all the other three admonitions. For, if there were such a liberty in the Primitive Church, immediately after the Apostles times; Our liberty herein after the Primitive Church and that on the imitation of the Apostles; and that in these two and so famous Churches, Corinthus and Ephesus: and yet different in these degrees and orders, of the Ecclesiastical ministery, one from an other, and other from them, according (not to any commandment prescribed) but to the reason of the circumstances of every Church: have not we as much liberty now, in the distribution of the degrees and orders of the Ecclesiastical ministery? Well, let us proceed with Kemnitius, to his particular examples of these orders. Dionysius, cap. 5. of his Hierarchy, expressly numbereth only three orders. first, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of the principal divine Minister, to whom he giveth the chief and most perfect office of teaching, in the declatation of all the mysteries of Christ, and administration of the Sacraments. secondly, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Sacerdotum, of the sacred Ministers or the givers of holy gifts, The name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Sacerdotal Priest. (or as we usually, for penury of proper words, improperly say, Priests, which is derived properly of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as is aforesaid, and you call Elders: whereas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth a sacred person, dedicate to the Temple, and the divine offerings or ministery) which do more fully instruct him in the Catechism, and bring him to the Bishop, and help in those things, that pertain to the administration of the Sacraments. thirdly, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ministrorum, of the (public) Ministers: to whom he giveth the office of cleansing, and preparing those, that are to be entered, that is to say, of Catechising. And cap. 3. he saith, by the office of the Ministers, the reading of the holy Scripture, in the order thereof, is recited. Again, of the Ministers: some stand to shut the doors of the Temple, while they which are learners of the Catechism, which are poenitents, which are possessed or vexed with a spirit, are thrust out. Other, have an other office, to strip him that it to be baptized, etc. Thou seest, that he reckoneth many offices of the ministery: and yet he doth not give to every one of them peculiar orders: but reckoneth up only three orders. The Canons of the Apostles, namely, Bishop, Priest, or Elder, Three orders. and Deacon, Reader, and Singer. But there is no mention made of doorkeeper, exorcist, and acolyte. Bishop. Ambrose on the 4. chapter to the Ephesians, describing the degrees of the offices of the ministery of his time, rehearseth Bishops, Priests, or Elders, Deacons, Readers, exorcists. In the book, which is ascribed to Jerome, of the seven degrees of the Church, Exorcists and Acolytes are not reckoned: Seven orders not catholic. therefore the opinion of those seven orders is not Catholic. But some of the ancients, number more orders above those seven: the Epistle of Ignatius reckoneth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Labourers: whom Epiphanius calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the little book of Jerome, calleth them Fossores, diggers; to wit, which attended on the corsses of the dead, and buried them. The Grecians have a peculiar office of those that are syngeli, (or rather, as I take it) sygeli, silensaries, or keepers of silence, or bidders of the congregation to hold their peace. Ignatius reckoneth unto the orders, Confessors: Clement, The Canonists make nine orders. Catechists: the Canonists reckon nine orders, for they reckon in Psalmists, and Bishops. But the multiplication of Ecclesiastical orders, from thenceforth, arose afterward. For Cyprian in the 3. book, Epistle 22, showeth, that nothing that was to be done in the Church, and in matters of the Church (although ●hey properly pertained not to the ministery of the word) should be done by any other, than by clerk. And so it behoved the waiting & household servants of the Bishops, and of the Priests or Elders, to be clerk. clerk. From thence afterwards Stewards, Defenders, Vidoms, those of the houses which were the greater (or Bowrgraves) were taken from the clerk. clerk therefore were those, which by a peculiar and more straight discipline, were framed and prepared to the Church's ministery. And they were first appointed to certain lesser offices: that the study, diligence, faith, and gravity of them, might be tried, whether they would become fit for greater and more weighty offices. And in the Churches more frequented, when as especially out of the fields, villages, and little towns, chiefly in the more solemn feasts, they must come from all parts to the Metropolitan Church, (as many ancient canons or rules do command this) one or a few were not able to execute all and every of the offices of the ministery. Therefore, degrees and orders were distinct: not in idle titles, but in certain offices appertaining to the ministery of the Church. The Bishop was treating of the word of GOD, and caring for the discipline of the Church: the Priests, were teaching and ministering the Sacraments. And here note this difference betwixt the Bishops & the Priests: not meaning your Priests that ye call Governors only, Difference between the Bishops and Priest's. but Priests that taught and ministered the Sacraments; that is to say, were both Doctors and Pastors, & withal note the superiority (over the Priests) of these ancient Bishops in the Primitive Church next the Apostles times. The Deacons were the Governors of the Church's treasures: that they might thereupon provide for the maintenance of the poor, and chiefly of the ministers of the Church. The Deacons also afterwards began to be assigned to ease some part of the ministery of the Bishop, The Deacons exercise. and of the Priests, or Elders, as also Hierom ad Rusticum doth testify: as before to read something out of the Scripture, to teach, to exhort, &c: to admonish the people to be attentive, to have their hearts to the Lord, to pronounce the peace, to make ready those things that pertain to the administration of the Sacraments, to distribute the Sacraments to the people, to present those that are to be ordained to the Bishop, to warn the Bishop of those things that pertain to discipline, etc. But Jerome complaineth to Rusticus of Narbona, that many such things especially in the Church of Rome, were imposted upon the Deacons, besides the Apostolic all tradition, and besides the custom of other churches, insomuch that the first and true office of the Deacons, was in Deacons almost blotted out. For sith that Deacons were occupied with those new offices; Subdeacons were substituted unto them, which gathered the oblations of the faithful, that were given for the sustentation of the poor, and of the Ministers. Besides these, there were readers, which out of the Scripture, especially out of the Old Testament, red publicly before the people. For the reading of the New Testament, was afterward given unto the Deacons. Inferior orders. There were Psalmists or singers, which did fore-sing (or set the note) to those things that all the people are wont to sing. There were door keepers or Porters, which in the time of the mysteries, after the denouncing of the Deacon, thrust out of the Temple the Heathen, the learners of the Catechism, the penitents, the possessed with spirits, the heretics, and those that were excommunicate. For so doth Dionysius describe this office. The Bishops, the Priests, and the Deacons, had their servants, ministers, companions, or followers of them, whose labour as necessity required they did use. As Paul used the labour of Onesimus. Those they called Acolytes. From whence afterwards ignorance made them taper-bearers. There were beside Exorcists, that had the gift of casting out or repressing devils. Where and how these distributions of degrees were observed. This distribution of degrees in the more frequented Churches, by reason of the offices that pertained to the ministery, was profitable, for because of order, to comeliness and to edification. But in smaller and seldomer frequented Churches, such destribution of degrees was not judged necessary. And in the more frequented also, was not every where the like and the same distribution of those degrees. But by this reason, to this use, and in the same liberty, the most part of those degrees of the old Church, are also kept of us. These things have I rehearsed, that it might the more commodiously be showed, what in this chapter is put in controversy, of the degrees or orders Ecclesiastical, for neither do we simply reject or condemn the distribution of those degrees, as it was in the Apostolical and in the old church: How far they are rejected. but according to the reason of necessity and edification, we use the same in our Churches, after the same sort as is declared. Thus d●o we see, all the state of the Ecclesiastical ministery in the Apostles and in the ancient time, in what fort and what variety they were used, and on what occasions, and to what purposes they were ordained, and how farre-foorth they or we are bound unto them, or at liberty from them. All which, in how many and how forcible points, it overthrows all your platform of Ecclesiastical government: I refer to any indifferent reader's judgement. But because my chief occasion, to set this down so far at large, was here especially to consider among these orders, what he noteth, concerning the office and degree of a Bishop: I mind therefore, yet further to proceed with him▪ where of purpose and directly he confuteth also the decree of Trident counsel, that Bishops and priests are not equal. But as we have seen all this in him at large, for all the orders and degrees of the Ecclesiastical ministery: so by the same aforesaid, and in general, have we to level all that, which in particular he setteth down after concerning Bishops, of whom, and as before in speaking of these orders he alloweth none of the popish abuses in them: neither any of us (I hope,) do favour, or would go about by any means to maintain any errors, usurpation, pride, and tyranny of the popish Bishops; so doth not Kemnitius any more than we condemn, in true and godly Bishops, simply all superiority over priests or pastoral Elders, neither would these our Brethrens, on the better consideration of the proves thereof, both in the Apostles, and in the ancient Fathers, and by the grave and modest judgement, even of the very best, and most learned late writers of their side. And first, as we are not, (at leastwise should not be) desirous of contention, especially to contend about questions of names only, and mere titles, but rather to search and follow the truth of the matter: so I gladly grant for the name Bishop, and for the name priest or pastoral Elder, though they differre in sense, (as Jerome in his Epistle to Oceanus saith) the one being a name of dignity, the other of age: yet in the old time, and namely when these names were first in the New Testament, applied to the Ministers of GOD'S word, The n●me Bishop and Priest, at the st●st accepting of ●●ē▪ used indifferently. and Sacraments, they were (I grant indifferently used, Priest for Bishop, Bishop for priest, and both for one. The reason was, because such commonly as were chosen and ordained hereunto, were in ripeness of years ancient men. Or if in years not so ancient, (which was the seldomer,) yet ancient in judgement and gravity of manners. Timothy Bishop. Whereupon they had the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Priest, or Elder: and withal in their office, having an oversight; the name Episcopus, that we call Bishop, was likewise given unto them. The state of the question for Bishop's superiority. But the question lieth not in this, whether at that time, until these names were grown into more peculiar uses, they were thus indifferently taken one from another; or, whether they might not be reduced to that indifferent acceptation again: but, whether those that were so called then indifferently, had likewise no kind of difference in oversight, authority, and government among them, but were merely in such sort all equal alike (being equally of like and of one order and degree of ministery) that no one or other among them, to whom the name and office of Bishop was compatible, had, or might have any superior oversight, government, and authority, over any other in the same order, of Priesthood or Eldership, that himself was of: whereupon this name Bishop (or some other name equivalent) began to be more restrained unto that Priest, or Pastoral Elder, than unto the residue: albeit, they were still indeed (and so were called) in the office of the ministery and Eldership, his fellow Elders. And how ancient the original of this superior authority was. For this I take, to be the ground and principal substance of this controversy. Concerning the etymology of the name of Bishop, because I have so largely begoone with him. I will only set down Kemnitius, tom. 2. pag. 1181. Kemnitius tom. 2. exam. cap. 4. de sacr. ord.. But that those things which in this place concerning Bishops may the rightlier be understood, certain things before hand out of the Scriptures, and out of the true testimonies of antiquities, are in brief to be repeated. The names therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of Bishop, and Bishoplie office, The original of the name Bish. are in the apostical writing read, to be used for the Ecclesiastical ministery, Act. 1. & 20. Phil. 1. Tit. 1.1. Tim. 5.1. Pet. 5. But those names are taken from the use of the vulgar tongue, and are applied to the ministery of the Church, for the care of administration and of viewing. Suidas saith, that in the commonweal of Athens there, were Bishops and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Keepers or watchmen, that were sent to the cities subject unto them: not to govern them with an absolute government, as Lindanus doth interpret it: But, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, as Budeus out of Livy translateth it, to view their fellows matters. Plutarch in the life of Pericles, saith: Phidias was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Bishop of all the works: that is the viewer of them, etc. And so noting out of Homer, plutarch, Tully, and the Pandects: The Apostle (saith he) did the more gladly apply those names to the Ecclesiastical Ministry, because they were known and common, by reason of the Greek translation of the Old Testament. For the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pakad Pekudah, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pekudim, which signifieth a visitation, a viewing, an office, a care, an administration committed, Bishop. a duty given in charge. The Grecians translated it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to oversee, an oversight, and overseers, or surveyors, Num. 31. the overseers of the army, judic. 9 Abimelech hath Zebull his Bishop or overseer, 4. Reg. 11. The Bishops or overseers that are over the army. Ibid. the custodies placed over the house of the Lord, are thus expounded of the Grecians he hath placed Bishops over the house of the Lord, 2. Par. 34. The viewers of the workers, are called Bishops, Num. 4. The office or duty of Eleazar in the Tabernacle of the Lord is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a Bishopric. So, Psal. 109. The function of judges is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a Bishopric. I have rehearsed these examples that I have observed, that it might be considered from whence the Apostles took that name. The force whereof also may be gathered and understood of those places. Jerome translateth it a superattendent. Ambrose, a Super-inspector. Thus far Kemnitius on the name. Now in this sense, every one to whom an Ecclesiastical charge was committed at the first might well be called a Bishop. In which sense, the name Bishop stretcheth especially to the Apostles, Act. 1. as likewise all the Apostles were Deacons. The general sense of the name Bishops. Yea the name Deacons contains all the Ecclesiastical ministery. But when these offices began more seperatlie to be divided: then the name of Deacon began to grow peculiar unto those, that attended especially on the tables, the name Bishop remaining as it did, unto the Apostles. And when the Apostles planted the faith of Christ in any Churches, and ordained in the same Pastoral elders, (in respect of this their overseeing the people, and good orders among them) they indifferently communicated this name of Bishop unto them. And so the name continued taken indifferently, and was well used by S. Paul to these Pastors, mentioned Acts. 20. (admitting they were all of Ephesus only,) until factions rising among the people, as they were affected to some Elders, more than to other: so the name of Bishop which was before indifferent, became more appropriate unto one; The appropriating of the name B. unto some one among the Pastors. who (as having the overseeing not only of the people, but also of his fellow Pastors,) began by their consents, more especially to be called Bishops, than the residue. Which title, of being the Overseer of them, as it could not but carry withal a jurisdiction and authority over them; nor could be wrong from them without all their consents, that were before invested with this title and authority: so, who were the first that began the appropriating of this title Bishop, unto one above his fellow Pastors; and when, and where it first began; though it be not purposely expressed in the Scriptures: yet that the occasion and introduction of it, had his entry even in the Apostles times; many reasons (and those I hope of substance) may induce us thereunto. And that not only of the testimonies of the ancient Fathers, Timothy Bishop. and practise of the Church of Christ, This appropriating of the name B. began in the Apostles times. in all the ages nearest succeeding the Apostles; (which should some▪ what move us) but even by the conference and examining the Scripture itself, we shall find more than probalitie of the same. For, if we should go no further, than this Church of Ephesus, of which ye make all these to be Pastors: & all these Pastors, Bishops: and all these Bishops equal, having jointly an oversight over the people, or parted into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which we call parishes: yet notwithstanding for all these Bishops, it doth plainly appear, they had afterwards in S. Paul's time, one Bishop that had an oversight, over all these Bishops & overseers. And what (I pray you) importeth that, (if it be proved) but that either he was an Archbishop or chief Bishop over them, if they were Bishops: or if they were not, and did but for the time portake the name of Bishop, that was but late taken up among them; yet at the last he had a superior episcopal jurisdiction over them? And first, what meaneth, (in the end of the later Epistle of S. Paul to Timothy,) this subscription? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The subscription of the later Epistle ●o Timoth. etc. The second Epistle written from Rome unto Timothy the first Bishop, ordained of the Church of Ephesus▪ True it is, the former part of this subscription, is omitted in the common Latin translation. But since it is in the Greek, and not omitted either by Erasmus, or by our Geneva translation, though Beza (likewise translating the same) do add his censure-saying: This member is not extant in some old books, and indeed, I think it is put in underhand: yet since he shows no reason at all, wherefore he should so think: it is free for other, not to think so lightly of it: Timothy being of so many learned and ancient Fathers and interpreters, so rep●●ted and called Bishop of Ephesus. Now, if Timothy were the first ordained Bishop of Ephesus; what? Was he first in time, and before all these▪ or was he any of these, whom S. Paul Act. 20. calleth Bishops? the text is manifest to the contrary. For as Paul took him to go with him, Act. 16.3. so he traveled with him till he came to Boerea, Acts. 17. verse. 14. and 15, & there abiding, when Paul went to Athens, he came at his commandment unto him to Corinthe. Act. 18.5. And so went with Paul, & abode with him at Ephesus, How Tim. was called the first Bi. of Ephesus. Acts. 19 until (verse. 22.) he sent him and Erastus into Macedonia. Whither, when Saint Paul came, Acts. 20, and traveled from thence to Greece: he sent again Timothy, with divers other to Troas, where while Timothy abode: Saint Paul (as it is likely) wrote his First Epistle to the Corinthians, in his return to Macedonia at Phillippos', Act. 20, verse. 3. and 6. Timothy Bishop of Ephesus. Determining to send Timothy with that Epistle back again to Corinthe, which of likeliehood he did, when he came to Troas, where Timothy with other abode his coming. Who, when he came thither, sent Timothy, accompanied with Stephanus, Fortunatus, and Achaicus, with that Epistle, as in the end thereof, 1. Corinthians. 19, verse. 8. appeareth. I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecoast, for a great door and effectual is opened unto me: but there are many adversaries. Now, if Timothy come, see that he be without fear of you. For he worketh the work of the Lord, even as I do. And even so saith Luke, Act. 20. verse. 16. Paul had determined to sail by Ephesus, because he would not spend the time in Asia, for he hasted if he could possibly be at jerusalem, at the day of Pentecost. Whereas before he had minded to tarry at Ephesus, till the drawing near of that feast. So that (if I conjecture not amiss, which if I do, I will be ready in all humility, to reform my computation) it appeareth that Timothy was at that time, none of these Bishops, nor among them, whom Saint Paul called from Ephesus to Miletum. How then was Timothy the first Bishop ordained of Ephesus? Not, first in time: for if any at all in time; then must he needs have been ordained Bishop after them. Neither yet, that all the other Bishops were not at all ordained, or were now all dead: but that in dignity he was the first, that is to say, Timoth not first Bishop there in time, but i● dignity. the chief or Archbishop among and over them all. And to confirm this, let us see the jurisdiction and authority by S. Paul given him, over all the Ecclesiastical ministery, in this City. For, whensoever Saint Paul wrote his first Epistle to him, which some take to be during the time that he tarried for the assembly of these Bishop's aforesaid, in the mean while, stepping over to Laodicia, which is about the same distance from Miletum, that Ephesus was, (as appeareth by the chart or map thereof) and there at Laodicea he wrote that Epistle. Other suppose (and it is far more likely) that it was after he had been at Rome, and was by Nero set at liberty, in which time of ●0 years space, as he visited again, (which the Centuriographers note) the Churches of Syria, Asia, and Greece: so having a great care of this Church of Ephesus, and keeping his former course of visitation, as he did, Act. 20. from Ephesus to Macedonia, and so back again, as before he had done: he writeth from Laodicea unto Timothy, whom 〈◊〉 had before ordained Bishop there, giving him this charge, 1. Tim. 1. v●●s●. 3. As I besought thee to abide still in Ephesus, 〈…〉 when I departed into 〈◊〉 so do, that thou mayest command some, that they teach none other 〈◊〉 neither that they give heed to fables and genealogies. Whereby 〈◊〉 appears, that he had authority given him by the Apostle, to 〈…〉 control, Timothy Bishop. and command such Bishops, Pastors, and Doctors, as were at Ephesus, both for the matter, and the manner of their teaching. Upon which sentence saith calvin: calvin on ●. Tim. 1. The word of denouncing signifieth power, for Paul would furnish him with power to restrain others. And this power he giveth him; not only that they should teach no other doctrine, but also not the same Doctrine, otherwise. So that the manner of setting forth doctrine, as well as the doctrine itself, appertained to his charge and oversight. In the 2. chapter he shows him some orders, that he would have observed in the Church, concerning prayers, and the public ministery of the word. In the 3. chapter he describes the office and duties of Bishops, and their wives: of Deacons and their wives, so that, although the name of Bishop, be there taken indifferently, for the Pastors of the word and Sacraments: yet still hath Timothy, an authority given him over them, both to make such Bishops, as should so be qualified; and to oversee, that they being made, should behave themselves accordingly. Whereupon, after he hath described them, he saith to Timothy, verse. 14. These things writ I unto thee, trusting to come shortly unto thee: but if I tarry long, that thou mayst have knowledge how to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of truth. In which words, he plainly giveth him an authority and jurisdiction of ordering and governing these offices, in the policy and regiment of the Church. calvin. In this speech (saith calvin) he commendeth the weight and dignity of the office, Timothy, a Pastoral elder in Ephesus. because Pastors are as it were Stewards unto whom God hath committed his house. So that, calvin here maketh Timothy a Pastor, whom ye call a Bishop, and he giveth him authority over other Pastors or Bishops there. And how doth not this plainly infer, that though all in the pastoral office may be a like, and equal: yet in dignity, one may have charge and government over another. In the 4 chapter, verse. 11. and 12. he saith, Commend and teach these things. Let no man despise thy youth, but be unto them that believe an example, etc. As though he would have him become a mirror and pattern, not only to the people, but to the Pastors. Whereupon (saith calvin) we also acknowledge, that Timothy was a young man, who notwithstanding far surmounted many Pastors. And on the 15. verse, he saith: Grace was given him by prophesy. How? To wit, for because (as we have said) the Holie-ghoste by oracle had appointed Timothy, that he should be chosen into the order of pastors. Yea, yourselves have clearly confessed, pag. 19 that, Timothy was but a young man, and yet had the office of an Elder. If then, a Pastor, & an Elder, & a Bishop, be all one; then must Timothy needs be a Bishop: & if a pastor, must have a charge & flock assigned him: then must Ephesus be his pastoral or Episcopal charge and flock. Which charge that it stretched above his other fellow Pastors or Bishops: is most apparent in the 5. Chapter, where, Timothy's authority above other Pastor● there. (besides his authority in choosing and overseeing the widows,) for his authority over these Pastoral Elders or Bishops: rebuke not an Elder rigorously (saith the Apostle, to Tim. v. 1.) but exhort him as a Father. And ver. 17. the Elders that rule well are worthy of double honour, especially they that labour in the word and doctrine, etc. Against an Elder receive no accusation, but under two or three witnesses. Them that sin rebuke openly, that the rest also may fear. And here our Geneva Bible noteth, On them that sin, chiefly the ministers, and so all others. I charge thee (saith Paul) before God and the Lord jesus Christ, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another. And do nothing partially, Lay hands suddenly on no man. And here again saith the Geneva note, in admitting none without trial. Here Timothy being himself a Pastor of Ephesus, (& so with you a Bishop of Ephesus,) hath a very precise and special charge, above all other in the Church of Ephesus, concerning all degrees of persons that should have any office in the Church, especially these Pastoral Elders, whom ye call Bishops, to admit them into this ministery: to rebuke: to see that they have maintenance of living: and to see them that rule well, and take pains in preaching the word of God to have a double honour in comparison of other: and that the preferring of men to this function pertained to him, and that he must take heed he prefer none of partiality, and to admit no accuser of the Pastor, but such and such, etc. Doth not all this infer that he had a superior authority over them, (using it rightly, and not wrongfully) to do these things? For, if they being Bishops and Pastors, were all equal, by such a flat and perpetual rule, as is pretended; then were every one of them equal herein to him. And though Paul would have written to him for love and acquaintance, rather than to them: yet, if all the Pastors than were Bishops in all dignity and jurisdiction alike: S. Paul could no more have attributed these things over them unto him, then unto all or every one of them over him. Yea, even Beza himself on the 16. verse confesseth, that as he speaketh of such Elders as were Doctors, so (saith he) we must moreover note out of this place, Beza in 1. Tim. 5.16. Timothy to have been in the Presbytery of Ephesus, both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est, antistitem, that is, the Prelate, or chief Bishop, or one that ruled and guided the other, as justine calls him. Not as one that should do all things after his own fancy, but one that according to his godliness and prudence, should moderate all things that in the assembly should be done rightly and in order. Whereby it appeareth plainly, that as by calvin, he is called their Pastor, which ye call Bishop: and by Beza, a chief Bishop in Presbytery Presbytery or consistory of Elders. Which accordeth to the foresaid subscription of the later Epistle to Timothy, where he is called the first or chiefest Bishop. It sufficiently (I hope) doth argue, that not all Pastors nor Bishops, were always even then in the Apostles time, of equal dignity and authority, no, not in the very Church of Ephesus that is here alleged Neither can all the shifts in the world, that he was bidden also to do the work of an Evangelist, that he was a Prophet, that he was a man endued with so many, and so great gifts, that by the Apostles authority he was appointed there for a time, that he did nothing by his own self alone, but by the consent of his fellow Bishops or Pastors, and a number of such evasions, be able to elude this plain example of Timothy, but that either he was an Archbishop over Bishops, or at least wise, a Bishop over Pastoral Elders. The learned Dis. Pag. 23. & 24. The same thing is to be observed, in the name of Bishops, used by S. Paul, Phil. 1.1. where he and Timothy send salutations unto the Bishops and Deacons of the Church, Phil. 1.1. which was in the City of Philippi: which Bishops were the Elders or Pastors, else would he not have saluted in special words, the Deacons which were in inferior office, and omitted the Elders, which were of more excellent calling. Bridges. This example tendeth to the confirmation of the former, that in the name of Bishops, Whether there were more Bishops at Philippos was signified Pastors, and that there were more such Pastors called Bishops, than one in a City. All this we have sufficiently seen in the former example, Act. 20. But will this infer any more than did the other, that all Bishops ever after must be, or there and then were, alike, and equal in dignity and authority? Or is this argument that is annexed here to strengthen this example, of force sufficient to conclude this equality? He that saluteth in special words, those which are in inferior office, Our Breath. argument. will not omit them which are of more excellent calling. But S. Paul saluted the Deacons which were in inferior office in special words: Ergo, he would not omit the Elders which were of more excellent calling. If this be the argument of this our brethren's Learned discourse (for it is the best argument that my simple learning can bring it unto) it standeth (God wot) on too feeble supporters of probability, to bear the poise of any firm and necessary consequence. Paul's salutations. Paul saluteth in special words, and proper names, in this Epistle to the Philippians, diverse women: and yet in special words and proper names he saluteth not one man among them. But because the argument, (though weak) carrieth a likelihood, that although there be no special words of Elders, so well as of Bishops and Deacons: yet that they be not omitted but included: I will gladly grant them, that Pastoral Elders are not here omitted, but included in the name of Bishops. What now are they the nearer to this equality? Is this reason, that they seem here to encroach thereon a sufficient reason? In the name of bishops Paul comprehendeth, Pastors, Ergo, Bishops, and Pastors are all one, and all alike equal? If this argument be good: then, In the name of bishops Acts. 1. Peter comprehendeth Apostles: Ergo, Bishops, and Apostles are all one and alike equal. Yea, Beza himself and that on this self same place, Phil. 1. doth say: Beza in Phil. 1.1. He understandeth those to be Bishops, whosoever are set over the word and the government. As Pastors, Doctors, and Elders, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, on the word to oversee, because they must as watchmen, inquire on the doctrine and the manners of the flock committed to them, as Act. 20, verse 28. whom sometimes by general name he calleth Elders, as in that place, verse, 17. And 1. Tim. 5.17. And the like doth Beza, 1. Tim. 3.1. Upon the word Bishopric: So he calleth the office both of teaching, and of governing in the Church, as we have said Phil. 1. a 1. And the quotation of the Geneva Bible follows Beza in both places. On the Phil. 1. By Bishops, he meaneth them that had charge of the word and governing, as Pastors, Doctors, and Elders. And again, on the word, the office of a Bishop, 1. Tim. 3. whether he be Pastor or Elder, saith the quotation of our Geneva Testament. Now then, by your argument and their interpretation, we must reason thus: by the name of Bishop he meaneth not only a Pastor, but a Doctor: Our brethren overthrow all their own devices. and not only a Doctor, but also a Priest or Elder, whose office (ye say) consisteth only in government, and not in public teaching: Ergo, a Doctor, and a Pastor, and a governor (for so ye call your not teaching Priest or Elder) are all one and equal. Which is the clean overthrow of all this your Learned discourse of Ecclesiast. Government. Likewise, as on this former word Bishop, Beza, and the Geneva Testament comprehend Doctors, Pastors, and Elders, not teaching, but only governing: so also on the other word, Deacons: But (saith Beza) he understandeth Deacons to be the stewards of the Eccles. treasury, Beza. and the college of the widows. And 1. Tim. 3: Deacons: These are they that have the care of the poor, etc. And the Geneva note: By Deacons, such as had the charge of the distribution, and of the poor and sick. Yea, Beza here proceedeth further, and saith: when otherwise, this name is sometime universal, The name of Deacon. in so much that it comprehendeth even the Apostles themselves also. So then, we must again conclude, that the name Deacon comprehendeth the treasorers, the widows, the Apostles, yea, and all the Ecclesiastical ministers, and so, Doctors and Pastors too: Ergo, all together are but all one office, and all alike equal in the same. Who seeth not the evil sequence of this conclusion? And surely, though your argument fail, and yourselves also are not comparable to the excellent Learned Master Beza: Our Breath. contrary to Beza, and to the Geneva Testament herein. yet of twain, (in my judgement) ye hold the truer opinion, in not understanding here by the name of Bishops, Elders, those that are only Governors and not Teachers: but understanding thereby, Pastoral Elders, contrary to Beza, and to the Geneva Testament. Our Breath. and we, with calvin and Daneus etc. against Bezaes' opinion. and the Geneva note herein. And as we will all join with you thus farre-foorth herein, that by the name of Bishops he comprehendeth Pastors, and not those that were not Pastors: so shall we have calvin on our side, yea, and Danaeus too, who is also of Geneva, and a most earnest favourer of your opinion, and one that hath written best (in my fancy) of all our side, for the maintenance of it. And yet where he goeth about of set purpose to 1. Tim. 3.1. to prove Bishops and Pastors to be all one: and maketh your last example Act. 20 his second argument, and this your present example, Phil. 1. to be a part of his fourth argument: Danaeus in Christ. Isag. 3. Part. c. 10. and where he distinguisheth of Elders as you do: even there (saith he) of these Elders therefore that have here their name of dignity, not of age: there are two sorts in the Scripture. The one of them that watch on manners only, the other of them that attend both on doctrine and on manners, and labour in both. The which may be easily gathered out of this Epistle, cap. 5. ver▪ 17. Concerning therefore the first sort, as it is distinguished from the second, so it is to be severed from the Bishops and Doctors. And so he entereth into his process, the whole beginning whereof was this, which I should have set before. But Paul in all this chap. treateth of Bishops and Deacons. Howbeit, there are other Ecclesiastical and necessary dignities besides Deacons & Bishops, as are Elders, of whom some think that Paul spoke nothing at all in this place. But rejecting their opinion, & distinguishing of these two sorts of Elders, he encludeth only Pastoral Elders, (as you do) in the name of Bishops. calvinus in Phil. 1. The like doth calvin in this place, Phil. 1. upon the word Bishops: He nameth the Pastors by themselves for honour's sake. Moreover, it is lawful to gather hereon, the name Bishop to be common to all the ministers of the word, when he attributeth many Bishops to one Church. Therefore the name of Bishop and Pastor are Synonyms (or diverse words meaning one thing, etc.) And on the name Deacon, he saith also in the said place. This name may be taken two ways, either for the ministers and carers for the poor, or for the Elders that were appointed to govern the manners. But because it is more commonly taken of Paul in the former sense, I rather understand it for the stewards, that had the oversight of distributing the alms. Thus you and we herein have these two most famous men of our side, against Beza and the quoters of the Geneva Testament. And to say the truth, (all respect of persons set aside,) our opinion is the better, having the manifest not example only, but rule of God's word, in both places: that the Bishops there mentioned, Act. 20.28. must feed which (ye say) inclusively, is as much as Pastor. And 1. Tim. 3.2. he must be apt to teach, which appertaineth not unto an only Governor. Now, although ye do well herein, to dissent from Beza, and from the notes of the Geneva translation, unto whom if ye would have agreed, you might easilier perhaps, have found many Bishops, both there in one City, and here in another: (but then must you either amend this your argument, or else ye should confound all offices in one, and make all equal) yet still your argument (even as theirs also) is not of sufficient force, that, because Pastors are there named & included under the name of Bishop; therefore simply Bishop and Pastor are all one, and yet, The weakness of our Breath. argument. I will gladly grant both you and them also, more than the argument can make good. That in the nature of the Pastoral Eldership and Episcopal oversight, though, ratione, they differ in this, or that consideration, one from the other: yet, re, and indeed, they are so joined together in one office, that the one might then very well, till the name Bishop grew to a more proper signification: yea, & may yet well enough interchangeably be spoken the one of the other: a Pastor is a Bishop, & a Bishop is a Pastor: How B. and Pastor differ and yet are all one. notwithstanding it doth not follow hereupon, that in all respects they are now, or were then, simply and absolutely all one and the same offices, and especially that in dignity, they were all a like and equal. For that is the chief point that should herein be proved. Must all, that be of one order or office, of necessity be of one equal dignity in the same? What degree or calling have you, of Gentlemen, esquires, Knights, Barons, Lords, Earls, Dukes, Princes, or Kings, but that, being in any one of these estates, orders, degrees, or offices, as they may be equal; so, one may have dignity, authority, government, and superiority well-inough over another even of the same estate, order, degree, or office, that themselves be? If ye say, we must not bring examples of offices in the civil policy, and apply them to Ecclesiastical: though yourselves brought in such examples a little before, out of Numb. 11.16. how God ordained 70. ancients to assist Moses in his government, which were civil Seniors, and apply them to these Ecclesiastical and Pastoral Elders: yet, will not you grant this, that when it shall come to any assemblies of Synods, or Counsels, one of these equals may notwithstanding for the time, have a superiority over all the residue of the same function, that he himself is of? Yes, but say you, this is done but for the time. Well then, if this may be done with a safe conscience, and without injury to other of the same function, for the time of such an assembly of Synod or Council, (which how short or long it may hold, Superiority of Pastors. is uncertain: can it not then be longer? Yea, can it not then become ordinary and standing? If it be injurious and contrary to the nature of the office, If superiority among Pastor's b● simply nought, it can admit no shortness of time. it is not time long or short, that mars or makes it. Continuance may make it a continual injury, and the longer time the longer injury, (if of itself it be an iniurie●) for then at no time, or by any means of man it can be lawful, being not compatible at all, with the nature and substance of the office. But if it be compatible, and may well enough agree therewith: then, as upon occasion the office may receive access of further dignity and superiority for a time: If it can be admitted for a time, it is not simply evil. so the occasion longer or still continuing, why may not the accessory dignity and superiority, longer also, and as need requireth, still continue, without any prejudice of the equality, in the essence and substance of the office? Substantia non dicitur secundum magis & minus. Peter, james, and john, were in the very function of the Apostleship (which was all one in every one of them) all but equal, Superiority of dignity in the equality of the Apostleship Gal. 2. fellow and fellow like, with all the residue of the Apostles. And yet these words of Paul Galat. 2. verse, 6.7.8. and 9 are not so lightly to be shaken off, where he saith: And of them which seemed to be great, what they were in times past, it makes no matter to me. God accepteth no man's person. Nevertheless, they that are the chief, did communicate nothing with me. But contrariwise, when they saw that the Gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the Gospel over the circumcision was unto Peter (for he that was mighty by Peter in the Apostleship over the circumcision, was mighty by me towards the Gentiles) and when james, and Cephas, and john knew of the grace that was given unto me (which are counted to be the pillars) they gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should preach unto the Gentiles and they unto the circumcision. Here is fellowship which carrieth some equality with it, and that in the Apostleship. But is there no superiority at all in this fellowship and equality of Apostleship? What mean these words, Great and chief among them? Or, were they so in times past, and did they not so continue? And what mean these words, that james, and Cephas, & john seemed pillars, more than the residue? Did they but seem so, and were not so indeed? And what meaneth this, that the Gospel over the circumcision, (that is to say) over the jews, was committed to Peter, and that God was mighty by Peter in the Apostleship over them? Was it not committed as well to the residue of his fellow Apostles? Or, had he no superiority over the jews in this Apostleship, more than his fellows had? Or was he, or any of his fellow Apostles, equal to Paul in the authority of the like Apostleship over the Gentiles? Or, did this superiority of both their Apostleships, th● one over the jews, the other over the Gentiles, more than their fellows, come and go by starts and sits, of times and actions, Superiority of dignity among the Apostles. and was not still restant in them, after it was committed to them? Well, what concludeth calvin hereupon? Now (saith he, on the 9 ver.) I have before declared that this (james) was the son of Alpheus. For, he could not be the brother of john, calvin on Gal. 2. v. 9 The superior dignity of james in jerusalem among his brethren, & fellow Apostles, etc. whom a little before Herode had killed. And to have been one of the Disciples, which so much excelled above the Apostles, were (in my judgement) very absurd. But that he was the chief among the Apostles, Luke also showeth, who attributeth the peroration unto him, and the defining of the cause in the council. Act. 15. c. 13. and 21. c. 18. He telleth that all the Elders of the Church of jerusalem, were gathered together unto him. As for that they seemed pillars, he speaketh it not by contempt, but citeth the common opinion, because that followeth thereupon which could not rashly be refused. Here where as the question is of dignity, it is marvel that james is preferred before. Peradventure it was done, Quòd Hierosolymitanae Ecclesiae erat praefectus, For because he was set over the Church of jerusalem, or he was perfect, or to speak plain (as the ancient Ecclesiastical writers do) the Bishop of jerusalem. And yet were the Apostles then resiant there, besides other Pastoral Elders. As for that, that appertaineth to the name of pillar, we know, that so fareth the nature of things, that those which in wit or prudence, or in other gifts do surmount other men, they also are made superiors in authority. Even thus goeth the matter in the Church of God, that how much more each one excelleth in grace: so much the more honour ought to be given unto him. For it is an unthankfulness, yea rather, a wickedness, not to worship the spirit of God, wheresoever he appeareth in his gifts. Furthermore, as the people cannot want a Pastor, so every assembly of Pastors require a certain moderator. Howbeit, let that always hold, that he which is the chief or first of all, must be as it were the minister. In which words, calvin plainly alloweth, not only one Pastor to be superior, above his Brethren and fellow Pastors, james hi● superior dignity standing & continuing in jerusalem. for a small time or present action: but for a standing continuance. For, this assembly of the Apostles, and of the 70. Disciples, that were preachers likewise of the word, and so, Pastoral Elders, began even from Christ's ascension and so continued till the Apostles were dispersed. If therefore, (as calvin saith) no assembly of Pastors can be without a Superior: and the Apostles and Disciples assembly at jerusalem was then standing and continuing: how followeth not withal, this standing continuance of james his superiority over them? especially▪ sith that, when many of them were afterward dispersed, yet this standing assembly of them broke not off, over whom (sayeth calvin) james was made the ruler, who continued still in this Superior dignity, james B. of jerusalem. both Act. 15. and Act. 21. and Galat. 2. both over the Apostles, and all other Pastoral Elders, at jerusalem. And to prove this further, even by calvin himself, that james had this standing and continuing superiority of dignity among the Apostles and Pastoral Elders at jerusalem; Caluines citing Eusebius, that james was B. of jerus. yea, so far, that he disalloweth not of the testimony of Eusebius, that he was Bishop of jerusalem: calvin on the 15. of the Acts verse 13. writeth thus: They are greatly deceived in that they deny him to be one of the twelve Apostles. For they are compelled to grant him to be the same, whom Paul so honourably doth celebrate, that he giveth him the first place among the pillars of the Church. Gal. 2.9. verily, never any of an inferior order, should have so excelled above the Apostles. For Paul adorneth him with the title of an Apostle. Neither is it worth the hearing, that Jerome allegeth, that the name is there general: when of purpose the dignity of the order is treated upon, how far forth Christ preferred the Apostles, before the other Doctors of the Church. Moreover, out of this place is easy to gather, that he was esteemed of no common price, sith that with his sentence, he so confirmeth the words of Peter: that all yield unto his sentence. And afterward upon the 21. chap. ver. 18. we shall see again, of how much value his authority was. The Ancients think that to be done, because he was Bishop of the place. How-beit, it is not probable, that the faithful at their will, altered the order by Christ set down, Wherefore I doubt not, but that he was the son of Alpheus, and of Christ's consanguinity, in which sense, he is called his brother. Whether he were Bishop of jerusalem or no, I leave it indifferent. Neither makes it much to purpose, save that clearly hereupon the impudency of the Papists is refelled. Scythe that the decree of the Council is established, rather by the authority of james then of Peter. And truly Eusebius in the beginning of the second book, doubts not to call james (whosoever he were,) the Bishop of the Apostles. Let the romanists go now, and vaunt, their Pope is the head of the universal Church, because he is the successor of Peter, who suffered another to rule him, if Eusebius be believed. And as james at jerusalem, so Peter and john were also pillars indeed, as they were counted, among their fellow Apostles. And Peter and Paul had a higher authority and dignity of Apostleship, (the one over the dispersed jews, the other over the converted Gentiles) than the residue of the Apostles had, though in the very function of the Apostleship, all were equally alike Apostles. And Paul might and did preach unto the ●ewes also, and Peter to the Gentiles, and all the residue, to either jew or Gentile. But these two, had a more special and higher dignity, and GOD their company. Which example of the Apostles, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. and Caluines judgement thereon, if we shall well consider: we shall not only find, that calvin answereth himself sufficiently, in that place, albeit he writ very moderately on the matter: but, that we and all our brethren may be fully satisfied, not▪ only it may well be, that many in one Ecclesiastical office and in that respect all equals one to an other, may safely notwithstanding have some superior in dignity and authority of government amongst them, without any prejudice at all to one jot of the equality, in the nature and substance of their office, but withal, that it was so even among the Apostles themselves: yea, even from Christ's ascension, and so continued, and that not only as a specialty sprung among them, and dying with them, but delivered by them to the ordinary office of Pastoral Eldershipp in the Church, as we showed before in the example of Timothy, whom calvin confesseth to be the Pastor of Ephesus,, and Beza, to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Provost, (the principal, the Prelate, or chief governor) of the Ephesine Pastors. And that not only it was, and may be, but (as calvin saith) it must be, and ought not, nor can be well otherwise: which (me thinks,) fully and clearly satisfieth all this question. Neither do I see, but as we safely dissented from Beza before, not suffering him here to apply the name of Bishops, to his new Priests or Elders that are not Teachers: so, I see not how we should approve him in that which he concludes thereon, neither with any necessary consequence to prove his sayings, nor according to the verity of the ancient Records, & Fathers, nor agreeing with many the best learned of his own side, nor yet correspondent to his own assertions. Bezaes' confession of appropriating the name of Bi. unto one For, Beza proceeding in his observation on this place: This therefore (saith he) was the appellation of Bishops, until that he, which for policy's sake, was placed in the company over the residue of his brethren, whom justine calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a principal ruler, or one being in chiefest authority, began peculiarly to be called Bishop. All this hitherto, I gladly accord unto: if Beza agree on the time when it was done, and show the reason of it, and allow there-of. Or else, show some sufficient reason to the contrary. For, here he confesseth, that before the name Bishop became peculiar unto one, the matter that the name importeth to be an overseer: yea, and a greater matter too, and a name that is far higher than the name Bishop is, was before the name Bishop became peculiar. And what maketh it matter for the name, if the matter be granted? Let them yield in the matter here with Beza, that one should be above his brethren, and we should soon end the strife for the name. The matter being yielded unto, why strive we for the name? Yet some name or other he must have, and if we find no peculiar name then recorded of this Superiority, and yet find the matter then practised, might not the Church make a name, so it be a modest name, as the church hath done in other things, where names wanted & matter appeared. The modest name of B. And may it not much more take the reverent and modest name itself, that the Scripture useth, and by all their consents, that had interest before (and yet have) in the same, yield it unto that man peculierlye, that before was their governor: but that this must be made so great a matter, being but the very express title that the scripture useth, and nothing so great indeed and significant in matter, as is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a prefect or Primate, a governor over them. But this name and office (say they) was not continuing in him, but for the assembly. What mean they: did it cease, when the Assembly ceased? and did they chose a new Perfect at every new Assembly? and so every day, The continuing of the n●me & office. when they came together, a new was chosen? or did they continue the old still? But neither Pastor, nor ever Bishop did or could feed or oversee continuallee without intermission: and yet they continued still those Officers, though the exercise of the offices now and then ●eased. And (as we have showed) the Apostles assembly was daily, which we call continual. And therefore (which calvin also confesseth) their Praefecte james, was their continual Praefecte. And as calvin rendereth a reason here-of: so Beza saith, it was for Policy. But what policy was it, good or bad: in having such a Praefect over them, before they gave him the name of Bishop? No doubt, if james among the Apostles, (as calvin saith) and Timothy (as Beza saith) were such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among the Pastors: The Primitive Church's policy then could not this Policy be but good, yea, very good and necessary for them: else would the one part never have given it to them, nor the other have ever taken it on them. But it was given, and taken: yea, but in justines' time. Well, and justines' time immediately succeeded the Apostles. But what called they this one Superior over his fellow brethren Pastors in justines' time? Forsooth, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Why, and who was he that told us, not long since, out of 1. Tim. ver. 19 That we ought to note out of that place, that Timothy was then in the Ephesian Eldership (understanding there Elders for Doctors or Pastors) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉? Must we note it there: and must we forget it here? Was that in the time of justine? or just in Paul's time? yea, but it was then, O●e among the Pastors was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. in the Apost ●ime. in Paul's time. then? and how long (I pray you) held that then? Forsooth? while Timothy tarried at Ephesus. And can you tell, how long, or short that was? Well, he abode not there, no did? S. Paul requested him earnestly to abide there. 1. Tim. 1.3. And did he neglect S. Paul's request? no, but Paul sent for him afterward. and where find ye that? If this Epistle be doubtful (with Beza) where it was written: in my opinion, it is more doubtful, when. And if, as is likely, after his liberty from prison, as is aforesaid: then will it hardly be proved, that Paul, after this Epistle written, sent for Timothy, to come to him from them, whom so earnestly he desired to tarry with them? Well, yet at the most, in th●s abode with them, he was but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And carrieth not this word as great a force of superior dignity, or rather of a certain Primacy or principality: as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth: whether ye call it Superattendent ot Overseer? But (I pray you) who expounds this word in the same place, Beza his own confession that Timot. was B. of Ephes. and saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (id est Antistitem,) ut vocat justinus? The interpretation of Gelenius calls him, praecipuum fratrem: and Praesulem, and praepositum. Which word praesul, and especially Beza his own word Antistes, is in Latin (as I take it) the very selfsame. that we commonly call in English a Bishop: so that the Office at the least, and superior dignity of a Bishop began to be peculiar unto one among his fellow brethren, and pastoral Elders, even in S. Paul's time, by this reckoning. Though this one that thus had the matter before, began a little after, that is to wit, about justines' time, to be peculiarly called Bishop. Now, if the matter were peculiar to one before: what need so great ado, though the name followed to be peculiar after: this name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, being indeed a greater and a higher title. insomuch, that it is applied unto Magistrates, and princes, as well as to these superior bishop As where Plato, epist. 7. saith: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Praefecte, Prince, or Magistrate of the great City, etc. Now if this appellation were given to one over the Pastoral Elders, (as Beza saith) in the Apostles time; which appellation notwith standing is often used in the Scriptures, and applied to Elders and to Bishops: as, 1. Tim. 5, ver. 17. even but 2. verses before this note of Beza: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Those Elders (or Priests) well Rulers, or that behave themselves well, in their praefectshippe (or principality:) let them be counted worthy of double honour: chiefly they that labour in the word and doctrine. Out of which words you gathered before pag. 21. saying: Which place also testifieth of an other kind of Elders, of whom we shall have occasion to speak more hear after: whose office consisteth only in government and not in public teaching. (the reverence reserved of all those famous men, from whom ye take this observation) me thinks, the words there, S. Paul's words. ●. Tim. 5.17. seem rather to infer Bish. then not teaching Elders. infer no such distinction, but seem rather to be referred to those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that such principal or perfect Elders, as, for all their godly pains & travel in this Government of other Elders, and rule of the Chur. discipline intermit not the labour of the word and doctrine, any more than do their fellow brethren Elders, that are not such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, where all generally are to be honoured: they, both for their dignity and good behaviour in the same, besides that, for their labour in the word and doctrine, (as the others do) more than any other, as they have a double & greater care, deserve a double or a greater honour. The resemblance of an house & the Church's government. And this rather seemeth to my simple judgement, (howbeit under all correction, and without all contention) to be a good exposition of that place. And of this Superior government in the use of this word, (which is used also, I grant, in many meaner matters,) he gave before an example to be a Bishop in the government of the Bishops own children and family, by comparison to the government of God's Church, 1. Timoth. 3.4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which governeth well his own house, having children 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in subjection with all honesty. For if he cannot 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rule (or stand as chief, or be principal) of his own house, how will he care for the Church of God? But in every house there may not be many Sovereigns, and chief Rulers, but one principal over all the other, nor yet many stewards, etc. And therefore, by the force of this word and similitude, the Church being compared a little after, ver. 15. to the house of God, though we be all fellow servants in respect of Christ, and all Pastor's fellow stewards of God's mysteries: yet in respect of particular Churches, and the external Ecclesiastical policy and Government thereof, as it is also aptly compared to particular families, though there be divers Pastors in the same: Yet must one be a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a Provost, a principal, a chief bailiff under Christ, that must there govern all his fellow servants and all the children, within the Region, Diocese, or city limited unto him: and keep them all in an orderly subjection, even as a Father doth his children; or else the Ecclesiastical policy is disturbed. And the same that here is attributed to him over his children and house is attributed also unto him, for this his principal rule, over the particular Church of God, 1. Thess. 5.12. We beseech ye brethren, that ye acknowledge them that labour among you, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. And them that are chief over you in the Lord, and admonish you. Now if this were the name whereby he was called, that had the Superiority not only over the people, but over his fellow and brethren Pastors in any assemblies, while the name Bishop was yet indifferent to them all and that the name Bishop began to become peculiar to one, The good change of the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, & the iniquity thereof. (as Beza saith) while there was such a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among them, then as the name was very well changed from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from one that had a principal being or standing office over them, to a superintendant or overseer of them, which was a lower title of superior dignity, and therefore not given or taken of any ill purpose: so withal, it argueth the antiquity both of the matter, and of the appropriating of the name Episcopus more peculiarly unto one, then before it had been, to be either in or immediately following the Apost. times, even by Bezaes' own testimony, out of justine and by examining of this word and title in the Scripture. And, as calvin and Beza here confess the matter, so Gellius Snecanus also de Disciplina Ecclesiastica, pag. 440. Golliu● Snecanus de discipl. Eccl. pag. 440. speaking of the ministry of the word, concludeth out of 1. Tim. 5. ver. 19 20. Whereupon it manifesthe appeareth, that even then a certain order was ordained at Ephesus, Cui Praefectus erat Timotheus, over the which Timothy was the Praefect. Whom justine calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and Beza translateth Antistiten, whom wecall Bishop. All this being considered, with the subscription aforesaid unto Timothy, argueth that this name. Bishop, (to become peculiar unto one above his brethren and fellow Pastors), was neither so late, (as diverse take it,) nor was merely and altogether man's invention: and yet, if it had been ordained of man, being not otherwise prescribed of God: it may well be called also even God's ordinance, as we shall see after (God-willing) upon Peter. The Centuriographers writing of the government of the Church, The Ecclesiastical orders and degrees in the Primitive Church. in the time next succeeding the Apostles, do say: Cent. 2. ca 7. pag. 125. and 126. But as there was no certain and prescribed number of Minist. of the Church, commanded in the holy Scriptures: so according as the necessity of the Churches required, they had more or fewer. And as among them, (to the intent that there should be some order, and that the Ecclesiastical offices should be better administered among many, by a certain reason or consideration, and that the succession of Ministers might be made in order): necessity compelled them to ordain and to keep certain degrees of persons. But in that matter, and also in this age, the most part of the Churches, kept a small number, and a simplicity. For, more orders than these 3. that is to wit, Bishopric, Priesthood, and Deaconry, are not found with approved Authors. And, the offices which afterwards were distributed to dore-keepers, to Readers, to Exorcists, and to Acolyts, were all names joined to the office of Deacon and Subdeacon. So in the French Church, (as appeareth by the Epist. of them that were of Lions unto the East churches), are reckoned up more Ministers of the Church, than Bishop, Priests, and Deacons: the other are called brethren. Euseb. lib. 4. cap 1. Clemens of Alexandria, in the books of him, that are at this day extant: maketh no where mention of more, then of Bishop, of Priests, and of Deacons: except that in some places he adjoin Widows. Neither yet doth he in plain words, ascribe unto them a Ministry in the Church, much less a degree. Also Jerome in his Epist. to Euagrius doth testify, that in the Church of Alexandria, there were no more degrees, from Mark unto Dionise, than bishopric, Priesthood, and Deaconship. And so proceeding to other Churches, and to Antioch, and Rome, where out of justine they note, unum perfectum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fratrum, and certain Deacons & the other brethren. Nic●phorus, li. 3. cap. 29. declareth that Eleutherius, which was taught the holy Scriptures of Anicetus, Ecclesiastical orders. (or rather of Anaclecletus) was enroled in the sacred number of the Clergy. And in the 15. year of his age, took the degree of Deacon, and three year after was made Priest, and in the 10 year of his age, was chosen Bishop. Whereupon may be gathered, what degrees were in Rome, under the reign of Hadrian, etc. It is worthy memory, that of every one Church, is only found a Bishop; in the Priesthood, and in the Deaconship, are always found many, according to the necessity of every place or Church. Jerome testifieth in his epistle to Euagrius, that in the time of the Apostles, the degrees of Bishops and Priests were not distinct. but afterward for remedy of schism, one was chosen out of the Priests, and placed in a higher degree, and called bishop. Which only in the office of ordaining should differ from the Priests. Whereupon it appeareth, that about these times, this change began in the Church, and the office of a bishop higher than the degree of Priesthood, not so much by the institution of God, as by human authority, for because of good order, edification, and succession. Hereupon it is that Irenaeus calleth Soter, Anicetus, Hyginus, Pius, Telesphorus, Priests: Euseb. lib. 5. cap, 24. And this indifferent usurpation of this word bishop and Priest, is also found with others. Under trajan as yet lived john the Apostle, which was the chiefest founder of the Churches that were in Asia, and which also was wont to go out of Ephesus, to the places near adjoining, both partly to ordain bishops, partly to choose the Clergy by lot, as Clement telleth in Eusebius lib. 3. ca 23. but he being dead: the Apostleship ceased in the Church, because that unto their doctrine and writings, God would have the Church at all times to be bound. But the Apostles gave Churches to Bishops in every one place: as Irenaeus lib. 4. cap. 63. doth testify. But because the doctrine of the Gospel was to be published throughout many nations, therefore the Churches were wont to choose famous and constant men, priest to travel, and ready to teach and to suffer for the Gospel, and to impose on them this office, that according to the imitation of the Apostles, forsaking their goods, or disposing them: they should travel through many and far places of the Gentiles, & preach the Gospel. These were called Evangelists or Apostolical men: and Eusebius testifieth lib. 5. cap. 9 that very many of them were yet under Commodus. In the number of whom is Pantenus reckoned, who was sent of Demetrius Bishop of Alexandria into India, etc. Out of these observations of these Centuriographers upon the ancient fathers, concerning the government of the Churches in this age, which was partly in the time and life of some of the Apostles, The observations of the Magdeburgenses. we also may note these things appertaining unto our controversy First, that there were ordinarily but three degrees of the Ecclesiastical Ministry: Bishops, Priests or Elders, and Deacons. by which Priests or Elders, The Primchurches' observations they mean such Priests or Elders, as were ministers of the word: For they speak of those Priests or Elders, whose office at the first was not distinct from Bishops. So that, in the ordinary regiment of the most famous Churches in that age, and while some of the Apostles lived, and immediately after their death, these unpreaching Prelates, Priests, or Elders that meddled not with teaching, but were all in governing: were not accounted any offices or degrees of the Ecclesiastical ministry. But they had only three: as we have, Bishops, Priests, or Elders, that were teachers of the word, & Deacons. Secondly, and that which they call worthy memory, One Bishop in one Church. that always there was but one Bish, of one Church, and that the placing of Bishops one in every Church, was the doing of the Apostles, while they lived. But always in every Church (meaning all the faithful of one City) there were more Priests or pastoral Elders, and more Deacons: Ergo: These Bishops and these Priests or pastoral Elders were not all one. Thirdly, that albeit at the first, in the Apostles times, Jerome testify, they were not distinct degrees, & some other fathers take the name indifferently, of Bish. and Priest, as Irenaeus that calleth so many bishop of Room, Priests: yet this alteration of the name, and this setting of him to whom they gave it in a higher degree, was done at the furthest (if not in Paul's time) yet in the time of john the Evangelist, & so continued. And therefore though these bishop of Rome are by Irenaeus called priests, as Eusebius reporteth. (although indeed the words of Irenaeus are not priests, but bi●h. as is mafest in Irenaeus himself: in the translation that we have extant. Lib. 3. cap. 3. Although, in the Chapter before, How Irenaeus useth the name Bish. and Priest indifferently. he generally calleth the Apostles successors priests: and in Li. 4. cap. 44. etc.) yet it followeth not, that either Eusebius or Irenaeus, took a bishop and a priest to be all one and of equal dignity, though now and then, they use the name indifferently, after▪ this appropriating of the name: because the persons which they speak of, were both priests and Bishops. For though every priest or pastoral Elder, (after the name Bishop was made peculiar to one,) was not properly a bishop: yet every Bishop was properly a priest or pastoral Elder, and therefore might be well called by that name. And because they are now and then used one for an other: it rather argueth, we should not mark so much, the interchangeable using of the name, as whether the parties be all alike equal in degree of dignity, that many times communicate in like name. And then shall we find, that these Bishops were not only Superiors, in Dignity, above pastoral Elders, but above all the Evangelists remaining after the Apostles times. And that Bishop Alexander (as we shall afterward see) sent the Euangeliste Pantenus into India to preach the Gospel. Bishop's Gods ordinance. four, that this application of this name Bishop, to this one, placed in higher authority among the Pastoral Elders, though it were not somuch done by any divine institution, or ordinance of God, as by the authority of man: (as Jerome saith) yet these words debar not, but it might be (though not somuch) yet in some part so done: or, not clean rejected from God's ordinance. For although no such ordinance appropriating the name Bishop, be expressed in the manifest word of God: yet the ordinance of the matter is plainly expressed: as we have showed out of Timothy, Caluines, and Bezaes' plain confession of the same. And the name also applied to Timothy in the subscription of the 2. epist. if that may go for Scripture. But, let the application of the name, be not so much the express ordinance of God, as of godly men, and those in the Apost. times. And now, the Apostles alive, being not unwilling thereunto, was this ordinance of man, good, or ill? First, that it was done to good purposes, here are plain words, that it was done, for good order, edification, The appropriating the name Bish. to one in some part the ordinance of God, though in some part the ordinance of man. and succession. yea, that very necessity did compel them so to do. Can there be any necessity, good order, & edification, against the institution of Christ? It is then apparent not that it is not lawful, because Christ gave to or fro no institution of it: but because he gave none, and that there is no institution of Christ against it, (which had it been material to salvation, or had it been of doctrine, no doubt had been expressed and commanded) but being none, this ordinance of man was a thing, that man might do. And, being done for so good and necessary purposes: it was requisite also that man should do. And so, though it be not expressly, so much the ordinance of God as of man: yet because it is not forbidden but allowed of God, it is in a sort even the ordinance of God also, and to be contained under Peter's sentence, 1. Pet. 2.13.14. For, though he apply it in particular to Kings, and those that are sent of him: yet the words are general 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto all or every human creature, or ordinance: so that whatsoever good law is made by lawful authority of man, not contrary to God's word, we are here bidden to submit ourselves unto it. And therefore, either prove this law and ordinance of man (to make the name Bishop, more peculiar to one, then to all the other, among a number of Pastoral Elders) to be contrary to God's law: or else, except this law be as lawfully removed, as it was made, I see not how we may lawfully disobey or contemn the same. Well may we now and than use the word indifferently, as did the fathers; but to deny them, both the title and the dignity also: that none of the fathers (that I read of) did, until Aërius came. Who, holding other more perilous points than this and perceiving himself over-matched with a bishop Aeri●s his impugning the superiority o● Bish. as ill as himself: when he could not have his own will, be an as a mal-content, mis●●king with the superiority of Bishops, to call this selfsame matter into question. About the year of our Lord 340. And went about, Aerius opinion. under pretence of the first acceptation of these name's Bishop, and Priest, used at the first, indifferently in the Apostles times, to reduce them altogether there-unto, and in all respect to make them alike, and equal, even for all the world, as now our Brethren would do. And although Aërius opinion, (had it been maintained no further of him, then that in the Apostles times they were sometimes used for all one. and had been, or st●ll were, in the substance and nature of the office equal and all one:) had been no matter worthy such great contention. Yet, when he did simply condemn this ancient order of superiority, instituted in the Primitive Church, and in the Apostles times, forgood order-sake among the Pastors: & stiffly with all contention maintained his opinion: the question grew from brawling to schism: and not so resting Aërius' opinion was at length rejected and condemned for an heresy. And so stands, for any thing I know to the contrary. Neither was it thus judged of the Bishops only themselves, that might be thought partial to their own part, albeit we may not so judge of all the holy Fathers that were Bish. in those days, which universally condemned this opinion, that they did it for ambition, or partiality, or pride, or ignorance, which were too hard a judgement of Epiphanius, Chrysost. Ambr. August. etc., Whose learning, as it was able to reach the depth of this question, or else (God wots) it had been small: So they seeing the truth, would never be carried away against their consciences, for worldly superiority, in the which many of them were most humble. But not only (I say) those holy learned fathers, that were theirselues Bishops, but those also that were no Bishops. yea Jerome that was much offended with some Bishops, and was a man also very passionate, where he took offence, when he saw this controversy hot in his days, S▪ Ieromes opinion of the superiority of Bish. by reason of the insolency of some Bishops, did he ever like and allow of this opinion, that Bishops and Pastoral Priests should still be counted as names indifferent, and their authority be alike equal in all things. And but all one? Or, but altar and differ by toornes, and on occasion of some present action, this Priest chosen to be Bish. or be Superior to day, or at this assembly: and to morrow, or at the next assembly, another Superior chosen, and no Superior standing? Did Jerome ever like of this? No, read all his works over, and wheresoever he writeth: as he often toucheth this matter & many times is very vehement against bishops, and favouring Priests▪ himself being one: so he always acknowledgeth, th●s difference of bish. and Priest, that though in substance of the Ministry they be both all one: yet in degree of dignity, the bishop is superior, and the Priest is inferior to the bishop. Yea, where of purpose, most favourably he setteth forth the Priest's authority, as in his epistle ad Euagrium, wher● he alle●geth even these examples here alleged, 1. Phil. & Act. 20. concluding thus: Wherein most manifestly it is proved, jeromens' observation. that a Bishop and a priest are the same: etc. Yet, even there also he determineth the matter, saying: But that afterward, one was chosen which should be placed before the residue, it was done for the remedy of schism, least every one drawing the Church of Christ after him, should break it. For, also at Alexandria, even from Mark the Euangeliste, unto Heraclas and Dionysius Bishops, the priests did always name the Bishop, one chosen from out themselves, whom they placed in a higher degree, even as if an army should choose a Cheftaine. Or that Deacons should choose from out of them, him whom they knew to be industrious & call him Archdeacon. For, what doth a Bishop, that a priest doth not, except it be the giving of Orders? By which it appeareth, that howsoever the names were taken indifferently, and as all one, at the first original of them, for a while in the Apostles time: The observation of Ieromes sentence of Bishops original. though there were no institution of the Lord, for the change hereof: yet, as it was done for a most excellent and necessary cause; so it was done in the time of the most of the Apostles, even S. Paul and S. Peter and many other of the Disciples, as yet living: Mark deceasing (as the same Jerome noteth) in the 8. year of Nero: Yea, if we shall consider Ieromes words further: we shall find this change both before, and also fully confirmed, and begun universally to be practised in the Apostles times. And even there also, where he allegeth all these selfsame examples and testimonies out of the Scripture, to the contrary of that, which these our brethren and all on the other side, at this day allege therein. As Phil. 1. Act. 20. Heb. 13. 1. Pet. ●. even as though S. Jerome had led them to these places. And his words are their own conclusion. Therefore a priest is the same that is a bishop, and before that by the instinct of the Devil, studies (or factious pertaking) were made in Religion, & that it was said among the people, I am of Paul, I am of Apollo, but I of Cephas: the Churches were governed by the common council of priests, or pastoral Elders, (for so Jerome taketh the name Presbyter, and not for such Priests, as only governed and were not Teachers,) but after that every one did think, those whom he had baptised to be his, not Christ's, it was decreed in all the world, that one of the priests being chosen, should be set above the rest, unto whom all the care of the Church should appertain, and the seeds of schisms should be taken away. And when he hath alleged (for proof, that Bishops and priests were first all one,) all our brethren's examples aforesaid: he concludeth again, saying: These, to this purpose, that we might show, that among the ancients, priests were the same, which all were bishops. But by little and little, that the plants of dissensions might be plucked up: all the careful provision was given unto one. As therefore priests know, Ieromes observation. that they by the custom of the Church are subject unto him that is placed over them: so let Bishops know, that rather by custom, than by the verity of the Lords disposing, they are greater than priests. And that they ought to govern the Church in common, following Moses, who when he had in his power to rule the people of Israel alone, The Bishop among the Pastors, compared to Moses among the Elders. he chose 70. with whom he would judge the people. Here is your former example also. Numb 11. but not as you allege it, that the office of the Eldership in the one, is an imitation of the Eldership of the other, meaning there the Ministers of the word and Sacraments. For, these offices are nothing like: the one being mere temporal, the other mere Ecclesiastical. Neither like your other, not Teaching Elders, as we shall after see. And yet, if they were alike, it would clean beat down your equality of dignity. For, though Moses took these to be assistants in Government to him, yet were they not equal to him, but his inferiors. And thus the Bishop should have his assistant priests & Minister of the word and Sacraments, in preaching and ministering the Sacraments, in ordaining Ministers, and in making any Ecclesiastical constitutions, and so, rule in common: but not that every Minister, or those that were chosen to be assistants, should be hail fellow well met, equal and all one in dignity with him: or else there is no imitation, but manifest breach of the example of Moses, and the 70. Elders, his coadjutors in the burden of the government. Thus equally in this controversy then, did Jerome bear himself, both to the Bishops and to the priests, being himself a priest, and favouring their cause, and pleading for them, so far as possibly he could. Neither would these testimonies (being not taken by the way, but of set purpose thus set down) be slightly considered For, (if we list not to be contentious) it may be a notable pattern unto us, sith we see this controversy so hot, in these ancient and holy Father's days, that were nearer the time of the original of this change than we are, what was their opinion (that were the best learned, and holiest Fathers) thereon: & what reasons and resolutions moved them thereunto; to be the more persuaded to follow their judgement: or at least, to beware, how far we stir & move factions and schisms for the same, as then Aërius and his sectaries did, to the disturbance of the Churches quiet in those days. For our Brethren do still allege this sentence of Jerome against Bishops; but they still pass over all those things that should open the grounds, the causes, the meaning and all the necessary observations thereof. Five things to be observed out of Ieromes sentence. Now, out of this sentence of Jerome, first we may plainly see, that although he say Bishops and priests were at the first all one: yet they were not so all one, that they had any law or institution of God, so to remain all one, for than could they never have been changed. And therefore, being changed by these so holy and so ancient fathers, it is apparent, that they all judged it, not to be any whit of the substance of the order and office, that they were all one: but a mere accessary and changeable thing, to be made different, as the Church should see most expedient▪ Secondly that this change was made, not only while the Apostles were alive, but that it drew fast uponthe time, after that those factions, mentioned by S. P. 1. Cor. 1, & 3. began to disturb the Church of Corinth. where it is said Silas was the Bish. & it may well be: for it is said of Silas, Act. 15.22. that he was one of those, that the Apostles appointed to send to Antioch. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Men that were principal Rulers among the Brethren. Whom, being left at Beroea, Act. 17, 14. Paul being at Athens sent for, ver. 15 Who came unto him at Corinth, where after these factions happened, it is little enough he was made Bishop, being commended in the Scripture for such an able man, to be a chief governor among his brethren. Neither is it unlikely, that he or some such other was ordained there, where Jerome saith the occasion thereof did spring. But whosoever was there, or in other places, the first Bishop so ordained: this change was not very late, ere it began in the Apostles times. thirdly, the occasion arising by reason of these factions, that sprang in the time while the name Bishop was yet indifferent to every Priest or Pastoral Elder, and while all among them were alike and equal in dignity, if that such and so many factions arose so soon at that time, while the Apostles lived: what would it have done, if this equality had continued longer? What would it have done, if it had continued after the Apostles days? If it had continued in all the ages following? especially in these our factious and licentious times? When the very beginning to renew this equality by Aërius, in the time of these so reverend fathers, did breed such troubles in the Church of God, as scarce Theodoret, Epiphanius, S. Augustine, S. Ambrose, chrysostom, Jerome, and other holy and learned men, could express. And it is likely, if it were now admitted, and that all were reduced to that first equality of name and dignity, that we should now be cumbered with no factions? When as the very motion of it brings withal in question, so many points of question, and it is so eagerly urged, and so peremptorily cried upon, as though all discipline were lost, all doctrine professed in vain, yea, we are no true Church of Christ, without it? If the beginning to reduce it, make us thus to leave the battle of the Lord against the open enemy, and fall to biting and defacing thus one another, that are brethren: verily (I fear) were it set up again, we should find far more perilous factions in these days, than ever those fathers either felt or feared, when they first made this ordinance. And as of the occasion, so, of the end wherefore, I (four) note on these words of Jerome, that the cause why they did it was good, and necessary. It was not directed to any tyranny, to any pride▪ 4. The good and necessary end and effect thereof. to any ambition, or to any ill purpose, but clean contrary. Especially, to pull up those factions that were bred: and to prevent, that other should not so easily spring, and spread in the Church of Christ. To which good purposes, nothing in very deed is better, than to have one in moderate order, without oppression and usurpation, to be over and under another. As we see how it was even at that time in jerusalem, when factions and questions began to arise, and that they could not decide them at Antioch, and other places, where this equality yet remained, when they came or sent unto jerusalem to the Apostles, those that were the pillars and chief among their fellow Apostles, did call them and all the Elders of the Church together. Which they could not have done, had they had before no superior authority over them. Neither read we of any given them, at any time after they were assembled. And therefore, it plainly argueth (though it be not plainly set down) that their superior authority was standing and continuing in them. By the orderly direction and determination whereof, all their controversies and affairs were the spéedilier dispatched, and the easilier composed, and they afterward continued the fréeer from all such factions. But who did that among them, and in what manner, we shall see afterwards. Lastly, I note upon these words of Jerome, that these considerations and causes did so move them, that it was liked generally on all sides. 5. The approbation of it. Neither any Pastor did refuse (in respect of the public benefit offered to the Church) to become an inferior, to leave their equality, and surrender their title of Bishop unto one, that should be chosen among them, and submit themselves to his superior dignity. Yea, that it was so well liked that by little and little, it was approved and decreed in all the world. Which, if it were so: (as, why should we not credit these learned father's affirmation, so many hundredth years nearer to the doing of it, than we are?) then (no doubt) but as it was in the Apostles times, which by many proves (I hope) I have clearly evicted: Augustine● rule of general observations. it must needs be done by the assent and approbation also of the Apostles: and may safely be accounted among those things, whereof S. Augustine saith Lib. 4. cap. 24. de Baptismo c●ntra Donatistas'. That which the universal Church doth hold, neither is instituted in the Counsels, but hath been holden always; is most rightly believed, not to have been delivered, but by the authority of the Apostles. And more at large in his Epistle ad januarium: Epist. 118. Which januarius, had moved a question unto Augustine, concerning the observation of Customs, Rites, and Ceremonies. To whom Augustine answereth saying: Augustine his rule. to those things that thou hast demanded of me, etc. First therefore, I will that thou hold, that which is the head of this disputation: that our Lord jesus Christ, even as he speaketh in the Gospel, hath set us under a gentle yoke, and a light burden. Whereupon he hath bound together the society of the new people, with Sacraments in number most few, in observation most easy, in signification most excellent. As is baptism consecrated in the name of the Trinity, the communicating of his body and blood: and if there be any other thing that is commended in the Canonical Scriptures. Those things excepted which burdened the servitude of the old people, according to the congruence of their hart, and of the prophetical time, and which are red in the five books of Moses. But those things that are not written, but that being delivered we keep, which are indeed observed throughout the whole world: are given to be understood, that they are to be retained, as either of the Apostles themselves, or of plenary (or general) Counsels (whose authority is most wholesome in the Church,) they are commended or decreed upon. As, that the passion of the Lord, and the resurrection, and the ascension into heaven, and the coming of the holy Ghost from heaven, are celebrated. And if any such other thing shall occur, which is kept of the universal Church, whither soever it spread abroad itself. As for other things, which are varied by Coasts of Countries, and by regions; as is that, that other fast on the Saturday and other not: other every day communicate the body and blood of the Lord, other do receive but certain days: somewhere no day is left of, in which there is not an offering made, somewhere on the Saturday only, and the lords day; somewhere only on the lords day. And if any such other like thing may be noted, this whole kind of things, hath free observations. Neither any discipline in these things is better to a grave and prudent Christian, then to do after that sort, after which he shall see the Church do, unto the which he shall happen to come. For that, which is enjoined, neither against the Faith, nor yet against good manners; is to be holden indifferently: and to be kept according to the company of them, among whom men live. So that, according to this fatherly advice and sound judgement of S. Augustine conferred with these and other circumstances, for the uniting of this name Bishop unto one more peculiarly, By this council of Aug. this superiority is allowable. then to other his fellow brethren, it being neither against the faith, nor against good manners: though there had been no mention at all thereof, or of that which might infer it, in the Scripture: and though diverse Countries had one custom of Government and we another: yet were not ours to be disobeyed, but strangers coming to us, are to conform themselves (as occasion requireth) to ours, and much more ourselves not to despise the same. But now, it being such an universal order, Bezaes' conclusion against Bi. that it hath always continued even from the Apostles times, and all over the Church in every place, without alteration: nor any age or people have been known, or can be named in all Christendom; where this pretended equality, since the Apostles times hath been maintained: but that there have been Bishops, good or bad, that have been superiors, though not in the office of their Order, yet in the office of their Dignity: albeit we could not show in the express scripture, the time, the place, the manner of the institution, & beginning thereof: yet may we safely with S. Augustine conclude, that it was not nor could be done, without the Apostles. Especially, when we can show, (as we have showed, even in the plain words of the Scripture,) the very matter itself, not among Priests in the old Law, among whom they had an high Priest, over them, and all the Levites, Princes, and Rulers of the Levites; as our brethren reason, from the prophesy of Esay: that God would take of the Gentiles, to be Priests and Levites; to fulfil this prophesy, by proportions of our Pastors and Doctors: but we stand (for the original practice of it) on the manifest examples in the new Testament. The Apostles, (and that not in respect they were Apostles; for so they were sent abroad, and not resiant in a place, but as they were resiant, Some superiority among the Apostles. & so Pastors,) had some higher than the residue; some that were Pillars and chief among them.. And likewise had the other brethren 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, those that were guides and Rulers among them. And Timothy the Pastor of the Church at Ephesus, (as calvin saith,) was the chief Ruler (saith Beza) of all the Pastors there. Yea, the very plain subscription of the Epistle itself, calleth him plat and plain, The first Bishop of Ephesus. Scythe therefore, both the gift of this superior dignity, and the application of the name: had such ancient original in the Apostles times when it began; had such urgent occasions where it sprang: had such godly purposes whereto it tended: had such plausible allowance and authority of all the world's decreeing to confirm it: (among whom, I hope at least were some good men,) And lastly, sith it hath had such universal and continual practice of it, among whom also, such a multitude of holy & learned fathers, have taken them this peculiar title and superiority: shall we now yield to Beza his proceeding on this example, Phil. 1. Bezain Phil, 1. That this was the chief occasion of all the mischief following? Here-upon (saith Beza) began the Devil to lay the first foundation of his tyranny in God's church as though all the administration of the Church, Bezac● wrong conclusion against Bish were together with the name translated unto one. All this, and that which followeth in Beza, hereupon (be it spoken with all dutiful reverence to so worthy a man, & unworthy affection with in these matters, to be so carried away) is unnecessary collected on the sequel here-of, howbeit directly, indeed, no sequel at all. True it is, that of any never so good a thing, the Devil indirectly may pick occasion to work mischief. But that cannot be properly avowed, that it cometh from thence. For (as S. james saith) doth a fountain send out at one place sweet water and bitter? Sequels of direct and indirect occasions. and directly (as Christ saith) a good tree bringeth forth good fruits. If therefore, so good an action, done for so good purposes, have not had so good a sequel: it is not to be imputed to the matter, but to other ill occasions afterward. When the good householder had sowed wheat: the envious man, (on occasion of the servants sleeping) sowed Darnel. When God had sent Christ into the world, to be the corner stone of the building, by the occasion of man's malice, he was called, and was indeed to many, the stone of offence and stumbling. But what of that, shall we take offence also? or, conclude, that Christ is not the God of peace and love, because war and discord follows, while Satan stirs occasions to make sects and divisions, where the Gospel is preached and received? if that were proved to be the very necessary and proper occasion; and those evils following, to be the direct & natural sequeles: it were a good argumit ab effectis. otherwise, on every accident, you may condemn all things. But all this runs on this supposal, that the whole administration of the Church, together with the name, is hereby translated unto one. If this sequel did consequently follow: B●zaes mispre supposal then indeed we might well conclude, that hereupon the Devil laid his first foundation of his tyranny in the Church of God. But when Beza conts in with a byowse presupposal, as though it were so: who seeth not, he dareth not, nor indeed can say, if did or doth so? may not every one still for all this order, retain all the administration of his office, both in preaching God's word, and administering his Sacraments? neither is all government taken away from although a moderate superior government be given of all to some: and not yet of all in all the Church to one; but to one over some in several particular Churches. And this orderly superiority, beneficial unto all the church, injurious and tyrannous unto none, as on the foresaid originals it sprang even from the Apostles: so, howsoever the wicked abused the same, yet very many most godly, excellent, & holy fathers, being lawfully called thereunto, did accept it, & acknowledge the state & challenge to be both lawful, and to be a high calling, not so much of Superior dignity, as of Superior charge in governing of God's Church. We must rather look to the right end & v●e of a thing, them to the wrong occasions and abuse it. And they traveled painfully, and faithfully & fruitfully in the function thereof, God blessing and prospering their good labours. And lo, we that reap the benefit of these Bish. travels look with an aw●e eye, rather on the hurt which we surmise may come, or hath come by sinister occasion, or by evil possessors of this good dignity. And look not (which we rather should) with a single eye on the marvelous good it may do, yea, it hath done, & ever will do, if they that enjoy this superiority, do not abuse it, but use it according to this first institution of it. But now that we have seen Beza his censure on this example, Thefathers' interpretation. Phil. 1. till he proceed from Bishops to Archbishops, etc. let us see what these ancient holy Father's Bishops theirselues, writ also, otherwise than Beza hereupon. And from them, come to the judgement of the best learned, of our own late or yet living Brethren, concerning Bishops, & their exposition of this place. And first Jerome that before (as we have heard) cited among other this testimony, The ancient Father's judgements of the name Bishop. Phil. 1. to show that Bishops and Priests were sometimes all one: Phil. 1.1. when he commenteth of purpose thereupon, doth say: Here we understand Bishops for Priests. For there could not be many Bishops of one City. But this is had also in the Acts of the Apostles. So that Jerome in both these places, understandeth the word Bishop, to be not properly, but improperly spoken. jeronimus in Phil. 1. And he rendereth the reason aforesaid: because that Paul writing this Epistle, when he was prisoner at Rome, and so belike after this order was begun: There could not be many in one City, to whom this name properly could be given. And to show, that it was but spoken in a general and unproper understanding, our Brethren also will perhaps at length confess it. For whereas they distribute all into four offices, and here are but only two reckoned up: and Beza saith, that Paul here setteth down the most beautiful distribution of the Church: It either followeth, that then there must be but two offices, Pastors, and Deacons, The name Bishop Phil. .1.1. understood unproperly. taking Bishops and Pastors but for one: or else, if as Beza divides it, he understand by Bishops, who-so-euer are over the word and government, as Pastors, Doctors, and Priests or Elders (understanding them for Priest Governors only) of the word to oversee, because they must be as watchmen to inquire of the doctrine and manners of the flock committed to them. Act. 20.28. whom now and then by a general name he calleth Priests or Elders, as there: verse, 17. and 1. Tim. 5.17. And so including both these Lay Priests whom you call Governors, and including Doctors, whom you distinguish likewise, from your Governors, and from your Pastors: it followeth, that the word Bishop here, and also in other places, Act. 20. is not taken properly, but in a general sense. And if this word Bishop here, be so properly taken, that it comprehend neither these Lay Priests (whom ye call Governors,) nor yet your Doctors (which ye make the first and chiefest officers) but only Pastors, upon whom here ye treat distinctly from the other: how is this the must beautiful description of the parts of the Church, when neither of these are mentioned? but belike there was no such most beautiful distribution of the Church's offices, in the Church of the Philippians, in those days, as Beza and our Geneva quoters did imagine. And you do well to reject this so general understanding of the word, that Bishop and Pastoral Elder or Priest, were here taken, and so still must be, for all one office. chrysostom writing on this place, Philip. 1. with the Bishops and Deacons: Chysost. in Phil. 1. what (sayeth he) is this? Were there many Bishops of one City? No. But so he called the Priests. For at that time they did now and then communicate (or parttake) in names, and a Deacon was called a Bishop. Wherefore writing to Timothy he saith fulfil thy Deaconship. When as he was a Bishop, for he saith unto him, because he was Bishop: lay hands hastily on no body, and that, which was given to thee with the laying on of the hands of the priesthood or Eldership. But Priests or Elders laid not their hands on a Bishop. And again, writing to Titus, he saith: For this cause I left thee in Creta, that thou shouldest ordain Priests (or Elders) in every City, as I appointed thee, if any be blameless the husband of one wife, he speaketh of a Bishop, and when he had said these things, he strait ways this setteth under it: for a Bishop must be blameless as the steward of God. Not froward. Therefore, even as I have said, Priests in the old time were both called the Bishops and the Deacons of Christ. Whereupon now also the most part of Bishops do write: To his consenior (or fellow Elder) to his Comminister (or fellewe minister): Howbeit, for all that, every one hath his own name severally by himself, given unto him, be he either Bishop, either Priest. What can be plainer spoken than this? that here, & in the other places by our Brethren quoted, to prove, by the indifferent taking now & then of the names & the offices that they were equal & all one; it is not so meant, but that these names were there taken improperly: whereas properly they are separate, and neither all one, nor equal. And that also is here proved by good reasons alleged for the difference of the offices in the matter. Theodoretus in Phil. .1. Theodoret likewise upon this place, writeth thus: He sendeth to all at once, as well to those that had received the Sacerdotal priesthood, as to those that were fed of them. For he calleth them that were vouchsafed in baptism, saints. But the Priests or Elders he calleth Bishops. For at that time they had baothe names. And that also the story of the Acts declareth. For when S. Luke had said, that the divine Apostle had called to Miletum the Elders of the Ephesians, he telleth also the things that were spoken to them, for saith saith he, look to yourselves, and to the whole flock, in which the holy-ghost hath placed you Bishops, to feed the Church of Christ. He named the same men both Priests & Bishops. So also in the Epistle to blessed Titus: therefore have I left thee at Creta, that thou shouldest by the Cities ordain Priests or Elders, as I have disposed unto thee▪ And when he had told what manner of men they ought to be, that are ordained: he addeth under it, for a B. must be without crime, even as the steward of God. Moreover, he showeth this here also: for he joineth Deacons unto Bish. when as he had made mention of Priests. Otherwise it could not be, that many Bishops should be the Pastors of one City. Whereupon it comes to pass, to wit, that they were Priests, whom he called Bishops. But he called in his Epistle the blessed Epaphroditus their Apostle. For your Apostle (saith he) and the helper of my necessity. Therefore he plainly taught, that the Episcopal dispensation was committed unto him, when as he had the appellation of Apostle. Thus also plainly saith Theodorete, that although the other Pastoral Elders were called by the name of Bishops, yet the matter which he calleth the Episcopal dispensation, was committed over all the other but to one. And with these accordeth Theophilactus, saying: Theophilactus in Phil. 1. He calleth the priests Fellow-bishops, for there were not many Bishops in one City, for as yet the names were notdistincte, but that also Bishops were called Deacons and Priests. For writing to Timothy being a Bishop, fulfil (saith he) thy Deaconship, that is, thy ministery. And again, that which was given thee by the laying on of the hand of the Eldership, that is, of the Bishops: for priests or Elders did not ordain a Bishop. Again, Priests were also called Bishops, as those that look also upon the people, and bore a care of them, to cleanse, and to lighten those whom it was needful. Thus doth Theophilact with all the other agree, that it was but a partaking of the name improperly, as the name of Deacon was used, till they were more properly distinguished. But all that while, the matter and office was not so confounded, as one or equal, but distinct and one Superior and inferior to another. And howsoever Ambroses judgement on these words, Ambr. in Phil. is lightly cast off by some of our Brethren, because he taketh these words, with the Bishops and Deacons, not for such Bishops and Deacons, as were among the Pphilippians to whom he wrote, but for himself and Timorhie and other with them: yet is he plain also of this opinion with the residue. For (saith he) he wrote to the people: for if he had written to Bishops and Deacons, he would have written to their persons, & he should have written to the Bishop of that place, not to 2. or 3. even as also he wrote to Titus and to Timothy. So that he verily thought, there was but one Bishop of that place, to whom when he wrote, he expounded these words of S. Paul's salutation: with the Bishops, etc. to be understood of joining himself and Timothy, etc. in the participation of the grace and peace that he wished to them. Thus do the ancient, holy, and most learned Fathers agree, & all other (that I read of) before these, from the Apostles times, not only such as were Bishops their-selves, The Church's practice. but also all other Pastors and Doctor● that the name of Bishop, was properly peculiar but to one Pastor, that had superior dignity, government, and authority, over the residue of the Pastors in the Churches, Cities, and Dioceses, assigned to them: And that this was the practice of the primitive Church, from the Apostles age, The universal practice of the primitive Church. universally both for times and places: the Fathers own testimonies conferred with the ancient Ecclesiastical histories, do sufficiently record. Which, as we have seen it begun, in the practice among the Apostles and Disciples themselves, at the first Metropolitical or Mother Church of jerusalem: so, for confirmation thereof, Eusebius lib. 2. cap. 1. citeth Clement of Alexandria, Euseb. lib. 2. cap. 1. to prove that james was Bishop there. Even this self same james, I say, (saith Eusebius) which of the auntientes was surnamed the just, by the worthiness of his virtues, and privilege of his notable life. The stories have declared that he obtained the first seat, james B. of jerusalem by the testimony also of Clem. Alex. (or, was the first, which received the seat) of the Church, that is at jerusalem, as Clement he speaketh not of Clement Bishop of Rome, whose works are manifestly forged and fathered in his name; but he speaketh of Clement Priest, Doctor, and Pastor in Alexandria) in his 6. book of Informations, affirmeth, saying: For Peter (saith he,) and james, and john, after the ascension of our Saviour, although they were preferred before all, notwithstanding they claimed not to themselves, the glory of the Primacy, but they ordain james that was called the Just, the Bishop of the Apostles. Which words of Eusebius, living within three hundred years after Christ, are yet not so much, as this testimony that he allegeth out of Clemens Alexandrinus, that lived in the very next age to the Apostles, and therefore could not lightly be deceived in this point. Neither doth he only ascribe unto james, the Episcopal office, but he calleth either him the first, or, the seat the first, as a Primacy, over all his fellow Apostles, jeroms testimony of Egesippus for james to be B. of jerus. and brethren in that seat. Whose Bishopric is also confirmed by Jerome, citing Egesippus, more ancient than Clement thereunto. Eusebius reckoneth up diverse Bishops of jerusalem, succeeding james, till he come to Narcissus and Alexander, who were both at once Bishops there, and it is noted for a rare example, and fell out when this Clement came thither. Hieron. in catalogue. illustrium virorum. Of whom, and of this Alexander, saith Hi●rom in Catalogue. illustr. virorum. There is extant an Epistle of Alexander Bishop of jerusalem, who together with Narcissus ruled the Church, etc. In the end of which Epistle he setteth down these writings. My Lords and Brethren, I have sent over unto you, Clem. Alexander. by Clement the blessed Priest (or Elder) a man renowned and approved, whom ye also know, and now ye shall more fully reacknowledge. Who when he came thither according to the providence and visitation of God, he confirmed and increased God's Church. Which showeth, that this Clement being Presbyter, as also Jerome calleth him a Priest or Pastoral Elder of the Church of Alexandria, and yet with all (saith he) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The offices that our Brethren make all one, were distinguished: and those that they distinguished, were all one. the Doctor of the teaching or Catechising, in the Ecclesiastical school of Alexandria: it appeareth, that those offices, which our brethren make to be distinguished, were not distinguished. And these offices that they make not distinguished but all one, were distinguished. For, Clement was a Doctor or teacher, and yet withal, a Presbyter, a Priest, or Pastoral Elder. And though he were a Pastoral Elder, yet was he no Bishop. Neither was his Pastoral Eldership so tied to one place or fold, but that he traveled abroad, to instruct and confirm other Churches. Nevertheless, both in other and in his own, Pastor's teaching in other Churches. though otherwise for learning, he was one of greatest authority in his age: yet lived he in all Ecclesiastical obedience under his Bishop Demetrius, who made him Priest or Elder in that Church, and also Doctor or public teacher in that school; and before him the famous Pantaenus, Clementes Master; and after him, Origene, Clementes Scholar, were all under Demetrius this Bishop of Alexandria. And to prove that this Clement flourished under Commodus within 80. years after the Apostle Saint john: not only Eusebius testifieth Libr. 6. cap. 11: but Clement himself inferreth it. Strom. lib. 1. saying: This book is not for ostentation, with scripture gathered together artificially: but monuments, (the help of forgetfulness) are gathered unto me, for mine old age. Verily, an image and shadow of those manifest and lively speeches, How near Clem. Alex. that testifieth of james his Bishopric lived to the Apostles. which I was vouchsafed to hear, of those blessed men, that indeed were of highest price and estimation. The one of them was in Greece an Ionian, the other in Greece the great (or Apulia.) The one was from Coelesyria, the other from Egypt. And other there were from the east, and one of those an Assyrian, the other an Hebrew in Palestine, of high pedigree. But when I light upon this last, albeit in power he was the first, I stayed in Egypt, hunting after those things that were hidden from me, even as a very Bee of Sycilia, sucking the flowers of the Prophetical and Apostolical meadow. He engendereth a certain sincere and incorrupt knowledge, in the minds of them that heard him; but he was such an other, as indeed kept the true delivery of the blessed doctrine, even straight from Peter, and james, and john, and Paul, and the holy Apostles, the son receiving them of the Father, (howbeit, few sons are like their Fathers) these have by the will of God come also to us, who will lay up those Apostolical seeds, that we have received of our ancestors. Pantanus. Eusebius testimony of Pantaenus D. Wherein, as this ancient Father declareth his sincerity and diligence, in following the Apostles: so withal, how near he was to the Apostles times, and so notable a scholar picked out such notable Masters, but the Master, whom in the Doctorship he succeeded was Pantaenus. Of which Pantaenus, Eusebius saith, Lib. 5. cap. 10. (to whom also accordeth Jerome) when at that time Pantaenus the most Noble man in all learning, had the rule of the Ecclesiastical School, and of the office of a Doctor, from whence the custom with them from the old time was delivered (as Jerome also saith, according to an ancient custom in Alexandria, were Doctors always from Mark the Evangelist) it remaineth yet until this day that in the Ecclesiast. School, there are to be had Doctors of divine Scriptures, (or, as we call them, Doctors of divinity) most choice men in science and learning. Of this office therefore, the man of whom before we spoke, was counted a certain author, and a chieftain very famous: as one that also among those Philosophers, which are called the stoics, had before that time nobly flourished. Whose study towards God word and great love is reported to be so much, that of the fervency of faith and devotion, he went to preach the Gospel to all the Nations that are hidden in the uttermost corners of the East, & that he came to the hither India, preaching the word of God. Evangelists. For there were yet in those days many Evangelists, who according to the imitation of the holy Apostles, traveling in diverse parts of the world, by the grace of God, and the virtue of their mind, brought the word of God, and the faith of Christ, to every of those Nations that knew it not. Whereupon say the Centuriographers, It happened that the Indians moved with the renown of the Church of Alexandria, & perhaps with the fame of the same Pantaenus, did by certain their legates, request of Demetrius the Bishop of that Church, that he would send a Doctor fit and sound, which might more fully instruct them, in the true doctrine of the Gospel, and win other unto Christ, that as yet were rude and ignorant of the Gospel. What is done? Pantaenus the moderator of the holy school in his Church, is before all chosen of Demetrius, and appointed unto that vocation. Pantaenus here doth not draw back, nor is terrified with the labours and perils: but forthwith obeyeth this vocation, as it were God's vocation, and setteth on the journey, although it were long and sharp. To become after the Apostles, the Evangelist of the Indians. Thus are these Doctors, and Pastoral Elders, chosen, ordained, and appointed by their Bishop, which in authority of learning, was far inferior to them, but in authority and dignity of place, far their superior: yea, although they were Evangelists, Bishop's superiority. yet were they subject to the Bishops. And as this Bishop Demetrios, Doctors & Pastors under the B. government. had this superior government over all the Doctors and Preachers in his time, which was the 11. Bishop of Alexandria: even so had all before him. Who are all said to rule and govern the Church, notwithstanding there were diverse notable Doctors and Pastors, besides the Bishops in Alexandria, and had so continued even from the very Apostles times, yea, from S. Mark himself, which was the first planter of the faith of Christ among them, both Paul and Peter being yet living. Jerome calleth Mark, the Doctor of Alexandria, and saith, that Philo Indaeus had friendship with Peter and for this cause did also set forth with praises, the Church of Mark, Euseb. lib. 2. cap. 16. the disciple of Peter, and his followers at Alexandria. Among which praises of Philo Eusebius saith thus: He describeth diligently the degrees of them that exercised the ecclesiast. functions, which excelled the one the other, also the ministers of the Deacons. And finally the chief and principal honour of the Bishop's office. And as it was thus, even from the Apostles times, in the Church of Alexandria: so likewise was it in many other places. Polycarpus (saith Jerome, Hieron. in catalogue. script. eccl. in Catalogo scriptorum Eccl.) the disciple of john the Apostle, being of him ordained Bishop of Smyrna, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, was Princeps (which is Ieromes own word) the Prince, that is, the chief Prelate, or as we more moderately call it, Policarpus primate of Asia. the primate of all Asia. For he had many of the Apostles and them that had seen the Lord to be his Masters, and had seen them. Eusebius Lib. 3. cap. 36. saith of Ignatius: Ignatius. Moreover Ignatius notorious in the renown of fame, even to our times, obtained the Bishopric of Antiochia, by the second succession after Peter; not that Peter was Bishop there; but that Peter being there, made Euodius the first Bishop of Antioch, after whom succeeded this Ignatius, that calleth himself the Scholar or Disciple of Saint john. Which Ignatius going to his martyrdom writeth thus in his Epistle to the Antiochians: Remember the rightly most blessed Euodius your Pastor, Ignatius ad Antiochenos. which was the first Bishop ordained unto you, even of the Apostles? And anon after, speaking to the Priests or Pastoral Elders, that he left at Antiochia behind him, he saith: The Pastoral Elders had a Bishop their Governor. Ye Priests or Elders feed the flock that is committed among you, until God declare who he shall be, that shall be the Governor among you. As for me, I now make haste that I may gain Christ. Let the Deacons acknowledge of what dignity they be, and study to be unreprovable, that they may be the followers of Christ. Let the people be subject to the Priests or Elders, etc. And after he hath saluted many, and done salutations from many, both Bishops, Pastors, and Deacons, etc. that accompanied him: for, he was of high estimation over all Asia: I salute him (saith be) which in my place shall be-come your Prince, (Primate, or chief Prelate) whom I have also begotten in Christ. Which he meant of Heron that did succeed him in the Bishopric, who was a Deacon in the Church of Antioch. These Epistles, (of what credit every thing contained in them is,) I will not plead for them. How far the credit of Ignatius Epistles stretcheth. But think verily, that there are some Popish foystinges crept into them, as also is found out, in the works of other famous men. But, that the whole Epistles should be utterly denied, or suspected, especially those that are not only mentioned, but parts of them also word for word set down, according to their manner, by other Ecclesiastical writers, both by Jerome, that was very curious in finding out forgeries, and also by Eusebius, that was within two hundred years of Ignatius: yea, Irenaeus that was Polycarpus Scholar, to whom Ignatius writeth one of these Epistles, and diverse other ancient Fathers of great credit, make mention of some of the words contained in them: it can not be that they should all be forged, especially this point, for the distinction of the Bishops from Priests, or Pastoral Elders, and the superiority of the Bishop over them, being concordant with all the other writers. And especially, to be observed almost in every one of these Epistles. In the Epistle ad Trallianos, he sayeth: Ad Trallianos. I know ye have an undefiled mind, and without deceit in perseverance, not on doubtfulness, but on the possession of saith, as Polybius your Bishop hath signified to me, who came to Smyrna by the will of God the Father, and of jesus Christ his son, by the working together of the holie-Ghoste, and did so congratulate unto me, being bound in Christ jesus, that in him I might see all fullness. Receiving therefore him according unto GOD, I have by him acknowledged your benevolence, finding you to be the followers of jesus Christ our Saviour. Be ye subject to the Bishop as to the Lord, for he watcheth for your souls, as he that shall give account to GOD. For which thing ye shall seem unto me, not to live according to the flesh, but to live according to jesus Christ, who died for us, that we believing in his death, might (by baptism) be made partakers of his resurrection. For it is necessary that you should do nothing nor take aught in hand (he meaneth concerning Ecclesiastical causes) with out the Bishop. But submit yourselves to the Priests (or Elders) as to the Apostles of jesus Christ our hope, in whom abiding, we shall be found in him. you must also therefore by all means please the Deacons, Practise of Bishop's superiority. which are for the ministery of jesus Christ. Eor they are not ministers in meat and drink (he alludeth to the Tables whereon they attended (but they are the Ministers of the Church of God. Ye must therefore observe that which they command you, even as if it were fire burning. As for them, let them be such. And as for you, reverence ye them, even as the Lord jesus Christ. For they are the keepers of his place. The Bishop distinguished from the Priest. Even as the Bishop is the form or type of him that is father of all. But the Priests even as the assembly of God, and the conjunction of the Apostles of Christ, etc. And again, after he hath warned them to take heed of Schisms, of Seducers, and those that are puffed up with pride: and exhorted them to humility, he saith, and yet reverence your Bishop, even as Christ, according to which, the blessed Apostles have commanded you. For he that is placed between the altar (which word altar, is often used of the ancient Fathers for the Lords Table, and is here meant, for the participation of the holy Communion,) he is clean. For the which, obey your Bishop, and Priests or Elders. For he that is placed without the altar, is doing somewhat without the Bishop, the Priests, and the Deacons. He that shall be such an one (that is, excludeth himself from the participation of the divine mysteries, delivered by the Bishop, the Priests, and Deacons) is polluted in his conscience, and is worse than an Infidel. For what is the Bishop, but one holding a principality and power over them all, thus far forth, as becometh a man to hold, that is made the follower of God according to virtue? What is Priesthood or the Eldership, but a holy institution of a counsellor and confessor of the Bishop? What also are the Deacons, but the followers of Christ, ministering to to the Bishop, as Christ to the Father, and working unto him that clean and undefiled work, as S. Stephan to the most blessed james, and Timothy and Linus unto Paul, and Anacletus and Clemens unto Peter. Therefore he that shall be disobedient to these, shall be altogether without God, and wicked, and contemning Christ, and an abaser of his ordinance. And in the next Epistle of Ignatius, to the Magnesians: Howbeit, Ad Magnesios'. I deserved to have seen you by the worthy in God your Bishop Damas', and the worthy in God, your Priests or Elders, to wit Bassus and Appollonius, and my guest Sotion, whom I have nourished, because he is subject to the Bishop, and to the Priests, in the grace of GOD, and in the law of Jesus Christ, and it behoveth you also not to contemn the age of the Bishop, and according to God the Father, The Priests reverenced the Bishop. to give him all reverence: according to which I have also known the holy Priests to have yielded it him. Not thinking him to be contemned for the age that appeareth in him, but in the wisdom of God to obey him. Scythe that, not the ancient in years are the wisest, neither the old men understand prudence, Bishop of Rome. but the spirit which is in men, etc. And in the next Epistle ad Tharsenses: Ye Priests or Elders, be subject to the Bishop. Ye Deacons, to the Priests, Ad Tharsenses. Ad Philadelphios'. ye people to the Deacons. And in the Epistle to the Philadelphians: Ye Princes be subject to Caesar, or to the King. Ye Soldiers, to the Princes, Deacons, and to the Priests or Elders, as to the administrators of the holy things. But let the priests and the Deacons, and all the clergy, Our Priests obey the B. together with all the people, and with the soldiers, and with the princes, yea, and with Caesar also, obey the Bishop, and the Bishop Christ, as Christ the Father, and so is an unity kept by all. What can be plainer spoken, both for the difference, and for the superiority of these ecclesiastical offices? I urge not these Epistles, as approving all things in them, nor avouching the credit of them, and therefore pass over the residue, serving also to this purpose. Neither yet dare I discredit them in all points, namely in this, for the distinction of these three offices, Bishop, priests and Deacons: and for the superiority of the Bishop, in any city over all the clergy there. Because these things accord with all the other writers, and state of that age, immediately following the Apostles. In Asia also about the same time, was Papias, of whom Jeremy saith: Papias the hearer of john, Papias saint john's disciple, Bishop. the Bishop of Hieropolis in Asia, and diverse other famous Bishops of that age, of whom saith Euseb. lib. 4. cap. 20, etc. At Antiochia about the same time, Theophilus held the Bishopric of the Church, The Bishops succeeding the Apostles being the sixth from the Apostles, where Cornelius was the fourth after Heron (Ignatus successor) whom in the 5. degree Heron succeeded. At the same time also was Egesippus holden famous, of whom we have spoken before. And Dionysius Bishop of Corinthe, & Pimitus was the most noble among the Bishops of Creta. Philip also, and Apollinaris, and Melito, Musanus and Modestus. And the chiefest of all, Iraeneus, of which men, most excellent monuments of the Apostolical faith, and sound doctrine, are come even unto our age. Egesippus in the first book of his Commentaries (where he sets down the sentence of his belief, Egesippus testimony of the Bishop's sincerity. with most full proof) declareth also this: that when he traveled to Rome, having conferred in speech and amity, with the Bishops in all places, he found them all Preachers and Teachers of one faith, and also in the Epistle of Clement, written to the Corinthians, he mentioneth somethings that I thought necessary to insert into this work. He saith therefore: And the Church (saith he) of Corinthe, even until Primus the Bishop, whom (sailing to Rome) I saw, The superitie of Bish. no alteration dissenting from the Lords ordinance. and abode with him at Corinthe many days, being delighted with the sincerity of his faith: but when I came to Rome, I abode there, until Soter succeeded Amcedus, and Eleutheims succeeded Soter. But in all these their ordeinings, or in other things that I saw in other cities, all things were in such sort, even as the law from of old had delivered, and the Prophets had judged, and the Lord had appointed. Moreover, the said party recordeth certain such sayings, Bishop's superiority. also of the Heretics, that arose in his time. And after (saith he) that james called the just, was martyred, even as the Lord also himself, bare witness to the truth: Simeon the son of Cleopas, the uncle of Christ, was by the divine election ordained Bishop, chosen of all, in regard that he was the cousin of the Lord, The Bish. superiority no defiling of the church. the Church than was called a virgin, because that as yet she was not defiled with the undermining of the adulterous word. But one Theobatus, for that he deserved the repulse of a Bishopric, began even in the beginning to disturb and corrupt all things, etc. Here we see again by Egesippus, that lived in justines' time, (not by the suspected Egesippus, that we have, but by the fragments of the true Egesippus, taken out of Eusebius,) another firm testimony, that james was Bishop of jerusalem, and Simeon after him. Yea Eusebius reckoneth up, lib. 4. cap. 5.25. Bishops of jerusalem, one succeeding another, from the Apostles times, until that destruction of jerusalem, under the Emperor Adrian; besides all the other Bishops in other places; and yet, that the Church continued still undefiled. So that, this superiority, was no defiling of the Church's discipline, but the godly government of it, and (as Egesippus noteth) even the appointment of the Lord, being practised and approved by the Apostles. And that all the disturbance and corruption entered indeed (as Beza and our Brethren note) on occasion of striving for this superiority: but yet, this superiority was not the cause, but their devilish ambition and pride, as in this Theobutus, and Simon Magus, and Diotrephes, etc. who could abide no rulers over them, but would themselves be rulers over others: and when they had repulses, than (as the for dispraised the grapes) they broke out into schisms and heresies. How corruption and disturbance entered about this superiority. So that, this rather confirmeth this superiority, then makes against it. And these godly Fathers, that gave not this offence, though other took it, continued this order of superiority in Bishops, and were the greatest defenders of God's truth and Church, against these Schismatics, Heretics, and disturbers of it. But now at length (saith Euseb. proceeding ca 23.) we must come to the mencioning of the blessed Dionysius Bishop of the Church of Corinth, whose learning and grace that he had in God's word, not only those people enjoyed, when he took upon him for to govern: but those also that were far off, to whom he gave his presence by his Epistles. There is extant an epistle of his▪ concerning the Catholic faith, written to the Lacedæmonians, in the which most florishingly, he treateth of peace & concord And an other to the Athenians, wherein he moveth them to belief of the Gospel, & stirreth up the sluggish, & withal reproveth certain, as almost fallen from the faith, when as their B. Publius had suffered martyrdom. And also he mentioneth Quadratus, that in the Sacerdotal Priesthood succeeded Publius. And he telleth, how that by his labour and industry, a certain reviving or quickening warmth of faith was renewed in them. Publius and Quadratus Bishops of Athens. Here this Quadratus is said by this Dionysius, to succeed Publius in Sacerdotio, in the Sacerdotal Priesthood, not that the Priesthood and the Bishopric, was equal and all one, for than he had not succeeded him, being a Priest or pastoral Elder in Publius time. But that which Ruffinus translateth, in Sacerdotio, Eusebius himself calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, And Publius that was Bishop before him, he calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, This Quadratus was also a Prophet, as saith Euseb. lib. 3. cap. 37. For having reckoned up Ignatius and Heron, that governed the Church of Antiochia, he saith: Among them flourished Quadratus, who togithee with the daughters of Philip, was most famous in the grace of prophesying, and also many other Disciples of the Apostles were alive at that time. Who upon the foundations of the Church laid by them, did build up most worthy buildings, increasing in all things the preaching of the word of God, and scattering more abroad through all the earth, the wholesome seeds of the kingdom of Heaven. To conclude, many of them (kindled with more fervent desire of the divine Philosophy) did consecrate their souls to the word of God, filling up the wholesome precept of perfection, that distributing their goods to those that had most need, they might be made ready to preach the Gospel, if that perhaps they should preach in any provinces, where the name of the faith was not known. And laying among them the first foundation of the Gospel, and committing the Churches that they had founded, to some certain chosen of them to the office of governing the Church, that they themselves hastened to other nations, and to other provinces, and exercised the office of Evangelists, so long as likewise the effect of divine tokens, and the grace of the Holie-ghoste, did follow, as it did the Apostles in the beginning. Insomuch, that at one preaching, whole peoples were brought to the worship of the divine religion, and the hearers faith was not more slow, then were the Preachers words. But because it is impossible to reckon up every one of them, who were after the first successions of the Apostles, in the Churches that are throughout the world; either the princes, (he meaneth the Bishops that were the chief Ecclesiastical Governors, or primates of the Church) or the Evangelists, or the pastors: let it suffice to have only remembered those; the monuments of whose faith and preaching, set down in books, have come even to us, as of Clement, and Ignatius, and of other, of whom we have before made mention. Thus (as Ruffinus translates him) saith Eusebius there, on occasion of this notable Bishop Quadratus, whereby (nothing withal the distinction of all these Bishops, to be the chief rulers, over the Pastors, even from the first planting of the faith, and founding of the Churches throughout the world: it plainly appeareth, that this Quadratus was long before he was Bishop, a pastor of the word, both at Athens, and at Corinthe, as the Centuriographers note, saying: It is out of controversy, that he was at Athens, and there with singular faith and dexterity, delivered the evangelical doctrine. But whether he were also an Athenian by country, or in what place, specially in the beginning, whether he taught in the Church or in the School, it is very obscure. That he was furnished with learning, with faith, with an excellent liberty of reprehension, and with all gifts that beseem a successor of the Apostles, is clear, both by the testimony of Eusebius, and by the things themselves that he did. Yea, he was famous in the gift of prophesy, as also at the same time were Philip's daughters, It appeareth: that before he entered into the function of a Bishop (although we may not avouch that for certainty) he had offered his writing for the Christians unto Hadrian, and thereupon gotten himself an excellent fame. By this (also) it is most manifest, that Publius was alive Quadratus continued under him, and was not Bishop although he were so famous a Priest or pastoral Elder, yet so long as this there nor his equal. So that, although a Bishop was a Priest or pastoral Elder, yet was not every such Priest, a Bishop, though otherwise he were never so famous a Priest or Pastor. But to return to Dionysius of Corinthe, in Eusebius lib. 4. cap. ●2, Dionysius B. of Corinthu● in the Apostles days. And this he noteth in that Epistle, that Dionysius the Areopagite, which being instructed of the Apostle Paul, believed in Christ, according to those things that are noted in the Acts of the Apostles, was of the said Apostle ordained Bishop at Athens. And so reckoning up other Epistles of this Dionysius, and in them commending Philip, Bishop of the Gortinians in Creta, and Palmus a Bishop of Pontus: unto these (saith he) is joined another Epistle to the Gnosians, in the which he warneth and beseecheth Pinitus their Bishop, that he should not lay upon the necks of the Disciples, heavy burdens, nor impose a necessity of a forced chastity upon his brethren, in the which the weakness of many should be endangered. Whereby it appeareth, that he would have enforced the Priests under him, to have abstained from marriage (for it cannot be understood, Philip Bish. of Gortinea, his superiority over the Pastors. that he went about to have so enforced all the people) but as the papists afterward did enforce the Priests, or pastoral Elders, whom he calleth his Disciples and his brethren. Which plainly argueth (though he abused the same) his superiority over them: for had they been his equals he could not have done it. next to whom, Eusebius reckoneth, Theophilus' Bishop of Antioch, an excellent writer. Whom Maximinus succeeded, Theophilus. Bishop of Anti-chia●. the 7 (saith Eusebius) after the Apostles, in the Sacerdotal Prieststood of the Church of Antiochia. By which term again he meaneth the Bishopric, and not the Pastoral Eldership or Priesthood. As shall yet more plainly appear, even in the next example of Irenaeus, which was the most singular instrument of God in all that age, a scholar of Polycarpus, Bishop of Smyrna, who after coming to Lions in France, where living with Photinus their reverend Bishop, Irenaeus the scholar of Polycarpus. he was made Presbyter, a Priest, or pastoral Elder of that Church. And when troubles grew in the East parts, about Montanus, Alcibiades, and Theodotus, troubling the Church with a new kind of prophesying: which Montanus (as noteth Euseb. li. 5. cap. 16, was inflamed with too great a desire of primacy: the Church of Lions sent Ireneus to them, to pacify the same. And by the way, sent him also (saith Eusebius, lib. 5. cap. 3.) to Eleutherius Bishop of the city of Rome, warning him of the Church's peace. Who also commended (to the foresaid Bishop of the city of Rome) Irenaeus, being then as yet a priest or Elder of the Church of Lions. Yielding a testimony of his life, which the words under written do declare: we wish you (O Father Eleutherius) in all things, and always in the Lord, well to far We have requested our brother and fellow Irenaeus, to bear these writings unto you, whom we beseech that you will have recommended, as one that is zealous of the Testament of Christ. For if we knew, that any man's degree would get and purchase righteousness, as in that he is a Priest or Elder of the Church, which also this man is; certainly we would have commended this chiefly in him. By which testimony, it appeareth (especially being sent in such weighty affairs) that he was a great and famous Preacher at that time, and yet was no Bishop in that Church. Yea, it should seem, that he had been a Pastoral Elder, or Priest, a good while before he was Bishop. For Eusebius in his Chronicle, maketh the persecution in France to be in the seventh year of Marcus Antonius, which belike lasted long, and Photinus Bishop of Lions, being yet alive: How long Irenaeu● was Priest before he was Bishop. and the prophesying of Montanus & his fellows, being in the eleventh year: he is not reckoned there as bishop till the 3. year of Commodus. So that he was Priest before he was Bishop, about a dozen years by this rockoning, if not more. Yea the Magdeburgenses, that say, there are which affirm, that in the 13. year of Marcus Antonius, he came to his Bishopric, about the year of our Lord 176. But under Commodus he flourished most of all. The contention for Easter when it was hoattest, Eusebius in his Chronicle placeth, in the fourth year of Severus, that is the year of our Lord 199: other refer it to the fift year of Severus. Therefore, he should have been in the ministery, especially in his Bishopric, about 23. years. To the which, if we add the years of his Priesthood or Eldership, perhaps it will run to 30. years. And so at the least, by their computation, he was seven years a Priest, before he was Bishop. And this also did these Centuriographers confess before, saying: Photinus being cruelly murdered in the persecution, for the confession of the truth of the Gospel: Irenaeus hitherto being but a Priest or Elder in the same Church, was substituted in his place. Whereby it is most evident, that Presbyter and Episcopus, a Priest or Pastoral Elder, or minister of the word, and a Bishop, were not all one and equal, in this holy and singular learned Father's days, so near unto the Apostles, that he was scholar to Polycarpus, which lived in the Apostles times. And even in Irenaeus time, he telleth, that neither the gifts of healings, nor of speaking with strange tongues, were yet ceased. Although (I grant) we shall now and then find, where (when he speaketh of Bishops) he calls them Priests or Elders: as lib. 4. cap. 43: wherefore we must hearken to those priests or Elders that are in the Church, those that have their succession from the Apostles, as we have showed; who with the succession of the Bishopric, have received the certain gift of the truth, according to the good will of the Father. And in the next chapter: But those that are indeed of many believed to be Priests or Elders, and serve their pleasures, The name of Priest & Bishop, now and then taken indifferently. and prefer not the fear of God in their hearts, but vex the residue with reproaches, and are lifted up with the puff of sitting highest, and secretly do evil, and say, none shall see us: shall be reproved of the word, that judgeth not according to glory, nor looks on the countenance, but on the heart, etc. From all such therefore we must abstain, but cleave unto those, that (as we have said) keep both the doctrine of the Apostles, and the sound word, with the order of their Priesthood or Eldership, and express a conversation without offence, to the information and correction of the residue, &c: Such priests or Elders the Church nourisheth, of whom the prophet saith: And I will give thee princes in peace, and thy Bishops in righteousness. Although in these and such like places of Irenaeus, the word both Priest and Bishop, may be taken, the one for the other indifferently: yet doth not this debar, but that as Irenaeus himself was a Priest, for a while, before he were a Bishop: so lib. 3, cap. 3. he there speaketh, all of the succession, until ●is time, of the Bishops of the Church of Rome, that cannot be understood of every Priest there. Bishop of Rome. And indeed among all other that were Bishops, I have chiefly forborn the naming of these, not so much for any corruption in this point, that at that time was in them, more than in other Bishops, (for I take them rather to have been as sincere as any of all the other) but that their successors since those times, upon the honour for their virtue and sincerity given to them, of this first age, and for the dignity of the place, and for the number of them that then were martyrs there, and withal, for the memory of Paul and Peter, supposed there also, to have suffered martyrdom, and to have established the Church there, and to have ordained a Bishop also over them: because (I say) their successors waxing insolent, and abusing all these good occasions, have also abused the memory and names of those good ancient Bishops of Rome, with a number of forgeries fathered falsely on them: I have therefore mentioned none of them. But because Ireneus (as they were then the mirrors of other Churches, and Bishops excelling in sincerity of doctrine, The succession of the Bishop of Rome, till Ireneus time. in good order of discipline, and integrity of life) bringeth in all the Bishops of that see, until his time, to confute the new devices of the heretics errors, by their constant continuance in the truth: I will therefore also set down, some part of Ireneus words, for our further confirmation of this matter. The tradition (saith he) therefore of the Apostles, is made manifest in all the world. It is present to behold in the Church, for all that will here the truth. And we have to reckon up them, which have been ordained Bishops in the Churches from the Apostles, and the successors of them, Ireneus lib. 3. cap. 3. until our days. Who have taught no such thing, neither have known how these men dote. For if the Apostles had known any such hidden mysteries, which they taught those that were perfect by themselves and privily: they would most especially have taught them unto those, to whom they committed the Churches themselves. For they would have them to be very perfect and unreprovable in all things, whom they would also have to be their successors. Delivering to them even their own places of mastership that they had, who behaving themselves without fault; great profit might come thereon; but offending, great calamity. How beit, because it is very long in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all Churches: therefore of that Church which is the greatest, and most ancient, and known to all to be founded and ordained, of the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul, declaring that tradition that it hath of the Apostles, and faith published unto men, coming even unto us by the succession of the Bishops, we confound all those, which by any manner of mean, or by their own evil self liking, or by vain glory, or by blindness and evil opinion, do gather otherwise than they ought to do. For unto this Church, because of the more mighty principality, it is necessary that every Church agree. That is, they that are faithful every where, Whom Peter & Paul made bishop of Rome. in the which always of those that are every where, the tradition that is from the Apostles, is kept. The blessed Apostles therefore, founding and instructing the Church, delivered unto Linus the Bishopric of administering the Church. Of this Linus, Paul mentioneth in those Epistles that are to Timothy: but unto him succeeded Anacletus, after whom in the third place from the Apostles, Clemens obtained the Bishopric. Who also saw the Apostles themselves, and conferred with them, while as yet he had the preaching of the Apostles sounding in his ears, and their tradition before his eyes. For (not he alone) many at that time were yet alive, that were taught of the Apostles. Under this Clemens therefore, no small dissension falling out among the brethren that were at Corinth, the Church which is at Rome, wrote most forcible letters to the Corinthians, gathering them together unto peace, and repairing their faith, and declaring the tradition that they had even of fresh received from the Apostles. Which tradition declared, that there was one God Almighty, the maker of Heaven & Earth, the former of man, who brought on the world the general flood, who called Abraham, who brought the people out of the land of Egypt, who spoke unto Moses, who disposed the law, and sent the Prophets, who hath prepared fire for the devil and his angels. That this GOD should be declared of the Churches, to be the Father of our Lord jesus Christ, they that lift may learn, even out of the Scripture itself, and understand it to be the Apostolical tradition of the Church: sith that it is a more ancient Epistle than these are, which now teach falsely and feign, that there is another God above: the Demiurgus (or speaker to the people,) & the maker of all these things that are. But to this Clement succeeded evaristus, & to evaristus, Alexander, and then Sixtus, the sixth, ordained from the Apostles, and from him Telesphorus, who most gloriously suffered martyrdom. And then Higinus, after him P●us, after whom Anicetus: but when Soter had succeeded Anicetus: now in the twelve place from the Apostles, Eleutherius hath the bishopric. By this ordaining and succession, hath the tradition and publication of the truth, which is from the Apostles, come unto us. Thus saith this ancient father Irenaeus, of the Bishops of Rome, from the Apostles times, until his days. Which sentence, How the Papists wrest this sentence of Ieromes. howsoever the Papists snatch thereat, to abuse the simple with the name of tradition, of succession, of agreement with the Church of Rome, of Peter and Paul as the first Bishops there, and as the head and principal Church of all other: as it maketh nothing for them in any of all these things; so notwithstanding for this point, that all Priests or pastoral Elders are not equal, but that one more peculierlie than the residue, called the B. of that church, had a superior and especial government of the same, Bishop of Ro●me. though not absolute and tyrannical, yet, in jurisdiction above the rest of his brethren, & fellow priests or pastoral elders there: This superiority no matter of unwritten & necessary doctrine or tradition. & that this was so ordained of the Apostles, and so continued from them till Irenaeus time: is by this testimony of Irenaeus, as clear as any thing can be: that it maketh no whit for any popish tradition, either of doctrine or of discipline necessary to salvation, besides the manifest published and written word of God: if a man would wish he cannot find a better place than this in all the fathers: For all the papists urging and writhing of the same. And therefore this argueth, that this episcopal superiority was then accounted, to be no such unwritten and necessary doctrine, but a matter of well ordered government, practised usually in the Apostles times, and ordained by the Apostles in many places, How far & wherein Irenaeus pleadeth on succession. and sufficiently apparent in the scriptures. And as for the succession that Irenaeus speaketh of: true it is, that hi● fetcheth it from the Apostles, and in a plain line without interruption till his time but he neither maketh a general and perpetual rule thereof, nor stretcheth it any further than he did reckon it, nor did, nor could make promise of further continuance, nor stands on that time neither for the time sake, nor for the persons sake that did succeed: but only and altogether for the doctrine, which is the tradition that he speaketh of, and in respect that they succeeded one after another, The B. of Rome's plea in these days. not so much, in the place as in the doctrine, without alteration or interruption of the same, for which cause he mentioneth the succession of them. But now, whereas the Bishops of Rome proceed further than these here reckoned up, to th●se that afterward added any other doctrine, besides that which the Apostles in the scripture did deliver, or any other tradition superstitious and hurtful, or any other discipline, as necessary to salvation: this place of Irenaeus doth nothing in the world help them: and they alleging this place in such a general sort, Counterfeit works in Clement's name. do manifestly wrest it, and abuse Irenaeus, and all those that believe them, on the credit of this ancient Father. Y●●, this place of Irenaeus, if it were to be measured no further than the personal succession of the B. doth not only ouerthr●w that succession, which they pretend from Peter to Clement, but also the works that go in Clement● name to be mere counterfeit. Yea, this succession hath had jarring about the reckoning of it, even in jeroms days, who saith in his catalogue, that Clemens was the fourth B. of Rome after Peter, for the 2. was Linus, the 3. Anacletus. Although the most of the latin writers think Clemens was the 2. after Peter, and Jerome took this opinion from Eusebius, and Eusebius (as himself confesseth) from Irenaeus. But none of them reckoned Cletus in this number, which Dammasus, Pletina, Onuphrius, and others do. So intricate and doubtful is also the very personal succession of these Bishops: and yet all these 3. later writers, agreeing with these three ancient Fathers, that Clemens did not succeed Peter: Pet. and Paul no Bishops of Rome. and all these three Fathers speaking also of Clemens works, and mentioning this his notable Epistle to the Corinthians, which we have not, and not mentioning any such works, as are now thrust upon us in Clemens name: it is a manifest argument that the Bishops of Rome that now are, and long have been, The corruption of the B. of Rome. Irenaeus plea of succession broken off. have altered the tradition that their predecessor Clement here alleged, and have thrust out the true Clement, and brought in a false and counterfeit Clement, and so, though they could agree upon the persons to be successors, yet have they again broken the plea of this succession, that is here urged by Irenaeus. Neither doth Irenaeus in pleading on this succession of these 12. Bishops (whom our adversaries make 13.) reckon Peter or Paul themselves to have been in the number of the Bishops, as all our adversaries do, and the Popes make their chiefest crack thereon, that Peter and Paul were the first Bishops there: but only saith Irenaeus: The Church of Rome was founded and constituted of them: How Paul and Peter were founders of the Church of Rome. as in the end of the same chap. he saith the Church of Ephesus was founded by S. Paul. And yet these words also, cannot be simply understood. For, albeit Paul was more among them, even by the manifest tradition of the scripture (which both Clement & Irenaeus here do plead upon) then can stand with any truth, that Peter had such continuance there as Paul had: yet was the church founded and constituted at Rome, before not only Paul did come among them, but before he wrote his Epistle to them. Nevertheless, it may in some sense, be safely said, that when as S. Paul came to Rome, and found the Church there, neither such in multitude, neither such in ripeness of knowledge, as the same went of them, and as he hoped of them, when he wrote untothem Rom. 1. ver. 8. Your faith is published throughout all the world, and yet at S. Paul's first coming to them, they were such a slender, and especially so raw a company, as appeareth Act, ●8. Yet, sith the text testifieth, ver, 30 & 31. And Paul dwelled two years full in his own hired house, Paul's continuance two years at Rome. & received all that came in unto him, preaching the kingdom of God, & teaching those things that concern the Lord jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him: all which was before his first arraignment at Rome, & he had much more leisure and freedom after his deliverance and before his second arraignment & condemnation: he might well deserve this commendation of Irenaeus, to be the founder, constituter & instructor of that Church. And as for Peter it might be well also, that he came thither afterward, for there is no likelihood of his being there before, when the jews that were so willing to hear Paul said unto him, Act. 28. ver. 21.22. we never received letters out of jury concerning thee, neither any of the brethren that came showed or spoke any harm of thee, but we will here of thee, what thou thinkest, for as concerning this sect, we know, that every where it is spoken against. Whereas if S. Peter had been among them, especially their B. it could not be, but they should of▪ often and fully at least have heard thereof. But (as I said) it may be that Peter also traveled to Rome afterwards, Peter not Bishop of Rome. desirous to see the faithful there, and to do some good among them, as Saint Paul also confesseth of himself, that he likewise was desirous, saying, Romans. 1. verse, 10, etc. Praying always in my prayers, The likeliehood of the causes of Peter's coming to Room. that by some mean, at the last, I might take a prosperous journey, one time or another, to come unto you: for I long to see you, that I might bestow among you some spiritual gift, that ye might be established. I would ye should know (brethren) that I have oftentimes purposed to come unto you (and have been let hitherto) that I might have some fruit also among you, as among other of the Gentiles. And no less cause had Peter of the like good desire, for those that were of the circumcision, of whom there were many at Rome, & desirous to hear (as they called it, unto S. Paul) of that Sect. And many godly men came to Rome, on such good desires, as Origen, etc. yea even Irenaeus himself, that joineth Peter with Paul in these actions: or else if Peter had no will, (as Paul had) of traveling thither: yet it might be, that Peter being of so great fame among the Christians, and accounted one of the chief pillars of the Church, was upon some occasion, carried thither, (as Christ said) whither he would not have gone, and brought prisoner to Rome (as S. Paul was) & many other were, though not recorded. And most likely it is, that he suffered there also, from whence Nero's persecution sprang. Which though it be not mentioned in the Scripture, yet the Scripture mentioneth these words that our Saviour Christ said to Peter, john. 21. verse. 28. & 29. verily, verily, I say unto thee, when thou wast younger, Christ's prophecy of Peter's death fulfilled. thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whether thou wouldst: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldst not. This spoke he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And therefore, since this was Christ's own prophesy of Peter's death: this is most certain, that he died not a natural death, but suffered martyrdom for God's glory. And why should we deny, without any proof, that which all the ancient Fathers, so near Peter's time, on so great likelihood, have with one full consent, so universally affirmed, that Peter suffered at Rome? If it be said, that this may confirm their opinion, that say, Peter was Bishop there: although that followeth not of any consequence; yet sith that opinion arose not all of nothing, it is the more likely, that he glorified God by his death there: at leastwise, that there he had been, and not been idle nor unfruitful, in that Church: when they grew so far, as to say, that he was there also the first Bishop. For my part, (upon the deeper consideration of these things, being matters whereof the dissent is no prejudice to our faith), I am not of their opinion, that say Peter was never at Rome at all. I suppose rather, that both he was there, and that for some time of abode, he taught there also: and that as Saint Paul suffered there, which his words there written, 2. Timoth. 4.6, do in a manner plainly declare, where he prophesied of his own death saying: for I am now ready to be offered, Whom Peter & Paul made bishop of Rome. and the time of my dissolution is at hand: and as Ignatius and other famous men, were fetched thither to suffer death; that even so, was Peter carried thither, (to use Christ's own words) and that being at Rome prisoner, before he died, Irenaeus (who flourished about the distance of fourscore years after Peter's death, which is no great time, and little more than many a man's age, This testimony of Ireneus, was within 80. years after Peter's death. and therefore it is very likely, that Irenaeus could tell somewhat of it) did know, that Peter and Paul had both been there, and done both of them so much good there, that he thought, he might worthily bestow these titles upon them, that they were founders, constituters, and instructors of that Church. For although they were not both of them, yea neither of them, the Bishops of Rome their selves: yet the Church there growing great, they had not only instructed them: but set down such Ecclesiastical orders among them, as whereby their Church was then governed. And as Ireneus saith, Lin● Episcopatum administrandae Ecclesiae tradiderunt, they delivered the Bishopric (or office of the Bishop) for the administering of the Church unto Linus: not delivering the same to Clemens, as that puppet which counterfeits himself to be Clement, most impudently vaunteth in a forged letter to james Bishop of jerusalem: Clemens Epistles convinced. that Peter made him Bishop of Rome: but this place of Irenaeus being authentic, doth notably convince that shameless forgery, and shameth all the Popes and Papists, that build their succession, & many other riffe-raffes thereupon. Neither doth Irenaeus ascribe the action of making Linus the B. of Rome, to Peter alone: but to both the Apostles. And although this be a good record of Ireneus, being almost of the same age, & living not far from Rome, yea, having been himself at Rome, and so, searched out the matter more exactly, or ever he durst put it in writing, and make argument thereon to confute the adversaries: which, had it not been so, would quickly have taken him tardy, and triumphed on the advantage: yet is not his testimony alone, for he also might else (as he was in some greater points) be by others deceived: but Euseb. likewise citeth other as ancient as Ireneus, to the same purpose. For saith he, lib. 2. Eccl. hist. cap. 25. Nero therefore, as he professed himself an open enemy of the Godhead, and of godliness, so before other things, he thirsted for the death of the Apostles themselves, because they were the Captains and standard bearers among the people of God. And verily he beheaded Paul in the city of Rome itself. Eusebius testimony of Pet. death at Rome. As for Peter, he condemned him to the gibbet of the cross. I think it superfluous to seek abroad otherwhere, the testimony of these things: sith that, notable and most clear monuments of them, remaining even until this day, do testify the thing to have been done. Notwithstanding a certain ancient writer Caius, writeth of these matters, Who, Witnesses of Pet. & Pau. death at Room. with Zephirinus' Bishop of Rome, disputing against one Proculus, a Cataphrygian, mentioneth these things, of the places of the Apostles. (This Zephirinus succeeded Victor whom Irenaeus reproved as we shall see afterward. I (saith he) have the tokens of the Apostles, which I will show. Eusebius his confirmation out of Caius For, if ye go in the King's high way, that leadeth to Vaticanum: or in the way that leadeth to Ostia; you shall see the tokens pight, which being set on either part, the Church of Rome is established. But that they suffered at one time, Dyonisius Bishop of Corinthus, when he was placed in the City, another confirmation out of Dyonisius Bish. of Corinth. and disputed of the Scripture (or in writing) saith thus: But you also having had warning of Peter and Paul, have joined together the planting of the Roman, & of the Corinthian church for both of them coming together, did teach also in our Church of Corinthus, & throughout all Italy, & teaching together in this Church were together at one and the same time crowned with martyrdom, These things have we rehearsed, that the story which is in the opinion of all men, might be more confirmed. This Dionysius here mentioned, lived also in the time of this Irenaeus and wrote (saith Jerome) an Epistle to the Romans, The Testimony of Jerome for these 2. witnesses. which he wrote to Soter Bishop there, next before Eleutherius, to whom Irenaeus being but Priest, was sent, and of whom he saith here, which now hath the Bishopric in the 12. place from the Apostles. Of this Caius also Jerome méncioneth, and of his famous disputation. And Eusebius also libr● 6. cap. 16. although his words here, should rather make Caius to be himself the Bishop of Rome, next to Victor. But I follow here Ruffinus his translation, because he was so near to Eusebius own time. Of which Bishops of Rome, How near Ireneus was in place and time to the doing of ●hese things Irenaeus himself, that reckoneth up the succession of them, and flourished in the time of Eleutherius, and had seen the race of some of them, and had himself in his youth, been a scholar under Polycarpus, the Disciple of S. john, as Eusebius lib 5. cap. 20. noteth out of Irenaeus own words, in an Epistle that he wrote to Florinus, how he did freshly remember, where Polycar●us sat, his gesture, his words that he spoke of john, how he wrote them not in paper, but in his hart, and laid them up, etc. And how that, if Polycarpus had lived till then to have heard Valentinus heresies: he would have cried out, O good GOD unto what times, hast thou reserved me, that I should hear such things? Is it now likely, Irenaeus writing thus in a matter so notorious, and reckoning up twelve Bishops, neither sparing Victor the 13. that succeeded Eleutherius, when Victor abused his authority, but reproved him: that if this superiority of one over his fellows, and this pecularitye of the name Bishop to that one, had been a new and strange thing, and not so ordained in the Apostles times, and by the very Apostles themselves: that Policarpus would not also have cried out against it? Peter not Bishop of Room. Or that Irenaeus would have commended all these Bishops: or durst have fathered the ordaining of them on the Apostles? Or could have made any argument at all thereof: when in Rome, so great a Church, How Irenae. arguments prove the superiority of one Bish. over all the other Pastors in that Church. in all these bishops times, there were other besides them, that were Pastoral Elders, as well as they? And how then goeth the argument of the succession of one, and none of all the rest mentioned: if all of them were all one, and equal with that one Bishop, in the Episcopal dignity and authority? No, he could not do this with any reason: except this succession which he deriveth from the Apostles, be of this peculiar title and authority of Bishop unto one, and that in superior dignity of the Church's Government, over and above the residue of his brethren Pastors in that Church. I know that both Eusebius in his Chronicle, and Jerome with others, in not throughly considering these words of Irenaeus, Eusebius & Ieromes escape in misunderstanding Irenaeus. gather further, and unnecessarily, that Peter also himself was Bishop there For so go Ieromes words, that Clemens was the fourth Bishop of Rome after Peter, for the second was Linus, and the third, Anacletus. But the very words of Irenaeus, are otherwise. The blessed Apostles therefore, founding and instructing the Church, delivered to Linus the Bishopric of the Church to be administered. Of this Linus Paul mentioneth in these Epistles that are to Timothy. But unto him succeeded Anacletus. Post eum tertio lo●o ab Apostolis Episcopatum sortitur Clemens, qui, & vidit ipsos Apostolos, & contulit cum eyes, etc. After him in the third place from the Apostles, Clement enjoyeth the Bishopric, who also saw the Apostles, and conferred with them. In which words he doth not include as Jerome gathereth, Peter to have been the first Bishop: but maketh the reckoning, beginning first with Linus, and so to Anacletus, and the third to be Clemens, proceeding till he come to the Bishop in his own time, saying. Nunc duodecimo loco Episcopatum ab Apostolis habet Eleutherius. Now in the twelfth place, Eleutherius hath the Bishopric from the Apostles. So that, still he excludeth the Apostles, from being in the number of these Bishops themselves, but only maketh them to be the Founders, Constitutors, and Instructors of that Church. And this (he saith) was known to all men. So that except we will utterly cast of Irenaeus for a notable liar herein, or, that notoriously he erred, and all other Bishops: And also his Master Polycarpus: I see not but how it manifestly falleth out, that this name of Bishop, to be made peculiar and proper to one, more than to all the residue of the pastors, and the same one Bishop, to have a superior government and authority in that Church, above all the other Pastors in the same: is not only the practice of the Primitive Church, next after the Apostles: but the very founding and ordaining of the Apostles themselves. Neither is there any point of popery, or of the pope's pretended claim, from succeeding Peter, here established. And many Churches had Bishops in them before Rome had any. And although here be mentioned, that all Churches ought to agree with the Church of Rome: yet he noteth, that this agreement must be in this doctrine, that is here set down. Let the Church of Rome that now is, agree in that: and then let them call for our agreement with the Church of Rome. But, sith the Church of Rome, that now is, differeth so notoriously, and in so many great points from that, yea, is clean contrary thereunto: we must needs differ from the Church of Rome, that is now, that we may agree with the Church of Rome, that was then. And for this our disagreement now, we have our placard also, even from this selfsame father Irenaeus. Ireneus own acquittance for our disagreement. For, when Victor (which followed this Eleutherius) did contrary, or went beyond his bounds: Iraeneus that so highly commended his good predecessors, did as sharply reprove him their evil successor. And he that said before, all Churches must agree with the Church of Rome; even he, and his Church, and many more Churches, did by and by, descent therein, from the Church of Rome, and from the Bishop thereof. Whereupon Erasmus, or Grineus, maketh a good caution in the margin, on these words, All Churches ought to agree with the Church of Rome. How much to be given to the church of Rome What and how much is to be given to the Church of Rome, if so be, it hold the doctrine of the Apostles. Neither yet doth Irenaeus mention, in this agreeing with the Church of Rome (whatsoever superiority the Bishop had there, among his own clergy and people) any obedience of all Churches, or of any other churches thereunto. No, although he allege a mighty reason, that All Churches should agree with the Church of Rome, for the more mighty principality of it, than other Churches had. For even at that time, it was a mighty Church, and one of the principal churches in the world. And yet the might consisted not in worldly might, Wherein the might and principality of the Church of Rome consisted. nor in any claim of principality over all churches; nor Peter, nor Paul, were then pretended to that purpose, but it was mighty, in constant defence and maintenance of the sincere faith of Christ, and less defiled with Schisms and heresies, than other Churches at that time were. And therefore, as it was more in light so was it more looked upon, honoured, and renowned in the world, than other lesser, or more distracted Churches were. Neither was this more mighty principality given to the Bishop, but to the church; for although he had a principality in some respects over all the Clergy in his Church: yet had his whole Church, in other respects, The church of Rome's principality. a mightier principality above him, yea, every Pastoral Elder in some respects, was his equal and all one with him. But the most mighty letters that were written by the true Clement to the Church of Corinthe, are not by Irenaeus called Clement's: but, under this Clement, the church that is at Rome wrote most mighty (or effectual) letters to the Corinthians, etc. And therefore saith both Eusebius, and Jerome: he wrote, as of the person of the Roman Church. So that here was a superiority, but no Tyranny. The Bishop did it, by the obedient consent, and ready approbation of the Church. Now although these Bishops by Irenaeus are afterward called also, Sacerdotes or Presbyteri, sacerdotal or Elderly Priests, as were the other ministers of God's word: The government of the Church of Rome not equal to every pastor in the same. as appeareth in his Epistle, cited by Eusebius, lib. 5. cap. 24. which he wrote to Victor Bishop of Rome after Eleutherius, for his rash excommunicating of the Eastern Bishops dissenting from him in the controversy of celebrating Easterday: yet giveth he not the government of the Church of Rome, to all the Pastoral Elders there alike, but to one only over them all, even where he calleth him also by the name of Priest or Elder. Which still, more confirmeth this our question. I will not reckon out of Damasus, or other after him (though ancient records) how many Bishops and how many Priests or ministering Elders, and how many Deacons, Many priests or Pastoral Elders in Rome not bishop there. such and such a Bishop of Rome made in those days: but, when Eusebius (whom I dare better credit therein) sets it down, then dare I make an argument on it. And even about the same time Eusebius noteth, lib. 5. cap. 15. that in the City of Rome, one Florinus a certain Priest in degree, fell from the Church. Shall we say now, that this Florinus was a Priest at Rome, or pastoral Elder: therefore he was Bishop of Rome also? It is plain therefore, that though in degree of Priesthood, they were equal and all one; yet in dignity and government of the Church there was great difference. Which appeareth better by that Eusebius noteth, for the pacifying of this controversy of Easterday. For Eusebius having reckoned up (lib. 5. cap. 22.) Victor succeeding Eleutherius in the Sacerdotal Priesthood (or Bishopric): and Demetrius, succeeding julianus at Alexandria; and Serapion, Bishops at the same time in other Churches. ordained the eight Bishop from the Apostles at Antioch; Theophilus at Caesarea of Palestine; and Narcissus in jerusalem: Bacchus at Corinthus: and Polycrates at Ephesus, being counted Noble among the Bishops: and many other excellent Sacerdotal Priests at that time in other places: he proceedeth, saying: cap. 23. While these governed the Churches in that time there arose no small question in the provinces of Asia, arising as it were of their ancient custom, because they thought that in any case, the Feast of Easter must be kept the 14. day of the month, to wit, When the jews were bidden to offer the Lamb. Contro●●rsie about Easter. Avouching it as necessary, that whensoever the 14. day of the month did come: they should leave off to fast: when as altogether in no other churches such a custom was ever wont to be observed. For which cause, Assemblies of Bishops & councils, through all the Provinces are called together. And sending forth their Epistles, one to another: they all of them, out of every their several places, confirm one Ecclesiastical decree. That it should not be lawful at any time to celebrate the Lords mystery of Easter, except on the Lord's day, in the which the Lord arose from the dead, and on that only day, the fasting should be broken up. To conclude, The Bishop of Rome not universal Governor of all there remaineth even to this day the decree of the Council holden at Caesarea of Palestine, in the which Theophilus B. of the same Caesarea was the chief, and Narcissus the Sacerdotal Priest (or bishop) of jerusalem. Another like decree, is also had in the Council of the City of Room, over the which Bishop Victor is said to be the Governor, and Palmeas of the Province of Pontus. There was likewise an assembly of the Priests of the French, assigning Irenaeus to be their guide. And Eacchilus Bishop of Corinth for Achaia. Who, all of them out of divers places, set forth one and the same sentence of their judgement. All which as it confutes apparently the Bishop of Rome, that he was not the only head and chief ruler over all: but every province had at that time, a Metropolitan Bishop, to be Precedent, or chief Ruler, among them, concerning the Government of this present action, and sessions in these several Counsels: so, while all these assemblies were made, did the Bishops leave their own Churches and Cities, in all these great Provinces, destitute of Pastoral Elders,, to teach the word, and minister the Sacraments? It is not likely. The Churches not destitute of Pastors in the B●. absence. And yet, notwithstanding, though all and every of these Bishops assembled, are indifferently called Elders or Priests; yet are not the other (whom no doubt they left behind them, being Priests also) any of them called Bishop of those Seas, or in any one of those places, saving only jerusalem, that had then 2. Bishop's together in one City. Which fell out upon a strange occasion, & is noted as a rare accident. And yet, in every of those famous places, they had many, (at least more than one) that were Pastoral Elders, that preached, & ministered the Sacraments in the Bishop's absence: which again plainly convinceth, that there was a great difference, in the ordinary Government of the Churches, besides the extraordinary government of the Counsels, between a Bishop, and a Priest or Elder: In the one, the Bishop, being always the Superior, in his particular Diocese: In the other, some Bishop being chosen the Superior or President, over the other Bishops, in that provincial assembly. And to show this yet more plain, and not only this, Controversy about East. but to measure this matter, being but a matter of government, (if it had been diversly used in diverse Churches, and not universally alike in all) to declare by this matter, here in question, how far forth we ought, and no further, (at the furthest) to strive against it, without making schism or division of the Church's peace, and unity: Let us see the collections of Eusebius, and Jerome, about the trouble and pacification of this question; for it fitly serveth to our purpose. But the Bishops of the coasts of Asia (saith Eusebius lib. 5. cap, 24.) did rather confirm the custom delivered them from their ancients, Amongst whom, Polycrates, Polycrates letter to the B. of Rome. (which seemed to bear the Primacy, among them, writing to Victor Bishop of the church of Rome, noteth in these words, the manner of the ancient tradition, continued even to his own time. We therefore, (saith he) do celebrate the inviolable day of Easter, neither adding nor diminishing any thing. For, the great lights in Asia, the chief and choice men are fallen asleep: whom the Lord in his coming shall raise, when he shall come from heaven in glory, when he shall call for all his Saints. Among whom, is Philip the Evangelist, which fell asleep at Hierapolis, and also his 2. daughters, which waxed old being virgins, and another daughter of his, replenished with the holy Ghost, which fell a-fleepe at Ephesus. And john also, which leaned on the Lord's breast, who was the chief Sacerdotal Priest, and wore the pontifical (or golden) plate: (he alludeth (as I take it) unto the Highpriest among the jews, signifying the chief dignity and estimation he had in Asia,) which was a Martyr & a Doctor of the Church, who also is fallen asleep, or died at Ephesus. Polycarpus also at Smirna, both Bishop and Martyr, and likewise Thraseas Bishop at Eumenia, but by martyrdom he died at Smirna. What shall I name Sagaren, being no less a Priest and Martyr, which resteth in peace at Laodicea. moreover, Papirius and Macarius (or rather) Papirius the blessed, and Melito, but an Eunuch for the kingdom of God, and filled with the holy Ghost, who heath in the City of Sardensias, expecting the coming of the Lord from heaven, to raise again the dead. All these therefore, observed the Easterday on the 14. day of the month, according to the Gospel. Doing nothing at all otherwise without it, but by all things and in all things following the rule of faith. Yea, and I Polycrates also, the least amongst you all, do observe it according to the tradition of my Fathers, these only whom I have followed even from the beginning. For, seven of my Parents have been Bishops by order, and I the eight, who have also thus observed this day, that it might agree with that day, wherein the people of the jews removed the leaven. Controversy of Easter Wherefore (most dear brethren) I am now (in the name of the Lord) threescore and five years old, having also most full understanding of many Bishops throughout the world, and intentively marking the Scriptures, I will not be moved by those things, which are set out to make men afraid: sith that mine-elders have also said, we must obey GOD more than men. And after a few words, he setteth these under it, concerning those Bishops that were present with him: But I could also make mention of those Bishops, that yourselves desired I should call forth, as also I have done. Whose names if I should write, it is too great a multitude. Who all knowing my business, have confirmed those things that we writ with their consent, being persuaded that we have not carried grey hairs to no purpose, but have been always conversant in Christ's discipline. Thus wrote this reverend Bishop of Ephesus against (saith Jerome) the Bishop of Rome about this matter: The Bishop of Rome's authority stretched no further than his own province. but I follow Eusebius as he is translated by Ruffinus. In the which Epistle, we may again perceive, that the Bishop of Rome had no such superiority over these Bishops, as he now pretendeth. Only he in the name of his Church, or of those Bishops that were likewise at Rome, assembled, over whom Victor was the Precedent, had requested this Bishop of Ephesus, (it being so great and famous a Sea, above all the bishoprics of those parts of Asia the less) to assemble and call for the Bishops of that province, to debate and give their judgements on this question. And yet this argueth, that not only this Polycrates called such a great multitude, from several places, o● such only as were Bishops in the same: but also, that as these Bishops were called from their own Cities, for the decision of this controversy: not only there appeareth a difference, between a Bishop and the Priests or Pastoral Elders left at home, to minister the word and Sacraments: but also an ordinary superiority of this Bishop of Ephesus, The authoof an Archb. over the other Bishops of that Province, to call and assemble them together to a certain place, and to propound this petition of the Italian Bishops unto them: or else, that he usurped it and encroached upon them; or else, that the Bishop of Rome had some authority over him and all them, to will him so to do. But sith it is apparent, that the Bishop of Rome's authority was never (no not when it was greatest) there acknowledged: it followeth, that not only Bishops were then Superiors unto the ordinary sort of Pastoral Elders; but that even at that time, there was an ordinary superiority, in that and such other principal places, over the ordinary sort of Bishops also. How near Polycra●es wa● to Saint And no doubt, he being the eight Bishop there, and by the count of his age, having lived within 40. years after john the Evangelist, and in the time of Policarpus, whom he also mentioneth, Polycrates. and all of them being so precise, that they would not go one jot, neither in adding too, john, & how precise in any thing not allowed by the Apostle. nor taking from the scripture; no not in so much as the alteration of a day, nor would vary in any thing from their forefathers, nor any of their forefathers from the Scripture: how is it likely, but that they took this order, both for one Pastoral Elder in a City, to be superior in dignity to his fellow Elders, to whom this name Bishop should more properly belong: yea, and in that City, the Bishop to have a superiority also over other Bishops: to be the very order of the Apostles, and to be sufficiently testified by Saint Paul's Epistle to Timothy, the first Bishop there: or else, Polycrates would never have taken these things upon him, nor he could ever (even for shame of all the world, and the testimony of his own conscience) have avouched such preciseness in his Epistle. But (saith Eusebius) Victor the Bishop of the Church of Rome, behaving himself more frowardly for these things, The Bishop of Rome's frowardness. goeth about to cut off from the fellowship of the communion, the Churches every where of all Asia, and of the provinces adjoining, as though they declined into Heresy, and sendeth out letters, Eusebius lib. 5. cap. 24. wherein he separateth all without discretion, from the Ecclesiastical bond of peace. But all the Bishops liked not this, but rather on the contrary, writing unto him, they commanded him, that he should do those things that pertained to peace, and that he should study for concord and unanimity. To conclude, their letters also are extant, in the which they rebuke Victor more sharply, as one that doth unprofitably regard the benefit of the Church. For Irenaeus also with other Bishops of France, (over whom he was chief) doth in writing indeed confirm, Irenaeus reprehension of the B. of Rome. that the mystery of the Lords resurrection should be celebrated on the lords day: notwithstanding he reproveth Victor that he had not done well, to cut off from the unity of the body, so many and so great Churches of God, who kept the custom delivered to them of old. Neither only (saith he) the controversy is handled of the day of Easter, but also of the form of fasting. For some think, that the fast must be kept one day only; some two days; but other, more days: many also 40. days, so that they make the day, by reckoning the hours of the day and of the night. Which variety of keeping the fast, began not first now, nor in our times, but long before us, of those (as I think) who not holding simply that which was delivered in the beginning: did fall afterward into another custom, either by negligence, or by lack of knowledge. And yet notwithstanding for all that, all these, yea, though they differed among themselves in their observation, have always been and are at peace with us. Neither hath the discord of the fast, broken the concord of the Faith. Irenaeus reprehension of Victor. And after this, he inserteth a certain story, that for the fitness thereof ought not to be omitted. To conclude (saith he) and all those priests or Elders before Soter, which held the sacerdotal (or sacred) priesthood of the Church, which you now govern, I mean, Anicetus, & Pius, and Higinus, and Telesphorus, & Sixtus, neither did they themselves hold it thus, neither they that were about them. And yet notwithstanding while they observed it not, they had peace always with those Churches, which kept this manner of observance, yea, even when it seemed contrary unto them, that other did not keep it also in such like manner as they did. Yet were they never repulsed from the society of the Church, or such as came from those coasts not received. Yea rather, all the Priests or Elders also that have been before you, have solemnly sent the Eucharist (which under correction, I take not here in this age, as many do, to be the mysteries of the holy communion itself; but rather of an ancient custom of honour and courtesy, to send the bread and the wine (as they say) unto them at their coming to the town, and the word Eucharist may well bear it, Comitas, gratitudo, or as Jerome calleth it, gratiositas, which we call thankfulness or courtesy) to all the Priests or Elders of other Churches, not observing it as they did. When the blessed Polycarpus came to the City of Rome under Anicetus, when as they had some little jar between them in many other things, and nevertheless joined themselves streightwaies together in peace: they so handled the matter for this question, that neither of them defended his opinion, with any obstinate contending for it. For neither Anicetus could persuade Polycarpus, that he should not observe those things, which he had known that john the Disciple of our Lord, and the other Apostle (with whom he always had been) did observe: neither again Polycarpus persuaded Anicetus, to forsake those things which he said he had kept after the manner of his ancestors. And while these things were thus between them, they did communicate together. Insomuch that Anicetus granted to Polycarpus, at the only contemplation of doing him honour, to exercise the function of the sacerdotal ministery. And so in full faith, and entire peace, and steadfast charity, they parted asunder, that all Churches whether they keep the Easterday so, or not so, notwithstanding should keep concord among them. These things writeth Irenaeus, performing the work that his name importeth, to wit, procuring peace to the Churches of God. Neither only unto Victor, but also in like manner unto diverse Governors of Churches, by his Epistles he affirmeth, that no dissension ought to arise in the Churches of God for this question. Thus far collected by Eusebius, out of this ancient father Irenaeus All which very fitly serveth also unto our question. This gov. of necessity or of no necessity. For if our question of the manner of the Church's government, be of necessity; we see then, how we should condemn all these holy Father's manner of Ecclesiastical Government, which was of one Priest or Pastoral Elder, to have an ordinary superior government and jurisdiction over his fellow ministers, and the name Bishop to be more peculiar unto him, then to them. For, we manifestly hereby do see, that thus had they, not only Victor, jerenaeus, Polycrates, Howsoever this B. differed in other orders, yet in this of B. superiority received from the Apostles they all agreed. and the Bishops of that age: but they also that were before them, both Anicetus Bishop of Rome, with his predecessors, even up to the Apostles times and also Polycarpus Bishop of Smyrna that knew Saint john, and some of the rest of the Apostles, was conversant with them, marked their orders, as here Irenaeus noteth of this Polycrates, that he would not observe any other thing, then that he had marked to be approved of them. And therefore howsoever they differed in other things, as in the observation of these Feasts and fasts: yet neither of them differed, in the superiority of Eccl. government, from the orders, which they had both of them received from the Apostles. Save that Victor began to abuse his authority too rigorously, which not only Polycrates with the Eastern Bishops being of contrary opinion; but Irenaeus and the Bishops of France also, that were of Victors own opinion, do utterly mislike, and thus sharply reprove in him, & disallow his censure. For, this superiority of Victor's clergy at Rome, stretched not then either Eastward or westward, over them. They mislike therefore, not his lawful & ancient superiority; What they mislike, and what they mislike not in Victor. but his new insolent overreaching the same. So that, if we make our question for the form of Eccl. government, to be a matter of necessity: either we must of necessity condemn it in them, which were next unto, yea, and in the Apostles days: or else, they using such an ordinary superiority, that so narrowly marked the Apostles, and the Apostles again, This question of government whether of necessity o● no. (as we may well suppose) no less narrowly marking them: How can it be, but that of necessity, we must needs allow it, that one among the pastoral Elders, should have a superior dignity and government, to whom the name of Bishop should be more proper and peculiar than to the residue, as Anicetus, Sixtus, Telesphorus, Higinus, Pius, Irenaeus, Polycrates, If of necessity we must needs have it as these fathers had. Policarpus, and other mentioned had? If now, on the other side, this be not a matter of necessity, but such as may be varied, being but a form and manner of Ecclesiastical government, as the observation of this Feast and these Fasts, were of accustomed order, not of necessity: then, so long as it is used in moderate sort without tyranny or pride, nor any thing contrary to the proportion, of Faith and Godliness of life, necessarily maintained there-by: (for otherwise, if those Fasts, or this Feast had been used to be kept superstitiously, Feasts and Fasts. it had been so farre-foorth to be condemned) there is no reason, why we should break the bond of peace, and make such trouble in the Church of God, The use of feasts & fasts to reject the Government, that in the nature thereof, is as much indifferent; as the solemnising this or that day, the memorial of the lords resurrection. And yet, we celebrate the same on the Sunday only, as those Bishops of Rome, at that time did. Which I hope we do, without all offence, though we have no precept in Scripture for it. And therefore, as Polycarpus and Anicetus, differing in that point, notwithstanding, did not violate the peace and unity of the Church: so according to Irenaeus rule, while no such excessive superiority is maintained of us, as the Pope since that time hath usurped, but such as we find practised in the primitive Church, and in the very Apostles age: we ought neither to condemn, or speak, or think evil, of other good Churches, that use an other Eccl, government, than we do: neither ought they to do the like of ours. Though diversity may be in divers states of Churches, yet in one state one uniformity. Not, that every person in one and the same Church, should use this liberty of difference, without controlment and restraint of the superior in that Church, wherein he liveth. For, though it were lawful for one Church, to differ from another, being not so tied to uniformity, as to unity: yet, is it not meet, for one Church to differ from itself: but to be both in unity, and be ruled also by uniformity. Especially, where Law binds them to obedience. Which argueth, that the Bishop of Rome, had not the Government and direction of all other Churches; for then, he would have brought then unto his bent But he in his jurisdiction, & they likewise in theirs, had such several superiorities: that those which would not obey their orders, being thus disposed, continued, and established, before their times, might worthily be punished for their contempt, & should well deserve as sharp, if not sharper reprehension, of every good Polycrates and Irenaeus, than did Victor. The examples of the Doctors & Pastors obedient knowledge to their Bishop Now, as this was the state of Bishops then, even from the Apostles times (till Victor began to disturb the same) as we have seen already, in Pantaenus and Clemens of Alexandria, that were Doctors or Teachers in the schools, and withal, Priests or Elders pastoral in the Church, and yet, not Bishops: so likewise, in Origene, Heraclas, and Tertullian, etc. it is no less, if not a great deal more apparent. For, when Origene for his singular reading and preaching, began to grow so famous, Origene. that he was of many desired to come to their Churches: and that a Prince of Arabia had sent to his Bishop Demetrius, to have him come and preach there: of this briefly saith Eusebius lib. 6. cap. 15. being entreated, he went thither; he taught them, they believed; he returned. Howbeit, before he went, he left Heraclas in his place, Heraclas. of whom he himself testifieth, as Eusebius noteth: Heraclas that now beautifieth the chair of Preist-hood or Eldership at Alexandria: and yet at that time Heraclas was not Bishop, but chosen after Demetrius. But after a small time, Origen. civil war arising at Alexandria,, while other went to other places, he (to wit Origen) withdrew himself to the parts of Palestine, and tarried at Caesarea, where the office of disputing in the Church, and expounding the divine Scriptures was enjoined unto him of the Bishop, even while as yet the order of Priest or Elder was not bestowed upon him, as we find recorded in the epistle of Alexander writing again unto Demetrius, reproving these things long after. But he writeth in this manner: As for that ye added in your letters, that it was never heard of or done at any time, that lay men should dispute, where Bishops were present. I know not why ye would avouch so manifest an untruth. Since that the custom is this, that if any where such men be found in the Church, that can instruct the brethren, and comfort the people: they should always be invited or bidden thereunto of the holy Bishops, as Euelpius was of our brother Neon at Larandos, & Paulinus of Celsus at Iconium, & Theodorus of Atticus at Synnada. Neither also it is doubted, but that very many likewise in other places, if there be any that competently can fulfil the work of God in the word and doctrine, they should be invited of the Bishops. Now, Origen thus traveling in preaching, before he was ordained a Priest or Elder, and being requested (saith Eusebius lib. 5. cap. 18.) of the Churches that are at Achaia, to come thither, When, how & of whom Origen was made priest. and convince the heretics, that in those places were grown up more at liberty: while he was traveling thither, and of necessity must pass by Palestine, he was ordained a Priest or Elder at Caesarea, of the Bishops of that Province. The Bishops that made him Priest were (saith Jerome) Theoctistus B. of Caesarea, and Alexander B. of jerusalem (who had (say the Centuriographers) the chiefest authority in those parts. Which dignity, (meaning of Priesthood and Eldership) when it brought great admiration unto Origen, and that he was every where in great authority and reverence with all men for his learning and wisdom: Demetrius envying his glory & fame, did grievously and bitterly accuse those Bishops that had promoted Origene unto priesthood. etc. Being certified therefore in his absence of the envy and evil will of Demetrius against him, he abode at Caesarea, and there taught, leaving Heraclas his successor at Alexandria. At what time (saith Eusebius lib. 6. cap. 19) among the bishops of the nation of Cappadocia, Firmilianus, of the city of Caesarea was bountiful, he bore such reverence for wisdom and Learning, still towards Origen, How other B. honoured O●ige●. that he was ever constraining him to stay with him. And he also, forsaking his Church, made speed to come to him. And he used a certain religious recourse, while now and then he called him thither, for the instruction of his Church, now and then, he to edify himself, would go to him, Origen. Tertullian and day and night sit by him while he taught. Yea, and Alexander also, whom we showed before to govern the Church of jerusalem, and Theoctistus which governed the Church of Caesarea (of Palestine) did even captivate almost all the time of their life to hear him, and yielded unto him alone, the sovereignty of Mastership or Doctorship in the divine Scriptures, and Ecclesiastical doctrine. Whereby it appeareth, that the office of a Priest or Elder being a Minister of the word and Sacraments, howsoever the party excelled, and were in admiration for his learning: yet in dignity, he was distinguished from, and was far inferior unto him, that was the Bishop of the Church. And that (as appeareth also in many places of origen's works), bishops, Priests and Deacons, were 3. degrees superior and inferior one to an other. And even at the same time or before it Zebenus being bishop of Antioch, (as Jerome noteth) Gemnius, or, (as Eusebius calleth him Gemianus) a Priest of Antioch flourished. The succession of the B. of Antioch. Which again argueth, that a bishop and a Priest is not all one. Which bishop being dead, Babilas (saith Eusebius lib. 6. cap. 16) received the principal government of the church. These bishops so continuing (as the Magdeburgenses note them), succeeding one after another, from the Apostles, until Paulus Samosatenus the Heretic was chosen bishop, against whom, Malchion a Priest of the same Church of Antioch disputed before all the bishops there assembled so singularly, that the disputation was written and published with great admiration of the same, and afterward under Cyrillus bishop there, the Magdeburgenses reckon Dorotheus, a learned Priest of Antioch, who after Cyrillus was made bishop. So that still Bishop & Priest was not all one. Tertullian. Before which time, under Zephirinus next bishop of Rome after Victor, Tertullian a Priest or Elder of Rome did flourish. Who in his book de Baptismo saith: Superest ad concludendum. etc. It remaineth to conclude the matter, to give warning of the observation, both of giving baptism & of receiving. The right of giving hath Summus Sacerdos, the sacerdotal Priest that is the chief (or highest) which is the bish. and then the Priests (or Elders) and the Deacons: howbeit not without the authority of the bishop, for the honour of the Church. Which remaining entire, the peace is safe. For otherwise, there is a right unto lay men. It may be given equally, except now the bish. or the Priests or the Deacons be called, Bishop's prerogative above priests and Deacons saying: the word of the Lord ought not to be hid from any. I defend not Tertullian'S opinion, that lay persons may baptise: but I note that which he setteth down for the order in his time of the degrees of the Clergy: that the bishop was superior to the Priests, aswell as to the Deacons: which also appeareth in his book De Monogamia. Wherein, though he slipped into the error of Montanus, yet in this distinction of a bishop of a Priest, and of Deacon: he swerved not from the continual approved custom of the Church. And in his book, Puritans. De fuga in persecutione. But when the very authors themselves, that is, the very Deacons, and the Priests, and the bish. do flee; how shall the lay people understand in what sense it is said, Flee from City to City? By which & other places in Tertullian you may see the difference of these degrees in his time. Which more manifestly appeareth in a matter, that fell out a little after, though before the foresaid condemnation of Samosatenus, Nouatu●the author of a sect of Puritans. as appeareth by Eusebius lib. 6. cap, 33. At what time Novatus a Priest of the Church of Room, puffed up with a certain pride, utterly bereft them that fell of all hope of salvation, although they worthily repent. Whereupon also he became the chief of the novatians heresy who being separated from the Church by a proud name, called themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is to say, puritans. For the which matter a most famous sacerdotal Council was called, to the number of threescore B. and as many priests with a great many Deacons. Besides this also, through every several province, with great deliberation had upon this matter, it is by decrees signified what was needful to be done. It is therefore decreed that Novatus being puffed up with a proud mind, with all those that followed him, & whosoever should fall into that cruel opinion, keeping no whit of brotherly love, should be excommunicated out of the Church. But those that in the conflict had fallen should be healed with brotherly mercy, and be helped with the fomentations of repentance. Upon this matter also, Cornelius the bishop of Rome, writeth to the Church of Antioch: declaring to Fabian the B, thereof, what the council assembled in the city of Rome had decreed, What also the Italians, the Africans, & other Western churches thought, etc. And an other epistle of Cornelius written to Fabian bish. of Antioch is extant, showing all things concerning Novatus, who he was, of what manner life and conversation, & how he fell from the church of God. In which epistle he declareth, The author of the Puritanisme dissembling that he would be Bishop. that he fell into all these things, even for the desire of a bishopr. which secretly he nourished in himself. But chief he was puffed up in that, that he had taken unto him certain excellent men, of those that were confessors, to be in the beginning his companions, among whom was Maximus a certain priest of the church of Rome, & Vrbanus, which remained among them that were confessors (of faith in persecution). Yea & Sidonius A Celerius which were very famous among those, that were holden for confessors because they had overcome all kind of torments. but these (saith he) when more diligently they had perceived that he dealt all by deceits, by lies & perjuries, and that he counterfeited holiness to this only purpose, that he might blear the ignorant, they forsaking him, or rather cursing him to the church, with great satisfying returned. And confessed to the bishops, (being present,) and also to the lay men first their error, and then his frauds and deceaving. How he suddenly started out a new kind of Bishop. Moreover, in this epistle he addeth these things, that whereas he was always wont to swear to his brethren, that he desired not at all to be a bishop: upon a sudden and unwittingly, (as though he had been a thing newly form) he started forth a bishop. Even he forsooth, that challenged the discipline and the decrees Ecclesiastical: he also took before hand, a bishopric upon him; but such as of God he had not received, For, having gotten from an out part of Italy, 3. bishops, most simple men, & altogether ignorant: or rather, they being deceived of him with subtle circumvention, How he abused some simple Bish. he wringeth from them an imagined rather than lawful imposition of hands upon him. Of whom notwithstanding, one forthwith returned to the Church, confessed his sin, and was received into the communion or fellowship of the laity. Yea, the people making intercession for thus much But into the place of the other twain, that laid their hands upon Novatus, were other bishops ordained and sent. He therefore that claimed to himself the Gospel, knew not that in the Catholic Church, How many Priests in Rome besides the B. in the which he saw there were 46. priests, and seven Deacons, and seven subdeacons. (or inferior Deacons) 4●▪ acolytes (or waiting servants,) Exorcists and Readers, with Dore-keepers 52. Widows with needy persons, 1500. all whom God nourisheth in his Church) that there ought to be one bishop or overseer of them. What can be plainer to show the difference and superiority between priest or pastoral Elder, and bishop, than this story? I stand not upon their diversity in the offices then, whereof I have spoken before out of Kemnitius against Trident Council: But to the present purpose, of these 2. degrees now in questions, bishop and priest in that age, while the bishop of Rome took not upon him, any such supreme authority, as now he claimeth: but only, as bishop of Rome, or as chief bishop in those parts of Italy about Rome: what a number of priests or Elders he had under him, how he called them and other bishops and priests or Elders, when this controversy fell, to consult with them upon the matter: how he in the name of his Church, and of this Provincial Council, sent about to other chief Bishops in other Provinces, to show what they had done, not prescribing nor commanding, but brotherly requesting them to do the like in their Provinces. Which showeth, that as he at Rome, so all other chief or inferior bishops, had likewise authority over their priests or Elders. And so long as this order was thus maintained, their was neither tyranny in this superiority, but very good & necessary order: nor such schisms, errors and heresies, nor such Hypocrites as were the broachers of them, could peep out, but straight they were found, examined, and (so much as could be) were suppressed. I grant, they could not utterly suppress them in those days, when their-selves were yet suppressed by Heathen Princes. Ignorant Bishop. And among these bishops also, that had this superior dignity, in some places some simple & ignorant bishops did creep in▪ As, what age was ever free? no, not the Apostles times. And this Superiority did tickle some also, that had not the fear of God, by such ill practices as here Novatus used, to attain by new devices to this dignity, under pretence of reformation of Ecclesiastical discipline, of the purity and sincere profession of the Gospel, and all this gear: and that there should be more Bishops, than one, in one church. Yea, as Novatus did: of whom saith the former Epistle: that in the time of persecution, when he hid himself in a little cell, & was by the Deacons, according to the manner, requested, The Author of this Puritanisme deemeth himself to be a Priest. to come and help at their departure, those that were learners of the faith: he, fearing to come forth, denied himself to be a Priest▪ And that, when he divided the Sacraments unto the people, he would hold fast the hands of the receivers, nor suffer them to take it, before that every one of them had sworn by those things, that they held in their hands: that they should never (forsaking him) return to Cornelius. Though counterfeit Puritans were then, and some such mnght even now also, disturb the peace of the church of Christ, and good order of governing the same: and by these practices deceive many, even such as have been most earnest Confessors of the Gospel in the time of persecution, and are most zealous of God's truth and glory; Yet, if good Bishops follow Cornelius his steps, that at that time was bishop of Rome, and was also a most constant Martyr, when the time of trial came, suffering death for the Gospel, and yet retaining with good conscience, (as nothing against the Gospel,) his right of his calling, in Superior dignity and jurisdiction over all his people, and his Clergy: he shall find out these imagined Bishops, (made in corners, pretending purity), well enough. And all the godly zealous, that have been, or be deceived by them, will (I hope) on better advising of them, and of the matter, forsake them, & acknowledge their fault, as Maximus, Vrbanus, Sidonius, & Celerius here did: yea, although they had vowed, and sworn, and received the sacrament of the holy Communion thereupon, to the contrary: and return to the due obedience and acknowledgement, of their lawful Bishop. Although (this by the way) I must confess, The Bishop worthily punished for making such Minist. that the Bishops then of Rome were worthily punished in this man: for he was made Priest, all of affection, and beyond all order. For Novatus, having been vexed in his you thewith an unclean spirit when he had consumed sometime with Exorcists fell into so grievous a sickness that his health was past hope: and even for necessity lying in his bed, he was baptised, he had so long deferred the time of Baptism. But afterward recovering, when he was of private favour so loved of the Bishop, that he would make him Priest: albeit all the Clergy, and very many of the laity stopped it, saying: it is not lawful for him to be a Clerk, which in extremity received grace lying in his bed. Yet the bishop besought them of a special favour, that this might be granted unto him for this man only. So that he whom the Bishop so extraordinarily advanced and made so much of, he of all other revolted from him, and caused the people also to disobey him. And though he differed not from his bishop Cornelius, and other true believers▪ in matter and substance of faith and religion: A caveat to all B. Magistrates and people, in this matter. yet under pretence of reforming discipline, and reducing all things to the Purity of the Gospel. he bred this faction and schism in the Church, that afterward broke out into foul heresies. And therefore, let all Magistrates Bishops, and all the people that fear God, take heed to this matter. We must not only abstain from that which is evil, but from all show of evil, so near as God shall give us grace thereto. The very God that is the author of peace, sanctify you throughout, that your whole spirit, and soul and body, may be kept blameless until the coming of our Lord jesus Christ. 1 Thess. 5. Thus have I run through the most part of this Primitive age, from the very Apostles times, ere ever the bishop of Rome usurped any such supremacy, as he now most falsely challengeth: save, one over rasheexcommunicating, which Victor pronounced, not, for that he claimed any jurisdiction, government or authority over those bishops, whom he excommunicated: but because they dissented from his opinion in those matters. Wherein we have seen, how all this while, in all parts of Christendom, at leastwise. in the most famous parts at that time, this peculiar applying of the name, and this superiority of bishops in dignity & authority, over such Presbyters Priests or Elders, as were Ministers of the word and Sacraments, (whom our brethren call Pastors,) was with one consent, allowed and practised, without any interruption, reclaiming, or misliking of any person, either of the Clergy, or of the people, by a continual succession from & in the very Apostles days. To the which purpose, I have not urged such authors, as are suspected to be forged, in those holy and ancient Father's names: but such as even our brethren theirselues do acknowledge, to be the true authors of those books and stories, whence I cite them. As for the holy Fathers following, Cyprian, Athanasius, Cyril, Basil, etc. do not only all of them agree hereto, and for the most part were such bishops themselves: but also upon any occasion offered in their times, do defend and maintain by the authority of the word of God, this superior dignity and authority that they had and exercised, as shall yet further (God willing) appear in that which followeth. But here, because our brethren may seem already to have answered all that can be alleged, out of the ancient fathers: I am now to crave licence of the reader, to set aside for a while our brethren's Learned discourse, that we may hear and mark for our further satisfaction, what our other Learned brethren answer hereunto. And first they answer to all this, by distinction of the order of bishops, in a little book late come forth, called: The judgement of a most reverend and Learned man from beyond the Seas, concerning a threefold order of bishops, etc. Which answer being so briefly and plainly perused, as may satisfy: and conferred with the resolutions of our other brethren from beyond the Seas also: we shall the readier return to this Learned discourse of these our brethren at home, for the titles and equality of the Pastors. The Argument of the 4. book, answering that part of a Book, late come forth, called The judgement of a most reverend and Learned man from beyond the Seas, etc. that concerneth the superior Authority of the Bishops. THis Book containeth a division of three kinds of Bishops, to wit, of God, of Man, & of the Devil. With Danaeus proves of this triple division. Treating first, of the lawful use, & honorablenes of the name B. Of Daneusand the most reverend man's Definitions, and their confuting the definition of the Bishop of man: Of the power that the most Reverend yieldeth unto: Of the continuing Assembly at jerusalem, under james: Of their office, that are called the Angels of the Churches in the Revelation, and of the church's Moderators Of the greatness of Peter, notwithstanding the rendering account of his doings; and of one going before the other Pastors Of the impugning and defending the arguments of Epiphanius, against Aerius: And of the Father's report, that Timothy was Bishop of Ephesus: with the shift for his being an Evangelist: and what the word, Eldership, importeth: Of the Order and authority of one laying on of hands: and of the differences between ordaining & electing: with the prerogative of one even in the elections: Of one or more Bishops in one City: and of the schisms in the ancient Churches, where more have been: and withal, of the lamentable schism by the Meletians: Of Cyprians defence for Bishops to succeed the Apostles: and Ieromes defence for the original of B. superiority in the Apost. times: and of the Apostles remaining superior although they join other with them in their actions, as Paul Softhenes: and that one was superior in excommunicating: and that all this superiority of Bishops, was no privy custom, but the continual and universal practice of all Christendom. This book entitled, Three kinds of Bishops. The judgement of a most reverend and learned man from beyond the Seas, etc. beginneth with this prefixed distinction. The most reverend. WE must needs make three kinds of bishop of God. of man.. of the Devil. WHO this most reverend and learned man should be, Bridges. sith his name (for what purpose I know not) is not dicovered by our Brethren: I mind not to pull off his viso, but with all due reverence both to his person and learning, I may take the advantage (with less envy, in a nameless person) the better to consider the reasons of his judgement. Howbeit, because the reverend and learned Danaeus professing openly his name, doth use also this selfsame distinction, from whence this nameless most reverend man, might seem to have barrowed it: I would therefore a little higher begin with him, that began before with this distinction, and so one answer serveth both. Danaeus in his Christian introduction 3. part, cap. 8. (after he hath briefly referred us for the dignity and office of Pastors to Bernard's sermons on the Canticles, 41. & 77,) saith on this wise: Danaeus in Christ. ● sagog 3. par. lib▪ 2. cap 8. Haec brevissime verum iam latius. Episcopi, etc. These things briefly, but now more at large▪ bishops and Pastors are one, in the holy Scripture. 1. Pet. 2. v. 25.5.2. We at this day, name them Ministers of God's word, because men have now long since abused both the name and dignity of bishops. And at this day, the name Episcopatus, of a bishopric or bishop's office, is esteemed to be the name of honour only and of gain, but not of burden and of labour. Albeit, contrariwise, Augustine in the 9 book of the City of God, chap. 19 saith: The name of bishop is of work, not of honour. For, of the office of a Bishop, or bishopric, which in Paul's time was one and evangelical, was afterward made a threefold bishopric, that is to wit, a Bishopric evangelical, Human, and Satanical. evangelical, where is greatest equality among all the pastors of the Church of God. Human, when unto some one of the Pastors a power and prelacy (or preferment) not indeed the greatest, howbeit some power, is given over the other men of the same order: that is to say, over other pastors and Elders. Satanical, when unto one pastor is given upon other Churches, an Emperors or Dictator's power: as, in popery are bishops, Archbishops, the Pope. The name of Bishop honourable. Be it spoken with protestation of all dutiful reverence I wonder at so renowned and learned a man. How zeal (against the corruptions of Popery) maketh now and then such a notable man also, and yet but a man (Homines sumus, labi possumus: We are all but men, and may overslip) to confound and carry things away in presupposals, clean from their right course and places, even where they would most precisely distinguish and dispose them. How bishops and Pastors are all one in the Scripture, we have seen already at large, though not yet out of that place of S. Peter here quoted, which (because our brethren Discoursers) do afterwards mention: we shall (God-willing) in order come thereto. For the name of Minister of God's word, understood both for Pastor & bishop: it is a good name, and a good reason. But, that we should so call B. and Pastors, ministers of God's word, that we should clean exclude either the dignity or the name of bishop: it is no reason at all. The Doctor both is, and may aswell be called a minister of God's word. And yet will you (brethren) distinguish a Doctor from a Pastor, whom yes call a Minister, as we do▪ Yea, the Deacons name in the natural signification thereof, signifieth a Minister: and yet, we commonly call not the Deacon, a Minister. But, that the name bishop should not be shunned, and turned to Minister, The name of Bishop not to be abolished though it hath been abused. because the name and dignity hath been long time abused: If this reason were good, we may take away the name and dignity of Doctor too, and the name of pastor would not be far behind. Yea, the name both of Church and Gospel. Yea, the name of jesus: and the names of many things else, have been both as long, and as much abused, as ever the name and dignity of bishop hath been. But since Danaeus, hath here granted, that their is a name and a dignity of it in the Scripture: me thinks, it were good reason, that we should rather seek, to retain both the dignity and the name, in such order as is not contrary to the Scripture, and so (without the abuse grown since) to use both the dignity and the name of the evangelical bishop, that is of God: than thus clean to cast off, both dignity and name of bishop, for the abuse of them. But what now is this so long and great abuse. A bishop's office is counted at this day, for a name of honour only & of gain, but not of burden and of labour. That it is of honour, I ask no better witness; then Danaeus himself upon 1, Tim. 3. ver. 1. The name of B●sh. aswell of honour as of burden. Who after he hath said that priests, or Elders & bishops are all one: he saith: Deacons are here distinguished and plainly severed from bishops. The name of priest is in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and therefore it is a Greek word. But this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, differ as in Latin do vetus and senex. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a name of age, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 also of dignity, The name of B. honourable. as may be gathered out of Plutarch in Nicaea. If now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be all one, how is not the name of Bishop, a name betokening an office of honour? Yea. the very Etymology of the name, signifying an Overseer: who seeth not it containeth an honour and preferment? Yea Jerome also whom Danaeus allegeth, in his Epistle ad Euagrium saith: A Priest and a bishop, the name of the one is of age, the name of the other is of dignity. But to say as Danaeus here doth, In what sense S. Aug saith it is a name of burden no● of honour. that the office of a Bishop is counted at this day, a name of honour only and of gain, but not of burden, & of labour, or pain: I know no Papists, much● (less Protestants) so carried away with honour and gain, that ever said it, or (me thinks) can think it. S. Augustine saith (I grant) it is a name of work not of honour: yea God saith I will have mercy, not Sacrifice. Such negatives are not simple, but comparative. God requireth both; howbeit, the one more than the other. As he said of justice and of tithing, Haec oportet facere, illa non omittere. And if Elders & bishops be all one: doth not S. Paul say, 1. Tim. 5. The Elders that rule well are worthy of double honour, chief that labour in the word doctrine? But what saith he? (saith Chrysost upon 1 Tim. 3.) If any (saith he) desire a bishopric. I reprove it not, I disallow it not: for it is a work of government. If any therefore desire this, not with the pomp of principality and lordliness; but with the care of government, and affection of Charity: I improve it not, for he desireth a good work. For Moses also coveted that matter: how beit he sought not such power and ambition of governing: but he sought the matter so, that it was said unto him: Who made thee a Prince and a judge over us? If any therefore desireth it so he desireth it well. For thereupon is it named a bishopric, because he looketh upon all men, and vieweth all things. But of what bishop did S. Augustine speak, when he said A bishop's name is of work not of honour? spoke he it not of such a bishop, as had a superior dignity and government over pastoral Elders, as all the holy bishops long before his time had, and himself also? Or, did he condemn them all, and himself, and his calling, when he so said? I marvel much (be it spoken still with meet reverence of so Learned a man) what Danaeus and our brethren mean, so often to allege the Fathers, Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, Theodoret, Cyprian, bernard? For, all those Danaeus allegeth in this chapter, and approveth their sayings, for the name and office of bishops. And yet all such of these as were bish. yea, Archbishops▪ used theirselues, this superior dignity and authority over pastors. This sentence of Augustine (here also alleged) Epistola ad Valerianum. 143. There is nothing in this life, especially at this time more comfortable and acceptable unto man than is the office of a bishop of a priest, and of a Deacon, if the matter be handled sleightlye, and flatteringly: Bishop evangelical but then, before God, nothing is more miserable: and also in this life and chiefly at this time, nothing is more hard and dangerous, than the office of a bishop. But with God, nothing is more blessed, if we go to war, as our Emperor, that is Christ, would have us. Is not here by the way, a plain distinction of all these 3. offices, bishops priests and Deacons. Again, Ambrose (saith Danaeus) doth say, that in a bishop is the power of all the Ordinations. And (as saith Cyprian) a bishop is set to be a watchman over all. Did they mean hereby that they had no more authority than all other Ministers of the word had? Or not rather, that they had a greater, than they all. But now to come to our triple distinction, that must answer all that is alleged in all the fathers. In the Gospel they are all one. I deny that. In the Gospel, is mention of Bishop for Apostle▪ and in that kind of Bishopric, The Bishop evangelical or bishop of God. all the Apostles were Bishops. But in the Gospel (I mean in the records and state of the new Testament) some were Bishops that were not Apostles: And therefore all were not all one. And doth not Beza, and the Geneva translation, take the name of Bishop (even in the places cited by our Learned discoursing Brethren) for those unpreaching Prelates, or Elders not teaching, whom they call Governors? And if it be so: then again, all the evangelical Bishops are not all one. And if the difference lay only, in the pride and vicious life: were all Bishop's good, that are mentioned in the Gospel, and by S. john in the Revelation? But the evangelical bishop is, where there is most great aequallity among all the Pastors of God's Church. Neither can that be. For, if it should: either there must never be assemblies and Counsels, such as were at jerusalem among the Apostles,: for then, their-selves confess, there cannot be aequalitye. We confess (say the Learned discoursers pag. 114, The equality among all the Pastors, maketh not the Magist. Bishops. ) that in every assembly or company, some one of necessity must have this prerogative, to order and dispose the same with reason. So that, if one must have pre-eminence above the residue: then is there not so much equality, as before, and after. And so, for that time, wherein of all other they should be most evangelical, by this most great equality among them, being left off: they should not be evangelical at all. And therefore, they may be evangelical well enough, both in such assemblies, and without them, having not such most great equality, as is here imagined. Neither can I see how this summa equalitas, this most great aequalitye can at any time, consist among the Pastors, For, if Caluines reason be good, The Bishop of man.. upon Galath. 2. ver. as we have heard (that greater honour (speaking there of the honour of dignity) should be given to those Pastors that have greater gifts: and all the Pastors in one City have not gifts alike: than not only this, inequality of dignity must be of the Pastor, to the people; but also of the inaequality of the Pastors, ariseth an inequality of the honour in dignity among the Pastors. The reasons that our little English book of the judgement of a most reverend and Learned man, Thehumane B. or B. of man, and his definition etc. allegeth for the Bishop of God to be all one with Pastor; are the places cited already by our own Learned discoursers alleged, as Ephes. 4.11. 1. Tim. 3. & Phil. 1.1. and therefore, I pass them over to the places, where they are answered, & come to the 2. kind of Bishop, the Bishop of man; for, on him lieth now all the controversy. The human (saith Danaeus) is when unto some one out of the pastors, there is given upon the residue of the men which are also of the same order, that is, upon other pastors and priests of the Church, a power or prelacy, which is not indeed the chief; but some it is. If the bishopric of man, be no worse than this definition maketh it: I see not, but that it is a good bishopric: yea, why may it not be counted all one with the evangelical bishopric? Shall I say, as much? nay, more than that, which is most equal with all the pastors? For, this we have showed by manifest proves, out of the word of God itself, even in the example of Tim. & by the example of james, Act. 15. & 21. & Gal. 2. & even out of calvin & Beza: and by the exposition of many the ancient and best approved Fathers, & by the tract of the universal practice from & in the Apostles times: & by the testimonies of more than 2. or 3. most ancient & credible witnesses: that the bishop of man (as he is here defined) is the very bishop of God also. As for the 3. bishop of the Devil, let him go to the Devil from whence he came. We have (God be praised) nought to do with him. And howsoever our Br. might warble at the bishop, if any were so evil a man, that he might be called the Devil himself, The definition of the B. of the Devil. as Christ called judas: yet was his bishopric of God. We have none to whom is given the summa potestas. We acknowledge it to be only in jesus Christ, which is the only high bishop of our souls. If he be the bishop of the Devil, to whom alone is given over other churches imperatoria & dictatoria potestas, an imperial & dictatorial power: then be our bishops in England, Our bishop in England have no such pours. no bishops of the Devil; which have no such most high imperial or dictatorly power Whosoever should so say of them, should most manifestly slander them, & of whom a slanderer: is that, let the Etymology of the name Diabolus tell you. As for our bishops, they are of the number of those bishops of God, Of whom this most reverend man saith: That the same were subject to Magistrates though profane: appeareth not only by the example of Christ the highest Priest, The. B. of man's power. and of the Apostles, but also by the express words of Paul, 1. Tim. 2, & Luke 12.13. and such (God be praised) be our bishops, and such were all these holy and ancient bishops that I have mentioned. Howbeit, though the Pope may go in this crew, whether this definition suffice for all Popish Archbishops, and Popish B; I doubt me of it. For they have no such highest power, though they would. But they are rather his slaves that hath it: & so it comes all to one reckoning for them, so long as they like it and maintain it in him, and serve under him, and as near as they can or dare, aspire to some part of his tyrannical pride, and devilish usurpation. But, (God forbidden) that we should so think (when we cannot so say, except we say amiss) of any of our Reverend Fathers, bishops over us, that have renounced him, nor taken any such power on them, over either prince, pastor, or people, in their governments. But to annswere Danaeus with the judgement of as reverend and learned a man as is himself: Let Danaeus his self answer himself, The superior authority that Danaeus alloweth to a B●. over the Pastors. what manner of superiority he alloweth in bishop For writing upon the 5. chapter of the 1. Tim. ver. 22. Unto whom the election of a pastor doth belong: After he hath taken it from prince, from patron, from prelate, neither yet that it pertaineth to all the Church alike, (which were to disturb all things) neither to any one, because none in the Church save only Christ, is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the governor by himself alone, (but of his arguments of election, we shall see God willing afterward:) at the length he saith: Neque eriam obstat. etc. Neither also doth this let it, that the Bishop is of the fathers called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉▪ Precedent, as though he only might order the whole Church after his fancy: and therein advance whom he pleased: for that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a President, declareth only an order, that he which was called the Bishop, aught to sit among his colleagues and fellow Priests or Elders: but it giveth not unto him a kingly or a chief and Pretor-like power, upon the Church. Ambrose in lib. de dignitate Sacerdotum cap. 6. doth confirm that which we say. If thine eye shall be simple: thy whole body shall be clear. that is, If that the B. which deseved to rule the body, be beautified with holy simplicity and innocency: all the Church shineth with the brightness of the light. But if thy eye be evil, etc. That is, if the B. which seemed to give light to the body subject to him, be shadowed with the blindness of wicked behaviour: what shall the other members do, that are bereft the light of the eyes? That is to say, what shall the secular multitude do, when with unlawful actions forbidden, the B. shall provoke the multitude to the like gulf of mischiefs. For what other thing should a B. be interpreted to be, but an Overseer: chiefly, when he siateth in a higher seat in the Ch. and so looketh upon all, that the eyes of all may look on him. So that here at least, the bishop is made a President, that sitteth, though among them, yet higher than all his fellows. And is this sitting higher, only to look on them? or this beholding and looking on them, The Bishop of man's power. for no governing of them? But let Ambrose tell his whole meaning: who, after he had highly commended the honour and dignity of the high calling both of Bishop and Priest, both above the prince and people, in his spiritual function, cap. 2. and showed the danger if their life were not answerable thereunto, cap. 3. Therefore brethren (saith he unto the Bishops & Priests under him,) as the Robe setteth forth the Senator, as the tillage the Husbandman, as the Barbarian his armour, as the skill of sailing the shipman: and the quality of every Artificers work declareth the Authors: So nothing betokeneth a Bishop, but a bishoply work. That he might be known rather by his good work, than by his profession: and more to be a Bishop by his well deservings, than by the name whereby he is so called. For, (as we have said) there is nothing more excellent than a Bishop: so nothing is more wretched if the Bishop be in hazard of his holy life. And as it is lighter to run on the plain, so is it more heavy, when one falleth from high dignity. For the ruin that is from an high, is frushed with the more weighty fall. Indeed, the bishoply honour before men, is renowned, but if it sustain a fall, it is a great grief. For how much the degree of a bishop is higher than others, so much the more grievous is the fall, if that by negligence he should slip. A great height, must have great heed. The greater honour, must be environed with the greater circumspection. To whom more is of trust committed, of him (as it is written) is more demanded. For, the things that are mingled, are with the worst. And in an other place, The mighty shall suffer more mighty torments. And to him that knoweth the Law and doth it not, the sin is heighnous. And the servant that knoweth the will of the Lord, if he shall not do it, shall be much beaten. For, it is another thing that God requireth of a bish. and another, that of a priest, and another that of a Deacon: and another, that of a Clerk, and another that of a lay man, either else, of every singular man. And albeit GOD shall examine in his judgement the works of all men, yet shall more be required for of him, to whom more is committed. For he shall suffer greater punishments, to whom a cure having greater multitude of people to be governed, shallbe committed. Thus much saith Ambrose in that Chap. of this matter, not only for the honour and charge of a bishop, more than other; but also of the several and distinct degrees, of bishop, of priest, of Deacon, of Clerk, and of the Say people. In the Chapter following, he describeth thė properties of a bishop, out of S. Paul to timothy. And in the● 1. Chap. he inveigheth most against the Arch-bi. in his time, that made bishops for money, and the bishops also for money, made priests & Deacons. All which as it showeth their abuses: so it necessarily inferreth, both their degrees, and also their dignities, to be different: and even confuteth that, The bishop higher Seat. that Danaeus in the same place principally defendeth. Last of all S. Ambrose cometh to this sentence by Danaeus cited: For thou art called of all men a Bishop without doubting. Especially, when thou art esteemed by the very name, if so be that the action agree to the name, and the name associate itself unto the action. For what other thing doth he interpret Bishop, but an over-looker upon? chief, when he sitteth in a higher seat, and so looketh upon all men, that the eyes of all men also do look on him. This is in very deed, both the sentence and meaning of S. Ambrose, that he is set in a higher seat, than other in the Church, because of his higher dignity in the Church. And that his action should so answer to his name, that as he overlooketh (whereon he hath his name,) so should he overrule them in the discipline of the church. And therefore he is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a precedent, or one that sitteth highest. as Jerome confesseth in his epistle ad Euagrium. For also at Alexandria, from Mark the Euangeliste, unto Heraclas and Dionysius Bishops: the Priests do always take one chosen among themselves, whom, being placed in a higher degree they called the Bishop. Whereby withal, it manifestly appeareth, that this Bishop of man (as they term him) is of good antiquity, even from Mark the Evangelist, and so an Ecclesiastical Bishop: so that, if he could plead for his higher chair, no better title, but only so fair a prescription from S, Mark: me thinketh he should be dealt too hardly withal, to be turned out now. Neither was this first begun at Alexandria from S. Mark There is yet a more ancient record than Ieromes testimony. For (saith Eusebius lib 7, cap. 15.) To conclude also, the Chair of james, (who was even of our Saviour himself and of the Apostles in jerusalem, elected the first Bishop in the earth, The chair of S. james at jerusalem. & whom books do note to be the brother of the Lord) is yet to this day there kept. And in the same chair do all they sit, which until this present time, do enjoy the sacred Priesthood of that Seat. It is kept therefore with great diligence, as a memory of holiness delivered from the ancestors, and is had in due reverence, either in pretence of the antiquity, or of the first sanctification of the sacred Priesthood. Neither doth Eusebius write this, of the common estimation of the people, and his own assertion, whereof he also spoke before, libro secundo, cap. 2●: That unto james an Episcopal seat in jerusalem was given of the Apostles: but also cited out of Clemens, which likewise he ha● done more at large before, lib. 2. cap. 1. and he addeth, for further confirmation hereof, saying: But Egesippus which was straightways after the very first successions of the Apostles, with more assured search, rehearseth of him in the fift book of his commentaries, after these words: james (saith he) the brother of the Lord, The definition of the B. of man. who of all men was called the just, received with the Apostles, the Church, who endured from the very times of the Lord until our days. (And so at large Egesippus declareth the manner of his martyrdom, The authentic testimonies of Egesippus, and Clement, Alex. cited by Eusebius and in conclusion saith) These things more at large, but agreeable unto Clement, hath Egesippus recorded: that james was so marvelous a man and among all men, so highly thought of in the observing of all righteousness; that all that were wise among the jews believed, that this was the cause of the siege of jerusalem forthwith following, that they had again on him laid their wicked hands. And that josephus did think even so, he evidently declareth by these words: all which things (saith he) happened to the jews for the revenge of james the just, which was the brother of jesus, that is called Christ, whom they killed, being by the confession of all men, the most righteous and most holy man. So that this Bishop which Danaeus calleth the Bishop of man, and his Episcopal chair wherein he sat among his fellow Brethren, and thereupon was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the precedent of them, is of man indeed, but of such men, even of the holy Apostles of jesus Christ: that we must needs confess, it is of God also. Except we will disavow the Apostles doings of the same, or call in question the credit of these Historiographers, that were so near, and as it were even in their times, which do avow it of them. But now that we have heard Danaeus judgement, let us hear also the judgement of this most reverend and learned man from beyond the seas, that is now arrived in England. For we Englishmen love many times to hear of news beyond-sea; where (in sooth) are many most reverend and learned men, and it is good to hear the judgements of them, to see if they agree with these men's judgements. For, if he be never so much most reverend and learned a man: yet, (I perceive hereby) he is but a man; and so is the Bishop of man, as well as he. And we have heard, for this one man's judgement, the judgement already of a great many more, and that as reverend and as learned men, as this one most reverend and learned man, who so ever he be. The style of most reverend man. But is he not some Archbishop himself? For this style most Reverend savoureth much that ways, if the style of Archbishops be not by you misliked, for that he is called a most reverend Father, and your style is to be well allowed of, that calleth him but a most reverend and learned man. But, as we have heard other most reverend and learned men from beyond the seas also, and from the most famous parts of all the world, and all of so many hundred years before our times, yea, and before the usurpation of the Pope: so let us now hear also the judgement of this most reverend and learned man, and confer it with the other, and with the best learned even of our Brethren themselves, The triple distinction overthrown and so return to proceed upon our Learned Discourse. The Bishop that is of man, (saith this most reverend & learned man) that is to say, The most reverend, brought into the Church by the alone wisdom of man, besides the express word of God, is a certain power given to one certain Pastor, above his other fellows; yet limited with certain orders or rules provided against tyranny. In this definition of the B. of man, made here by the judgement of this most reverend and learned man, Bridges. (except in the party himself that is here defined) I see as yet (in my simple & unlearned judgement) no great matter to be misliked in him, Another B. of man defined than we defend. or cause that he should mislike in the B. of man. Save that here (me thinks) he defines an other B. of man, than we defend or know of, to be among us. And this is principally to be marked, that definitum & definitio do so agree, that whatsoever is spoken of the party defined, be answerable to the definition of him: and whatsoever is put in the definition, be in all points answerable, and neither more nor less, than is proper to the party that is defined: or else, it is no good definition of the party. For, here concerning the B. of man, are adjoined these words, that is to say, brought into the Church by the alone wisdom of man, besides the express word of God. Where here this most reverend and learned man, taketh on him to define such a B: we take not upon us to defend or maintain, such a Bishop, as is brought into the Church by the alone wisdom of man. If he be brought in by the only wisdom of man which is folly to God, he is the very B. of the devil. For, the alone wisdom of man, is mere foolishness before God. Yea, (saith S. Paul 1. Cor. 8.) The wisdom of the flesh, is death, but the wisdom of the spirit is life and peace, because the wisdom of the flesh is enmity against God. For it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. But, it is such wisdom as S. james speaketh of, earthly, sensual, and devilish. jac. 3. while therefore, this most reverend and learned man, speaketh here distinctly of the B. of man, from the Bishop of God: he confoundeth him with the B. of the Devil. For what is the alone wisdom of man without the wisdom of God, but the very wisdom of the devil? For when man would be wise without God, he became a fool, & lost the Image of God, and was deformed with the image of the devil, till by the lively character of Gods express Image jesus Christ, the Image of God was renewed in him. And if he do any thing of himself without the wisdom of God, which is jesus Christ, though in some respect it may be said his own: yet, it is the Devils, from whom all sin first came. So that, here this triple distinction is confounded, neither indeed can it well be maintained, T●e overthrow of this most reverend man's triple distinction. that he saith: we must needs make 3. Bishops. There is neither need nor truth in this distinction, and (saving the reverence of every reverend and learned man) it is but a captious distinction. Where with, seeing they dare not for very shame, nor indeed can condemn all these holy fathers that maintained it, as maintaining a B. of the devil: The ancient Bishops were of God. they turn that cunningly to the Papists, that are the open adversaries: and devise a mean betwixt God's Bishops, & the devils, and that (for sooth) is the B. of man. Wherein, good simple men, or rather well weening fools, brought in a B. of their only or alone wisdom, There is no B of man, but either he is the B. of God, or of the devil. & that (for sooth) is not the devils B. but whose is he then? Is there halting here betwixt God & Baal, and a mean between Christ and belial? Was not saul's alone wisdom, without God, witchcraft? And is not witchcraft of the devil? Doth not Christ say, he that gathereth not with me, is against me? And is not he that is against Christ, with the devil? Why then do ye seek out these figs leaves, & not plainly say (if ye can so say, if ye dare so say) that this Bishop, which all these holy fathers did acknowledge, was the devils B? if ye say it was the devils B: I pray you look upon the fathers a little better, that brought this B. in into the Church. And mark whether they look not like God's children, Whether the holy fathers in the primitive ch. set up the devils Bis●. yea the notable & excellent, most reverend & most learned saints of God, many of them. And would all these set up such an Idol puppet as the devils B. to be governor, & overseer of God's Church and many of them be such their selves? If ye say it was not the devils Bishop. For he was not yet come, but that (as Beza and Danaeus say) he made notwithstanding a way for the devils Bishop to follow after. The reverence still reserved of so learned and reverend men, I dare not think so hardly of them. For what is that, but to be the devils Bishop's gentlemen ushers, preparers, and forerunners of his antichrist? And so all comes to one, they were all the devils Bishops, save that the less hurtful devils went before, and the more perilous devils came after. But all of them devils incarnate, and no better than the devils Bishops. But, God forbidden, that ever we should so say, or think of them. It is no charitable judgement of any (be he never so reverend and learned man) upon so many holy, ancient, as good, and perhaps better Bishops of God, then is himself. But if (to mollify all this) he will defend this part of his distinction, they are of man, but not of the devil: them let him put out these words brought in by the alone wisdom of man: yea, then let him confess, (for in the end, he shall be driven unto it) that this B. of man, is even the very B. of God also. The B. that was among these holy fathers was not so besides but that he is included in God's word. If he say, it can not be, the B. of God, because it is beside the express word of God: that which is included, can not well be called beside, but within. And than who seeth not, that if it were so, beside, yet, that is no bar, if it be not debarred by the express word of God, but be either of necessary consequence included; or a matter left at liberty, and not expressed? Neither is this any whit inclining to the errors of the Popish Bishops of the devil, that would bring in any doctrines of devils, or devilish traditions of man into the Church of God, beside, that is, without and against the Scripture. The Bishop's power limited. For if the Papists can prove any of those things though not expressed, yet of necessary consequence included in the scripture, & we refuse them: then had they matter indeed to be justly offended with us. But where their doctrines and traditions (which we refuse) are such, as are neither expressed nor included in God's word: what are they but in effect against it? Prove this Bishop that ye call, of man, to be of that stamp, and then indeed: Out on him, yea and out with him. He is then of man (I grant) but he is of the Devil also: and we will (God willing) with you renounce and defy him. But as for those holy ancient Fathers, they brought in no other Bishop but such as had good warrant, both inclusive and also express in God's word. And we have none (I hope) nor defend any, but that accordeth with these holy Fathers, and is not only of man, but of God also. As the most reverend misseth in the party defined, so likewise in the definition. And as we say thus, for the party defined, so, for the definition, that this Bishop of man is a certain power, given to one certain Pastor above his other fellows, yet limited with certain orders or rules provided against tyranny. That the party to whom power is given, may be called figuratively the power itself, is indeed in the express word of God: Rom. 13. Let every soul be subject to the higher powers. Nowbeit, for such a learned man, in a definition to set down, in the front of any treatise, to express the nature of a thing, upon the light and truth whereof all the treatise dependeth; he should (me thinks) avoid such figures, & speak plain, and not say a Bishop is a power given to a Pastor, for this is rather a definition of the Bishop's office, then of the Bishop that enjoys it. But because they be so nearly conjoined, and have relation one to the other: let that go. And although this difference here set down, that applieth this definition to the party defined, be so large that it stretcheth to other persons, as well as to a Pastor, and so containeth more than doth a Bishop: yet let that go too. But do ye think that a power limited with orders or rules provided against tyranny, is not a good and lawful power? Or is such a power of the Devil? If all power (that is indeed power) be of God: is not this much more of God, and acceptable to him? Yea, but (say you) be it never so good, yet the same to be given to one certain Pastor above his fellows, that is the point this learned man denieth. Yea? is that the matter? And what if he himself, or ever he turn the leaf, The most reverend confutes himself, and his own defition. in express words do say: all things ought to be done orderly in the lords house, and therefore, that some one should be precedent in every assembly? And can this be done, without a certain power be given to one Pastor above his other fellows? Yea, but that (will he say) is not given him to continue, but for the continuance of the assembly. But, this was less out of the definition, and he was called simply the Bishop of man, The differenceof the time. that had a certain power given to one certain Pastor, above his other fellows, yet limited with certain orders or rules provided against tyranny. So that, he that hath this power given him for a time of an assembly, is by this reckoning the Bishop of God. And he that hath given him for longer time than an assembly, is the Bishop of man. But I pray you, have me reverently commended to this most reverend and learned man, and desire him to show me this, in the express word of God. For, I fear not, but that wheresoever he shall find the one, I will hazard to find the consequence of the other. And if this power may be given of man for a time: it is not then, The most reverend confesseth superiority of the power, but he differeth for the time. (I take it) the difference of the power itself so much, nor of the competency of it to the persons as the difference of the time, how longer the person shall enjoy this power that we contend for. We agree, that such a power as is limited, with certain orders or rules provided against tyranny, is good, and lawful, and of GOD. We agree also, that it may be given of man to a Pastor, above his fellow Pastors for a time, and he still remain a Pastor, and they still remain therein his fellows; but in respect of this his limited power given him, he is above them for the time. Is now the limitation of time, of the substance to make such difference, and that before God? But (I doubt not) if there be no worse matter in the power itself, we shall easily obtain a little longer time, than of a short assembly, that our Bishop of man, being the man of God, may be Bishop of GOD also, and not so soon made a quondam, and another placed in his Bishopric. Since, (be-it short or long) there is no danger at all of any tyranny in it. But as he limiteth him for the time, so he addeth after this definition, a limitation also, or rather, a specification of the power, saying: They which did bear this office of Bishops, The most reverend, Bridges. are called Bishops in regard of their fellowe-Elders, and the whole Clergy, as watchmen set over the Clergy. True it is, that they are so called, though not only in regard of their fellow Elders, and the whole Clergy; but in regard also of the whole people under them. And the regard that is toward their fellow-Elders and the whole Clergy, since it taketh not away the fellowship of their brethren Elders, nor is any absolute power, but a certain power limited with certain orders of rules provided against tyranny: is a good regard and neither injurious unto their fellow-Elders, or to any man, and even therefore acceptable unto God. But, saith this most reverend and learned man: The most r●uer●●●▪ that this calling was not brought in by the word, it is manifest, by that, that there is not to be found in the new Testament, so much as one syllable, whereby there may be the least surmise of any such thing. The continuing assembly. Whether there be not to be found in the new Test. so much as one syllable, Bridges. whereby there may be the least surmise of any such thing. I refer it to the consideration of that, which is already alleged, not only concerning Timothy & Titus: but also out of the testimony of those historiographers & fathers cited, that lived either in the Apostles times, or followed next them. Yea, I refer it to calvin & Beza themselves in the places before noted. And that is more, I refer it to the very judgement of this most Reverend and learned man from beyond the seas, even in the very next sentence, immediately following this overbolde, & too peremptory assertion. The most reverend. For (saith he) although we doubt not, but all things ought to be done orderly in the lords house, and therefore that some one should be precedent in every assembly, whom john in the Revelation seemeth to call the Angel of the Churches. If some one should be precedent in every assembly, because all things ought be done orderly in the lords house: Bridges. and the assembly be of Priests or Elders: then should one of the Priests or Elders be precedent over the residue. And if the assembly continue not only for actions done at one time, but continue still; then this presidentship over the Priests or Elders should still continue, by the testimony of this most Reverend and Learned man; The continuing of the assemblies at jerusalem whe● james was precedent. or else, all things should not be orderly done in the Lord's house. But now, whether the assembly of the Clergy & Pastoral Elders, did not continue at or about jerusalem, and that there be not so much as one syllable, whereby there may be the least surmise of any such thing: look Act. 1. ver. 4.13. and 14. Act. 2. ver. 1. & 42.43. & 44. Act. 4. ver. 32. Act. 5. ver. 11.12. and 13. Act. 6. ver. 2. & 5. Act. 8. v. 14. & 25. Act. 9 ver. 27. Act. 11. ver. 1.2.3.4. and 22. Act. 12. ver. 12. Act. 15. ver. 2.4. 6.12.22.23.24.25. etc. Act. 21. ver. 18. By the conference of all these and other places, it is most apparent, that the assembly of the Clergy at jerusalem was still continuing. And therefore it followeth, that one should be still a continuing precedent over them: or else, all things should not have been done orderly in the lords house. And what differeth this continuing precedent (that is to say, one that sitteth higher than all the residue,) from the Bishop, whom Egesippus, Clem. Euseb. Jerome, & Ambr. (as is aforesaid) described to be placed in the higher seat to oversee his Brethren, whereupon this name Episcopus Bishop, is derived? Neither do I refuse the example, that this most Reverend & learned man allegeth, Marloraeu● in Apocal. cap. 2. saying: whom john in the Revelation seemeth to call the Angel of the Churches. And what gathereth Marlorate, that S. john meaneth, by this Angel? Angel and sent are all one. Whereupon we learn, that none can minister the word of the Lord purely, and with profit except, he be sent of the L. Rom. 10. c. 15. john foretold that he would write to the 7. Churches, as is abovesaid, The Angels of the Churches. 1. a. 4. which thing he now beginneth to put in practice, while he writeth to the pastors of those Churches. For the Pastors ought not to be estranged from the Churches, of whom is made one body. Of Ephesus we spoke 1. c. 11. What office they had that are called in the Revelation, the Angels of the Churches. From this Church of Ephesus, john beginneth, because for the multitude of the believers, and the celebrity of the place, it was esteemed for the chiefest Church. And profitable was it to make the beginning from the same: that it being corrected, it might more easily be provided, for the correction & health of other Churches. And although certain things were to be corrected, aswell in the people, as in the Clergy, (as they call them) notwithstanding he setteth not on the people, but on the Clergy. Neither calleth he upon every one of the Clergy by name, but on the Prince of the Clergy, that is to say, the Bishop. And that not without a reason. For the Pastor is to render account not only for his own sins, but also for the sins of those that are subject to him, if it chance any perish by his negligence or slothfulness, as is contained Ezech. 3. c. 20. Moreover, even as, so long as the stomach is sick, health is provided to the other members to no purpose, but the chiefest regard is to be had thereof: even so, ought the medicine of correction, to be ministered to the Pastors before the people. For, as the ill stomach infects the nourishment with the which all the members are increased: so by the evil and noisome life of the Pastors, the life of the people is corrupted. Albeit, it is likely, that not any one of the governors of the Church, is in this and in the places following, noted: but with all, the whole succession of the B. and Elders of that Church, is by order to be taken. Although the minister of the place ought to be accounted always among these to hold the chiefest. By which collection of Marlorate it appeareth, that although S. john by name of Angel, may comprehend generally the Clergy, to wit, chief the Pastors; yet here in writing especially to one, and calling that one the Angel of this or that Church; it is apparent, that some one or other, had a superiority over the other of the Clergy in those Churches. Which one, is here peculiarly called the Bishop and Prince, or chief of the Clergy or Pastors. Among which Churches, Ephesus being reckoned one & the first, wherein (as we have seen Bezaes' testimony) were many Pastors: it is evident, that although after Timothy, yet in S. john's time, the Church of Ephesus, of whose Elders (if they were Elders of that Church only) called by S. Paul to Miletum, we had heard so much debated, how soever they might there be termed by the names of Bishops improperly: yet notwithstanding they had but one Prince or chief of all the Clergy there, which was indeed the Bishop or overseer of them all, whom Christ here calleth, the Angel of the Church of Ephesus. And so likewise, we have also to think of all the other Churches there named. A Moderator. Lo, how this most reverend and learned man, hath himself against himself, found out in the new Testament, a great deal more than one syllable, not of gathering the least surmise, but manifest evidence, that some one, yea, diverse some such once, bore this office of Bishops as Princes or chief in regard of their fellow Pastoral Elders, and of the whole Clergy, as principal watchmen, set over the other inferior watchmen, in their several, greater or lesser Cities and congregations. And therefore this Bishop that here is called the Bishop of man, is manifestly brought in by God's word, clean contrary to this overbold assertion, of this most reverent and learned outlandish man, who-so-euer (saving his reverence) he be. Neither can this shift following, elude this proofa, wherein he saith: And Austen calleth the moderator Proestôta, yet this moderator of actions of the Church, The most reverend. saving this one thing, that he was the first in order in the company, had no authority over his fellows, neither did he exercise any higher office. I would feign the place had been quoted where S. Augustine calleth the moderator Proestôta. Bridges. That we might turn unto it and peruse it, whether it be appliable to this question, yea or no. I fear me greatly, S. Augustin hath no such saying, especially meaning it, of a Bishop, that he was such a Moderator of actions of the Church, saving this one thing that he was the first in order in the company: but, had no authority over his fellows, neither did he exercise any higher office. And what a Moderator call ye that which doth not exercise any higher office? A Moderator. Is his moderatorship no office? And how can it be a moderatorship, and not higher? And how can he moderate his fellows, except he have some authority over his fellows? Is this no more but this one thing, to be the first in order in the company? Or rather, is it not to be the last in order, and the first in authority of higher office? For in order, the moderator speaketh the last, and in all deliberations, determineth, that is, endeth and knitteth up the matter. And the first in order, is rather in dignity and authority the lowest, and commonly the puny (as they term him) to all the company. Whereas, if he be the moderator, to moderate the sentences of them all, his last voice strikes the stroke, and hath the first and highest authority in the company. Yea, but he is the moderator of actions of the Church. And doth that abridge his authority? What should he moderate, being a man of the church, but actions of the church? Grant this, & there an end. For, whether ye mean by the Church, all the people of God, or only the Clergy, as usually, we take the name; if he must moderate all their actions, how hath he not in this moderation an authority over them, and an higher office? If ye mean by the actions of the Church, the actions of the Clergy assembled in a Synod: And is this no action of the Church to call and assemble the synod together, and appoint them time and place, and propound matter to them, as causes of the said assembly? or shall not the moderator (the Christian Princes supreme authority always preserved) moderate these actions of the Church? if not; name who shall. The moderating the actions of the Church not the actions of the synods only. if he shall; by what authority? and how then are these actions of the Church to be understood only, of moderating the actions of those that are assembled in the synod? But if this party whom S. john in the Revelation seemeth to call the Angel of the Churches be this Proestos, & this moderator of the Church's actions; was there then in every one of those 7. Churches when S. joh. wrote to their Angels, that is, to their Proestotes and moderators, a synod holden at that instant? for if there were not; then, these angels, Proestotes, & moderators, were not so called in that respect: but in respect of those actions, that were usual, & continuing among them, And indeed, such are the matters that Christ there, doth commend or discommend them for: and not for moderating actions of any Synod then holden, or for being precedent in any such assemblies. It followeth therefore, that if they be of Christ himself called Angels in the Revelation: and (as here is said of Austen) Moderators and Proestôtes, that is, provosts, or, such as had a principal being or chief standing among and over the Clergy; that the terms were given them, rather for a continual office of higher authority, whereby they should be the precedents & moderators of every assembly, when any such should by them be summonced, rather than they should be called by these names only, for being presidents and moderators of them, when they were assembled, The most reverend. when as there were no such assemblies there at that time to moderate, nor Synods whereof they should be Precedents. But, saith this most reverend and learned man: Therefore the author of the Epistle to the hebrews, as Jerome noteth, doth call the whole company of the Elders, governors, not any one certain man. Where Jerome noteth this, is not here noted, Bridges and therefore I can not note, what Jerome noteth thereon. But, that the author of the Epistle to the hebrews calleth the whole company of the Elders, Governors; What hindereth this but that they also might have a governor over them, and yet their selves be governors over others? and doth S. Paul speak there, of any such company of these governors assembled in a Synod, as this learned man speaketh of? else: wherefore is this here alleged? and yet, if he spoke of such an assembly of these governors; if his speech should not admit any, some one certain man to be governor also of them: how should then one be precedent in every assembly (sith that all things ought to be done orderly in the lords house) if they be all alike and equal governors? neither is the example of Peter next alleged, any whit against it, but rather for it, The most reverend. Such a one (saith this learned man) was Peter many times in the very assembly of Apostles, of a great authority surely amongst the Apostles, who were all otherwise equal, and yethe himself one of the company of th'apostles sent by his companions to Samaria with john, Act. 8.14. and in the assembly giving an account of his ministry, to those which were of the circumcision. Act. 11.2. Bridges If Peter many times were such an one, that is to say, a Precedent, Proestôs and moderator of the assemblies of the Apostles: This is not only to be of a great authority among them, but also, if of any authority at all, than this great, was greater among the Apostles, than the authority of others at that time was. But did this great or greater authority by and by cease from among them, How Peter, james and john were greater. upon the ceasing of every particular assembly? Doth not S. Paul acknowledge Peter to remain still great among the Apostles, even when he mentioneth no assembly of them? and what meaneth he by this great, but by way of comparison, that the other Apostles were less? and so james, and Peter and john to be greater than the residue. True it is, that here is said, they were all otherwise equal. But what do these words also import, otherwise equal? ergo, this otherwise, being set aside: they were not equal. So that I perceive in some respect, they that are not equals, may otherwise be superiors or inferiors one to another, without prejudice of their equality well enough▪ Yea, Calvin, calvin in Act. 8.14. on this very example of Peter here alleged, Act. 8.14. doth say: In that Luke declareth that Peter was sent of the residue, hereon may be gathered that he exercised not an empire over his colleagues, but did so excel among them, that yet, he was under & obeyed the body. As who say, his superiority among them, was rather in respect of their particular persons, than of the whole Church or corporation. So that, this confutes the immoderate pride of the Pope, but denieth not a moderate superiority in the ministery, wherewith it may very well agree. And this accordeth with Christ's saying, Luke. 21. He that is greatest among you, let him be as the least. Neither doth this debar Peter's superiority, that in the assembly he gave an account of his ministry to those which were of the circumcision, Act. 11.2. For, if we better regard those persons, Peter's giving account deb●rreth not his superiority. to whom he gave this account: I doubt not, but all our brethren, yea, even this most reverend and learned man will confess, that he was far superior unto them. And if Apostleship have any high authority: S. Paul Galat. 2. calleth him the Apostle of the circumcision. So that, this his fact, debarreth not his superiority over them. And on those persons to whom Peter gave this account, saith calvin. But note, that when as before, Calvin. in Act. ●●. 2. Luke had said that the Apostles and the brethren heard this same: he spoke not a word of offence. But now to bring in as it were a new sect of men, that attempted strife with Peter: The brethren (saith he) heard it, he addeth nothing afterwards: it followeth, Peter rendering accounts. when Peter came to jerusalem, they which were of the Circumcision chod with him, Who (verily it must needs be) were diverse from the former. The particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of the Circumcision, doth not simply note the jews, but those that were too much addicted to the ceremonies of the Law. For there were no people of jerusalem then in the flock of Christ, but such as were circumcised: from whom then should they discern these? Last of all, it seemeth not likely that the Apostles, and those more moderate, which were of the number of the faithful, did attempt this strife. For although they had been offended, yet might they have come to Peter privately, and required a reason of the fact. By these reasons I am moved, that I think them to be called of the circumcision, whom such a religion of circumcision held, that they would permit no man to have place in the kingdom of God, but him that received the profession of the Law, and being initiated by this holy ceremony, did put off uncleanness. To men having Circumcision: This was not forbidden by the law of God, but it was an observation delivered of the Fathers by hands. Neither yet doth Peter except, that in this behalf he is handled too precisely, that by the necessity of the law of man he is not bound: he omitteth all this defence, but answereth only, that they came to him before, and were offered to him as it were by the hand of God. Howbeit we here see the rare modesty of Peter, that whereas trusting on the goodness of his cause, he might have despised the unskilful men, that unjustly were troublesome unto him: notwithstanding, How Peter submitted himself. (as is decent to be done among brethren) he doth gently excuse himself unto them. Indeed this was no light tentation, that he was unworthily accused, seeing that he had faithfully obeyed God. But because he knew, that a Law was given to the whole Church, that every one should be ready to render an account of his doctrine and life, so often as the matter so requireth: and he remembered that he was one of the ●locke: he not only suffereth himself to be brought into order: but of his own voluntary, he submitteth himself to the Church's judgement. Verily the Doctrine if it be of God, is placed above the dice of man's judgement, but because God would have prophecy to be judged. 1. Cor. 14.29. & 32: this condition must not be refused of his servants, to prove themselves to be, How Peter's fact confuteth the Pope's pride & tyranny, not any moderate superiority. such as they would be counted for to be. But how far the defence aswell of doctrine, as of facts, aught to proceed: we shall see anon. This (for the present) must be holden, that Peter willingly descended to plead his cause, when his fact was improved. But if the Pope of Rome be the successor of Peter, why shall not he be holden by the same Law. Howsoever we grant this kind of submission was voluntary, The naming of the superiors. notwithstanding, why doth not the successor imitate such an example of modesty showed unto him? albeit, here need nothing circuit: for if it be true, that the pope's vomit up in their sacrilegious decrees, Peter falsely forsook the privileges of his sea, & so was the betrayer of the Roman Sea. For, after that they have made the Pope, the judge of the whole world, who may not be subject to the judgement of man: after that they extolled him above the Clouds, that being free from all reason to be rendered, he might account his own will and lust for Law: straight they ordain (him) Patron of the Sea Apostolical, which stoutly should maintain the privileges thereof, Of what slothfulness therefore shall Peter be condemned, if by yielding so easily▪ he cast off the right by God collated to him? Why did not he at the least object, that he was free from Laws and exempted from the common number? but he allegeth before hand no such thing, but strait entereth into the cause. But let us remember, that nothing letteth whereby we may not falsely despise that idol, sith that usurping to himself such unbridled tyranny, he hath put himself out of the number of the Bishops. Thus we see it at large by Calvin, though it be rightly alleged against the insolency of the Pope: yet maketh it nothing against the lawful superiority of Bishops, but rather for it: showing, how they should use it with such humility, that not only they should subject themselves to the whole Church, but now and then, to base and unskilful men being their accusers. (Such, as Beza also calleth these unworthy accusers of S Peter) and of humbleness of mind, and of their own good will render reasons to them of their doings, and yet, may well be, and (for all that) are, superior in all ecclesiastical authority to those persons. The most reverend. But (saith this most reverend and learned man) if any such Byshoplike authority of any one above the rest, as there was afterwards, had been then: surely the Apostles would have set down their names even at that time, in their letters which they sent from one to another, especially, seeing Paul in his Epistle to the Philippians, doth name Bishops in their plural number, and Deacons: or there should have been at least, some peculiar mention made of them. Which seeing it is not done: it appeareth that amongst those governors, there was none in degree above their companion and fellow Bishops: but as occasion served, the Churches were governed by a fellowlike and equal authority, among the fellow elders in their elderships, he only going before the rest, whose godliness & authority the company did most allow of. This argument, if any such Byshoplike authority etc. had been then: surely, Bridges the apostles would have set down their names, etc. which seeing it is not done, it appearth etc. is gathered of probability, not urged of necessity. And therefore with as easy probability, may be rejected. The naming of the superiors. If not: why is not this as good an argument: If any such doctors as might not exhort, and if any such elders as might not minister the word and sacraments, had been then: surely, the Apostles would have set down their names, in their letters which they sent from one to another. The most reverends argument on probability, and of not naming the persons. etc. Which seeing it is not done; it appeareth, that among the ministers of the Church in the time of the Apostles, there were no such doctors nor Elders. If now this most reverend and learned man shall say, what though the Apostles set not down their names, which they were not bound to do, nor needed: yet if the matter be proved plain enough, that there were then such offices; it makes no matter, though we want the names, to know who were then such officers. Now, If the matter be proved it sufficeth. although this for the matter of those offices be not yet showed; yet, were it showed, if the names of the officers be not showed also; where is the virtue of our most reverend and learned man's argument then become? and yet (God be praised) the assumption of this argument is not so true. For we can show, and do show, both apparent matter, and names also, that there was some one amongst the governors even at that time, that was in degree above his companions and fellow Bishops. As, besides Peter, The persons are named that had superior authority. james and john, who (as is aforesaid) are expressly in the text itself, by S. Paul, named greater than the rest of the Apostles, not only the subscriptions of the Epistles to Timothy and Titus, declare: but also a great part of the matter contained in them, doth not of probability but of necessity infer it. But what need further proofs or plainer testimony, than this most reverend and learned man's own mouth against himself, and that in this self same sentence? for, what exception is this that followeth here? There was none above their companions and fellow Bishops, but as occasion served, The most reverends confession of one going be●ore the residue, and that in authority. the Churches were governed by a fellowlike & equal authority, among the fellow elders in their Elderships, he only going before the rest, whose godliness and authority the company did most allow of: For if he only were going before the rest: how then was their authority equal? yea, but he had none authority, but by their allowance. What is that to the purpose? had he authority by their allowance? So much the better, when so good men did allow such authority, for one amongst them to go before the rest: and the worse for all those that will not now allow the like. Yea, but (saith he) he only going before the rest, whose godliness and authority the company did most allow of. So that here is not only his authority allowed of, but also his godliness. And well worthy. Think ye that we defend, that any should be allowed this authority without godliness? allow the authority to the godly; and then, dissalowe and prove the party to be ungodly that is allowed it, and I hope, if it be done in good order, all that allow of godliness will allow your dissalowing. Epiphanius oppugned and defended. Yea, but what was this authority here allowed? but of one only going before the rest? What meaneth this learned man, by only going before the rest? Doth he mean of going only, as the gentlemen others or other officers prepare the way for Princes, and more honourable personages than themselves, to follow? or as, when those that are companions in each respect, fellow and fellowlike, having equal authority, and yet they can not go altogether cheek by cheek: some one of necessity must go before his fellows in a narrow passage, notwithstanding all they that came after him, are in all points of of equal authority and fellowlike unto him? What a going before is this? or how is this said, to be a going before by authority? For if one amongst them went before the rest of the Pastors or B. This B. of man had his beginning in the apostles times. with authority, what else is this, but that one was in degree above his companions and fellow pastors or bishops? yea, but this saith he, was as occasion served. And I think so, for occasion served very well. But howsoever it then served, than it was. And so by this learned man's own confessions, he answereth and confuteth himself, still inferring that this Bishop of man, had his beginning even in the Apostles times. After that this most reverend and learned man, hath in this sort (as he thinketh) proved, that this calling was not brought in by the word, and that, it is manifest by that, that there is not to be found in the new Testament so much as one syllable, whereby there may be the least surmise of any such thing: (which assertion how true or false it is, I refer to the indifferent reader's verdict, on this foresaid improving of it, yea to that he hath himself already alleged against himself) presupposing now, The most reverendes confutation of the ancient fathers, for this B. of man. that this calling was brought in only by the fathers: he entereth into the confutation of them, and first inveigheth against Epiphanius, who lived about 380. years after Christ, and that we may the better way the judgement of this most reverend and learned man, and how he confuteth Epiphanius: let us before at large set down Epiphanius own words, The most reverend. and then peruse his confutations of him. But first, in that he saith, Epiphanius against the Arians defending the contrary opinion. True it is, Epiphanius did mightily oppugn also the Arians, as the Capital enemies of our faith, Bridges and Aerius that began this schism in the church about this equality, was likewise an Arian. Howbeit this is not here so properly said, Epiphanius against the Arians, ●piphanius against the Aerians. defending the contrary opinion, namely, the Bishop ordained by man, etc. As to have said, Epiphanius against the Aerians. etc. For although Aerius were also an Arian, and denied the divinity of jesus Christ: yet was not Arius an Aerian, nor (that I read of) made any Question about this matter. Which that it may appear, and who this Aerius was, and what in these points (besides other) he oppugned: Aerius. let us hear Epiphanius himself declare it. And likewise (saith Epiphanius) there arose one Aerius, a great hurt unto the World, being of a boisterous mind and lift up in his own opinion. For, whether it were by reason of vainglory, Epiphanius contra h●res. lib. 3.10.1. Her. 75. The original from whence Aerius conceived this error against bishops. or of haughty pride, he effected all their heresy, that by rashness hath been wrought, even from the beginning to the ending. Verily, either lust or envy against his neighbours, or grief of mind, or frowardness, wrought these things. In conclusion, blindness is of the Devil, not that the Devil can do any thing against a man's will, but that every one is the author to himself of the work of sin. Whereby (as he saith) those that be good and sound, may be made manifest. This Aerius liveth in the flesh, and is yet alive even at this day. Verily altogether an Arian, for he thinketh not otherwise than even as Arius doth: yea, and stretcheth further beyond the points that are of Arius. Quick of speech, and in this part having his lips armed, that he might draw to himself, even an army of such as are beguiled, Whom Aerius beguiled, and a multitude of such as have itching ears, and a lose mind. For he also hath devised unto the world, a certain fabulous and vain opinion, which is ridiculous to those that are prudent, and yet hath he deceived and alured many by the same. This man was Schoole-fellowe with Eustathius the Sebastian, of the region so called of Sebastea, of Pontus or little Armenia. For they were both trained up together, Emulation & envy the ground, on repulse of promotion. the foresaid Eustathius and Aerius: but when E●stathius came to a Bishopric, he (Aerius) did the more lust after it, but he obtained is not. Heereuppon arose envy, but Eustathius seemed to flatter Aerius. For straight ways after, he made him priest, and committed an Hospital unto him, which in Pontus is called Ptochotropheum, of nourishing the poor. For the prelate's of the Churches do build such places for the love of hospitality. Aerius promooted to be master of an hospital of the poor. Causing the maimed and impotent persons to lodge there, and according to their ability, provide victuals and necessaries for them. When as therefore his wrath was not yet appeased, speeches daily increased, and their emulation broke forth abroad, and talk not very good, yea, slanders were given forth of Aerius against Eustathius. But the bishop Eustathius calling Aerius unto him, flattered him, exhorted him, B. Eustathius flattering & sawning on Aerius. threatened him, chafed with him, comforted him, and yet wrought nothing with him. For that platform that was laid down in the beginning, drove him into this great evil work: and so, at the length forsaking the hospital, Aerius went away. Hereupon purposing to find a pretence against his enemy, or searching to hurl a dart at his adversary, and from that time forth slandering Eustathius before all men, Aerius unthankful & false slandering and backbiting of Eustathius. he said, he is now no more such a person, but he is fallen to gathering of money, and to the possession of all sorts of things by all manner of means. And this verily devised he of mere slander. Howbeit in very deed, whereas Eustathius had in his hands the necessities ecclesiastical, he could not otherwise do, and the things that were spoken by Aerius seemed probable. But if any shall thus think with himself, sith that (speaking against Aerius) we have by the way brought in Eustathius, do we therefore with prayers extol Eustathius? verily, not a few men have his life and policy in admiration. But would to God he had also thought a right in the faith. Eustathius error. For even he also held the opinion of Arius, from the beginning to the ending. Neither did the troubles of persecution amend him, for he suffered persecution with Basilius, with Bleusus and with others. Yea, he was seen also to travel in legacy with many other bishops to Liberius the happy bishop of Rome, (or rather unhappy for he himself also fell from the faith & became an Arian) And to subscribe to the confession of the right faith made by setting forth of the Nicene council, but afterward as bethinking himself, & as one awaked out of sleep, he left not of to consideragain his former points, of the wicked opinion of the Arians, but we have to speak of Aerius & therefore we must again direct our speech to him. He (for the foresaid reasons) doth in the beginning crack of his renouncing. And having forsaken the hospital, he toulled unto him a great multitude of men and women. But he with his company was driven from the Churches, the fildes the villages, and other cities, and often with his great company they lived watching and sober in the fields, and continued all night abroad under the open sky, and under the rock, and fled to the woods. But his speech was rather furious, then according to the condition of man. Aerius renouncing his living because he would not live under Eustathius. And he said, what is a Bishop to a Pastor? the one differeth nothing from the other. For, it is one order. Yea (saith he) it is one honour, and one dignity. A bishop useth imposition of hands, so doth a priest. A Bishop baptizeth, so doth a Priest. A Bishop maketh the dispensation of the worshop of God, and a Priest likewise. A Bysh. fitteth in his throne, a Priest sitteth also. Herein he deceived many, and they had him for their guide. Thus far Epiphanius upon the occasion and description of this error. Whereby we see, that this most reverend and learned man is overshot in this, that he saith. Epiphanius here wrote against the Arians: for although by the way he mention them, with whose heresy Aerius an● Eustathius were both infected: yet having written against the Arians before, Lib. 2. to 2, haeres. 69. Here Lib. 3. to 1. haeres. 75. Epiphan. against Aerius. He wrote against Aerius: And maketh this his proper and his first error. And withal Epiphanius telleth, on what occasion of emulation and envy this error sprang and with what odious slanders and devices it was set out, and with what reasons and arguments it was defended, and what multitudes of men and women were alured by it, and how they behaved themselves, etc. All which things draw so near (the heresy of Arius, and other errors of this Aerius set aside) to the foreshadowing of these controversies, that we may all now (with grief and tears) see the very cause, why the malicious and slanderous adversaries of the Gospel, object falsely unto us to be Aerianst because these our brethren (which we do not) do seem so nearly to follow the error, the occasion, the dealings and the arguments of Aerius: in this matter. Now to Epiphanius confutations of them. But let us come (saith he) to the oppositions against him, Epiph. confutation of Aerius. reciting but a few things, and so passing over them, and that indeed because the whole matter is full of folly, and manifest unto those that are wise. For, to say that a Bishop and a priest are equal, how is it possible? sith that the order of bishops is the begetter of the Fathers. For that order begetteth the fathers to the Church. but the order of Priests is not of ability to beget the fathers, but begetteth sons to the Church, by the regeneration of baptism, but not the fathers or Doctors. And how was it possible to ordain a priest, nor having imposition of hands, for to elect, or to say, he is equal unto, a bishop? The B the fathers of the pastors▪ the pastors the father's o● the people. But his trifling and his envy, deceived the foresaid Aerius. But he allegeth for his error, and the error of them that hearken to him: that the Apostle writeth to the Priests and Deacons, and writeth not to the Bishops, and saith to the bishop, despise not the gift that is in thee, which thou hast received by the hands of the priesthood (or eldership,) and again in another place, he writeth to the Bishops and Deacons. Therefore (saith he) a bishop and a priest is all one, and he understandeth not, (being ignorant of the consequence of the truth) and hath not read the most profound histories, that while as the preaching was new, the holy Apostle wrote according to the occasion of the matter, even as it was. The occasion of difference in the apostles writing. For whereas bishops were ordained, there he wrote to bishops and Deacons? For the Apostles could not ordain all things forthwith: for it was needful to have priests and deacons. For, by these two, the ecclesiastical things may be filled up. But whereas there was not found any worthy of a bishopric: the place abode without a bishop. but where as need was, and there were that were worthy of a bishopric, their bishops were ordained. But when as there was no multitude, and there were not found among them that should be ordained priests or elders: there were they content with a bishop only, ordained in that place alone. But it is impossible possible for the Bishop to be without a deacon. And the Apostle provided that Deacons should be made unto the Bishop, for the ministry. Thus did the Church receive the filling up of the dispensation, thus were the places furnished at this time: for every thing had not all things at the first beginning: but in the process of time, those things were provided for, that are requisite to the perfection of things necessary. Indeed Moses was sent into Egypt, (as hath the old Testament) only with a rod▪ but being sent of God, when he should go forth into Egypt, his brother Aaron was added to be an helper unto him: and then after he had given his commission to his brother, a senate was gathered to him▪ and the princes of the people of that time. And after these things, the work being corroborated, and a company to follow him being gathered together, he passed through the sea: and as yet things were not according to the Law, till the Lord called him into the mount: and then he gave him the foldinges (or tables) of the commandments, and showed unto him how he should build the tabernacle, and promote Princes and Captains of ten, of fifty of hundreths and tribunes of the soldiers: And thou seest how things are enlarged. Thou shalt do all things (saith he) according to the form showed thee in the mount Sinai. And thou seest how the cansticke, having seven lights is added, the vestments reaching down to the feet, the preestely garments, the bells, the cloaks, the little coats, the capppes, the mitres, the setting of the precious stones, the Cups, the mortars, the censers, the Basins, the Altars, the dishes, Masmaroth, which are colanders: Midicoth, which are called gobbets, Mechonoth, which are steps, and whatsoever the Law rehearseth, Cherubins and other things. The Ark of the Testament, the staves, the rings, the tent, the collars, the skins died red, the pots and other things, porters, Trumpets cast and crooked, golden and of silver, brazen and of horn, and other things that the Law nameth: divers sacrifices and doctrines. For whereas these things were not at the beginning, did not these things therefore after the order was made put men to business? and even so those things that are written by the apostle, until such time as the Church was enlarged, until she came to her proper measure, until she was most rightly governed with the ornature of understanding, by the Father, the Son, and the holy ghost. And down fell the saying of Aerius. And that it cannot be all one, the divine saying of the Apostle teachet●, who is a bishop, and who is a priest or elder: When as he saith to Timothy, that was a bishop, Rebuke not a Priest or an Elder, but exhort him as a Father. What should a bishop have to do not to reprove a priest or elder, if he had no power over a Priest or elder? even as he saith again, Admit no accusation lightly against a priest or elder, eucept before two or three witnesses, Defence of Epiph. argument. and he said not to any Priest, admit no accusation against a bishop: Neither wrote he to any Priest, that he should not chide a Bishop. And thou seest, that all the ruin of him that is shaken of the devil, is no small ruin. These are the arguments of Epiphanius against Aerius on this matter. Now let us see how This most reverend and learned man, doth answer the arguments of Epiphanius. Epiphanius (saith he) against the Arians, defending the contrary opinion, namely, the bishop ordained by man, The most reverend. as ordained by God, doth bring forth three reasons to the contrary: Two as it were out of the word of God, the third out of the history of those times: the first place is, 1. Timothy 5.1. Rebuke not an elder. etc. It is strange to see, how these our Brethren under countenances and Titles, forestalling the credit of most reverend and learned men, Bridges would carry away the matter, against these reverend and learned aucient Fathers: Yea, and that against the manifest word of God: And first, concerning this Father Epiphanius, hath he here brought forth but three reasons? If this most reverend and learned man himself, in prosecuting Epiphanius reasons, do allege more than three: Epiph. hath more arg. then three. then blame himself, for this so manifest an untruth. Except he will peradventure salve it thus: What though he brought forth threescore? yet we may say, he brought forth three, And think ye we may thus dally with these Fathers? But as he handleth the number of the Reasons: so likewise he proceedeth in the order of them. He saith the first place is 1. Timothy 5.1. If by the first place, he meaneth the first reason that Epiphanius bringeth forth: Epiphanius is most plain to the contrary, and he manifestly inverteth Epiphanius Order. But let us take his answers, as it pleaseth him to answer them. The first place is 1. Timothy 5.1. Rebuke not an Elder. etc. Whereby he gathereth that Timothy had some authority over the Elders, The most reverend, that is, the pastors of the Church of Ephesus: but (be it spoken with the favour of so worthy a man) he should have marked, that here an elder is called, he that is such by age, not he that is a pastor, which is declared by the opposition next following of young men. I deny not, but that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that place is aptly, and most commonly understood, in the natural sense, Bridges. for Elders in respect of age. But to deny that Epiphanius or any other, may not also apply it to Elder in office, which on the Greek, by contraction, Epith. understandeth well enough the name of elder. is called Priest: is too hard a challenge of so worthy a man: especially since he makes the key of his reason on the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: saying, what should a bishop have to do, Defence of Epiph. argument. not to reprove a priest (or elder) if he had no power over a priest (or elder)? And understanding elder in his natural sense for elder in age, as also younger in age, that Timothy should not rebuke them: doth not this presuppose, that he had some power over them so to do? if then Saint Paul anon after in the same chapter, would have Timothy openly reprove them that sin: and there (without all exception) he especially speaketh of the elders in office and pastors: and this inferreth an authority, that Timothy had over the pastoral elders, whereby he might or might not so rebuke or reprove them: how then, is not this reason that Epiphanius maketh a good reason? That, being forbidden to abuse it: he had authority for to use it, and so therein, had some power over them. And that this may be applied, not only to the elder in age: but also to the elder in office: as Epiphanius sets down the whole sentence, rebuke not an elder but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exhort him as a father: So Peter, 1 Pet. 5 1. for this latter part, useth the same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (to the Elders, to whom notwithstanding he was Superior) that Paul prescribeth here to Timothy. To conclude, sith calvin and Beza both confess, that the 20. verse of this chapter is understood of those that are Elders in pastoral office, what differeth it in effect from this sentence? and how holdeth not Epiphanius reason? He might reprove pastors: Ergo he had some authority over them, and so one pastor had at that time a superior authoity over other his fellow pastors. The most reverend. Another place (saith this learned man) is out of the same Epistle, receive not an accusation against an elder. 1. Tim. 5.19. Whereby he gathereth, that the elders were subject to the bishops and tribunal seat: but who will grant him that Timothy was bishop of Ephesus? Bridges Epiphanius here doth mention no tribunal seat at all, nor gathereth his argument in this lose manner, and me thinks (by good reason and law of Logic) if this learned man would deny Epiphanius reason: he should set down his words and make some argument of them: and deny, or grant, or distinguish some part of the argument. For yet at the least, The most reverends il answering Epiph. argument. he did so before. But now he letteth the argument go clean away, & only denieth another assertion: that Epiphanius had set down, before he made the former argument: where only speaking of Timothy, that was (saith he) a bishop. These words, this learned man catcheth up for halting, And as for the argument, that Epiphanius gathereth on Saint Paul's words to Timothy: he meddleth nothing with it. Wherein (me thinks) he goeth wisely (though not so learnedly) to work to slink ● away from the words of the argument, and make as though he saw them not. For if he had but looked on them, he should plainly have seen, how fully they prove the matter now in vestion. those Pastors that have authority given them to admit or not admit accusations made against other pastors, Timothy Bishop of Ephesus. are superior pastors or Bishops unto them. And on the contrary, they that have no such authority given them, are not superior pastors. But Timothy a pastor in Ephesus hath authority given him. 1. Tim. 5. ver. 19 to admit or not admit accusations made against other pastors: and contrariwise, the other pastors in Ephesus have no such authority given them over him: Ergo, Timothy was a superior pastor in Ephesus over the other pastors, That is to say, their Bishop. This being the effect of the argument, this learned man denieth only this, that Timothy was Bishop of Ephesus. But go to, The most reverend. Bridges. let us see how he denies the same, or proves his denial. Who will grant (saith he) that Timothy was Bishop of Ephesus? Forsooth, that will I, for any thing I see yet. Nay rather; not who will; but, who can rightly deny, or elude the force of this, and other arguments that infer it? But saith this most reverend and learned man. The most reverend. Bridges. For the history will easily refel that which the fathers do report as certain. And do the Fathers than report it, and that, as certain? and doth this most reverend and learned man, so confidently ask, who will grant it: when he himself confesseth, that the fathers grant it, and that, as certain? Do they report it as certain, and yet deny it? The Father's report, and that as certain. or is the report that the reverend and learned fathers make, as certain: of so light regard with him? this (me thinks) be he never so much his self, a most reverend and learned man, is a little too much liking of his own, The history of the Acts refelleth not the father's report of Tim. to be B. of Ephes. and too little esteeming of the learned father's judgements. But what reason hath he, why we should thus discredit the Father's report, and, credit his? For the history (saith he) will easily refute it. And what history: the history of the Acts by S. Luke recorded? And did not the fathers know; or did they reject the credit of this history? but let us see how the history will easily refel them. For no man (saith he) can deny, that Timothy was one that accompanied Paul, and therefore no Bishop assigned to any certain place, The most reverend, who was sent one while to this place, another to that, for the establishing of the Churches: and finally, that he was an Evangelist, and not a bishop of any one certain flock. I have desired thee (saith he) to abide at Ephesus, whilst I went into Macedonia. And why so? namely to look to the Church which he had begun to establish, until he were called for again, which he doth in the other epistle. What? and did the Apostle rob the Ephesians of their Bishop, without ask their Church at the least? Surely, when he went last to Jerusalem, never minding to return to Ephesus: either he would have restored Timothy unto them, or the Ephesians would have required him again of the Apostle, when he put them in mind of the great danger at hand? or if another were to be put in his room, he would have made express mention in that his divine Sermon: but he is said to have sent for the elders only, and to have warned them of the duty belonging to them all. Bridges. To all this (save that which is inserted of his being evangelist) I answer with the old rule, distingue tempora, concilias loca, Distinguish the times, & thou reconcilest the places. The time of Timothy being B. after the hist. of the Acts. For, if this epistle were written after Saint Paul's first being prisoner at Rome, as I have already proved it likely enough so to have have been: then is all this descant lost, and the father's report, may be as certain, as they report it, for any thing in the history to the contrary, well enough. Yea, if it had been written before: why might not Timothy (after he was by the Apostle settled, and commanded to stay at Ephesus as bishop) have come from his Bishopric, at Saint Paul's sending for him, to do further good at his return, and another supply his absence at such a time? Neither did Paul rob herein the Ephesians, sending to them another faithful minister to supply his place, or (if he came no more again unto them) to succeed him. And though this change might at the first be somewhat grievous to the Ephesians, yet knowing the Apostles mind and authority herein, no doubt they yielded their willing assent thereto. Of his return the history of Luke mentioneth not, nor any other part of the Scripture: The history of the Magdeburgenses, Cent. 1. lib. 2. cap. 10. pag. 614. lin. 35. writ thus of him: When he was requested of Paul to abide at Ephesus, and there instruct the Church, of the which matter Paul prescribeth to him certain precepts, through out the whole former epistle to Timothy: he stayed at Ephesus. Upon which occasion Eusebius, li. 1. Cap. 14. saith Sophronius and very many other have delivered forth, that he was made the first bishop of the Ephesians, but that he was sent before to the Corinthians, for because also of the ministry, it appeareth out of the former epistle, Chapter 16. and that in joint labour with Paul he wrote the later epistle to the Corinthians 2. Cor. 1. because it is also conjectured out of the Epistle to the Philippians, Chap. 2 that he was with Paul at Rome under Nero: but how, and how long, he ruled Doctor and governor of the Church of Ephesus, nothing plain and certain is delivered forth, of any approved writer. whereupon, neither can we affirm for certain, that at Ephesus, (because, he coming near to the porch of the Temple of Diana, reproved the Idolatry of the Ephesians) he suffered martyrdom, being overwhelmed with stakes and stones, which very many have delivered forth, as Antoninus, and Vincentius, Lib. 38. Chap. 10. out of Polycrates the Priest or elder. Henricus de Erephordia, that said Timothy suffered under Nerua: but Nicephorus, Lib. 3. chap. 71. under Domitian. As for the Ephesians requiring him again, (when Paul Act. 20. was at Miletum, and foretold the bishops there collected of the great danger at hand) ariseth only on this learned man's surmise, that Timothy's being among the Ephesians, and his calling away from them, was before Paul's coming to Miletum. Which both we have sufficiently improved, neither can it agree either with the former, or especially with the later Epistle of Paul to Timothy. For how could they require him again of Saint Paul, or that he would restore Timothy unto them: when in the former Epistle Paul requireth him, that as he left him there, so he would tarry there? and in the later Epistle he writeth for him being there, to come from thence to Rome to Paul, where he was then prisoner and ready to be offered up to death: so that, all that while, he was not from them, and this was long after Paul's being at Miletum: and so with all, this unnecessary conjecture depending héereon, is clean cut off: that if another had been put in his room, Paul would have made express mention thereof: or of the others name, in that his divine sermon. For, neither is it likely, that of all things then and there done or spoken, in that his divine sermon, express mention is made, but only of that, that was sufficient for Luke to have expressed, to that purpose, for the which he sets down that his divine sermon, Neither could this sending for of Timothy be mentioned then, Tychicus sent in supply of Timothy. which was done in another place, and long after, in the other Epistle, Chapter 5. as this learned man himself confesseth: and yet even there, Paul plainly, expresseth also, whom he sent to Ephesus, even by name, Tichicus, when he sent for Timothy to come from them. But least none of all these shifts should serve the turn: This learned man also hath learned the old refuge, that he was an Evangelist: and then for sooth, what authority soever he had: The most reverend. Yet it need not seem strange to any, that the Evangelist Timothy, a man endued with so many, and so great gifts remaining at Ephesus, did govern all things by his direction, as one in degree above the Elders, and by the Apostles authority appointed there for a time. Bridges. This seemeth somewhat strange, at least to me, that this most reverend and learned man, should deal in this matter in so strange a fashion. For that after these arguments of Epiphanius, enforcing a superior authority in Timothy, are by him slatlye denied, and with these shifts eluded: here in the end it is now granted, that both he had a superior authority over the Pastors of Ephesus, and that he remained there, and that he governed all things by his direction. Which withal, The shift of Timothy's evangelistship. implieth an higher authority then either Epiphanius urged, or is in question, Howbeit, here is yet another stolen shift. This is not granted him as Bishop, but as Evangelist, and as a man endued with so many and great gifts. For his gifts, they are no hindrance why he might be no Bishop, The shift of Timothy's being an Evangelist. nor any debar to any other Bishop, but rather the contrary: both he was the better bishop, and the better example to all other Bishops. The gifts of S. Steven bebarre not, but another which hath not so many and so great gifts may be Deacon, as well as he. As for Timothy's being an Evangelist, because Paul bids him, do the work of an Evangelist. If this be enough to prove he was an Evangelist: then whereas the words in the same sentence, 2. Tim. 4. ver. 5. Immediately follow, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, fulfil thy Deaconship or ministry, it should follow he was a Deacon or a Minister jointly with his evangelistship, and so was Titus, and those that were joined with him, as appeareth, 2. Co. 7. ver. 6.7 6. that Titus fulfilled this work of a Deacon, and gathered the alms and benevolence of the Corinthians, How one person the head, divers functions at once. and Paul requested Titus, ver. 6. that as he & 13. c. 8.1. had begun, so he would fulfil this benevolence, And ver. 16. he giveth God thanks, that he put such carefulness for them in Titus his hart, and commendeth his promptness to travail herein. And verse 18. he saith: But we have sent together with him, that brother whose praise is in the Gospel, through all the Churches etc. On which words saith calvin; that three are sent: it is an argument, that a great great expectation was conceived of the Corinthians, whereupon it behoved them to be more heedful unto their duty, least they should deceive the hope of the Churches. Moreover, who this second was, it is uncertain, ●aue that some conjecture it was Luke, other that it was Barnabas. chrysostom rather thinketh it was Barnabas, to whom I assent, because it is certain he was by the voices of the Churches, joined a companion with Paul. Howbeit because it is received by the common consent almost of all, that Luke was one of those that carried his Epistle, I mislike not to have him assigned to the third place. As for the second, whosoever in conclusion it was, he adorneth him with a notable testimony, that he was exercised in the gospel with commendation, that is, he deserved praise in promoting the Gospel. Gualther (and much better in my opinion) thinketh rather that it was Saint Luke, and could not be Barnabas, scythe Paul and Barnabas fell at strife about Mark, and parted asunder, Acts 15. verse 39 before the Corinthians were as yet converted to the faith. But were it the one or the other: ●●the both here, with Titus, he did so diligently exercise and fulfil the work of a Deacon: and Barnabas was a Doctor: and Luke an Evangelist: and Titus also is called of calvin an Euangeliste: if these offices then (without confusion of them) might be thus jointly combined in person person, why might not Timothy be as well a Bishop as a Deacon, though he were also an Evangelist? He could not (saith he) be a Bishop. No? And why so? For, a Bishop is one that is assigned to a certain place: but, no man can deny that Timothy was one, that accompanied Paul; and therefore no Bishop assigned to any certain place, who was sent one while to this place, another to that, for the establishing of the Churches. And had not a Deacon a certain place to, although on occasion he might be sent to another? Timothy did not accompany Paul from place to place. But a Bishop must be Bishop of a certain flock. Timothy was not a Bishop of any certain flock: This is a mere flock and not true. Did Timothy accompany Paul from place to place, after he was assigned of Paul to settle himself at Ephesus? Had he not then a certain flock, and was assigned to a certain place? And did he not there remain (even by this learned man's own confession) till in the later Epistle. S. Paul again sent for him, and appointed another to supply his absence? And therefore, although an Evangelist, yet a Bishop. And why not an Evangelist and a Bishop: as well as an Apostle and a Bishop, as S. james was? Yea, if an Evangelist, than a Bishop. Zuinglius in his book of a preachers office, saith on this wise, upon the chief place Ephes. 4. so earnestly urged by all our Brethren. Zuinglius in Ecclesiast. Paul in this his distribution of offices, mentioneth Evangelists in the third place, whom he saith to be no less ordained of Christ, than are those other. But the office of an Evangelist differeth no whit at all, from that office that is committed to a prophet, if so be that we take a Prophet (as right now was said) for a watch man, which rooteth up that which is evil, and planteth that which is good. The office of an Evangelist, the same that a Bishop. Neither is also an Euangeliste any other than a Bishop, or than he is whom he call a Pastor, as we may certainly gather out of S. Paul's words, (in which calling upon his Timothy) he saith: But watch thou in all things, hard●n thyself in afflictions, do throughly the work of an Evangelist, make thy ministery approved to the full. 2. Tim. 4. But Timothy at that time when Paul wrote these things to him, performed the office of a Bishop: where-upon it is evident, that according to the opinion of Paul the office of a Bishop and of an Evangelist is all one. Which thing every man may easily gather by the words also of Paul going before. About the beginning of the same Chapter, he writeth thus: Preach the word, urge it in season and out of season reprove, rebuke, exhort with all lenity and doctrine. What shall we call this any thing else, than to be the office of a Bishop of a Prophet & of a Pastor? What can be plainer than these words of Zuinglius? Neither are these (as Megander in his commentary on the Ephesians saith) vain & frivolous reasons, but weighty reasons. But had we no other reason than out of calvin, with the assertion of this our Learned brethren's discourse, saying: a Pastor is all one and the same that is a Bishop: Imposition of hands. yet (say they) Timothy had the office of an Elder. And Timothy (saith calvin on, 1. Tim. 4. verse, 14.) was a Pastor, yea, the holy-ghost (saith he) had destinated by Oracle Timothy to be chosen into the order of Pastors: Ergo, Timothy even by the appointment of the holy Ghost was a Bishop. Now if Timothy were a Bishop: then also by Epiphanius reason out of S. Paul (which holdeth for any thing by this most Reverend and learned man alleged against his reason) he was a Superior also of other Pastors. Yea, as calvin saith upon these words to Timothy: Let no man despise thy youth, but be an example of the faithful in word, etc. as though he said, see that in gravity of manners thou gettest to thyself so much reverence, Timothy's excelling the other Pastors in Ephesus not only in example of life, but in superior dignity & authority and that continuing all his abode among them that thy youthful age, which otherwise is wont to be subject to contempt, diminish no-whitte of thy authority. whereupon we acknowledge that Timothy was yet a young man, who notwithstanding did far excel many Pastors. Which excellency being not only of gravity in virtue, but also of authority; which both S. Paul's words give, as Epiphanius reasoneth, and this most Reverend and learned man, himself liberally confesseth, that Timothy being a man endued with so many, and so great gifts, remaining at Ephesus, did govern all things by his direction: How doth not this necessarily follow hereupon, that one Pastor and the same a Bishop had a superior authority in the Apostle time, and by the Apostles authority, appointed there for a time, over other Pastors, and even of the same degree that they were of in respect, (as calvin saith) of Pastorship, which is the point in question, and yet in dignity and authority above them? Neither here sufficeth this poor shift, to say he was so appointed there for a time; sith this time is not of any present assembly, but of a long continuance, and whether any assemble were holden, yea or no. Now that this most reverend and learned man hath held Epiphanius thus short, as though he would yield somewhat more unto him of his free courtesy, he saith: The most reverend. But let us grant Epiphanius more than this, that Timothy had the authority of the laying on of hands out of these words of the Apostle, Lay not hands suddenly upon any. Let us grant this too, that these duties belonged to the governors: yet we deny, that Timothy could have had any authority therefore, over the Elders of Ephesus, except he had been an Evangelist. Bridges These grants come in so freshly, one on another's neck, as though greater & greater matters were granted, then was of fine force before confessed. This most reverends lieralitie i● 〈◊〉 Whereas indeed, either less and less is granted then was before, and much of that pulled back: or else in conclusion, cometh all to the former stop, wiping all away as before, with the name and title of Evangelist. Before at length, he confessed: that Timothy governed all things by his direction, as one in degree above the Elders. And is this now more, that he had the authority of laying on of hands? This is but one thing, and before we had all things governed by his direction. And how then cometh in this grant upon the other: Imposition of hands. But let us grant Epiphanius more than this, that he did govern all things by his direction? Or rather, mought he not much better have said, Let us deny that which we have granted him, or, in all things grant him less? But more, or less: how come in these things as grants, from this most Reverend and learned man? As though it lay in his free choice and liberal grant: when it cometh out of these words of the Apostle, Say not hands suddenly upon any. For, if it come not out of these words; how dare he grant it out of them? Will he grant an untruth? And if the words enforce it, then gramercy Paul's words, and not his grant: for he granteth nothing more, than he is driven unto. But there is here yet another grant, that perhaps is more free & worth the taking at his hands, where he saith, Let us grant this too, that these duties belonged to the Governors. What duties (trow we) are those he speaketh of? For he named but one ceremony, of the laying on of hands. And who are these governors that (he saith) this belonged unto? For if he mean by governors (as do our Brethren the Learned discoursers) for the signory of Elders, being not Pastors: then have we spun a fair thread, and gotten a goodly catch of all these grants. But if he mean by the Governors, the Pastors that had a superiority in governing their fellow brethren Pastors, that the imposition of hands pertaineth only or chiefly unto them, as he granteth here, it did to Timothy: then I grant indeed it is a further grant, Timothie● superiority in imposition of hands. than was his last grant, and I ta●t it thankfully at his hands. And, though it be not so much, as was the last grant before granted, that all things were governed by his direction: yet will it be enough, even by that one thing, at least to infer a superiority of a Pastor, to have been then in use among the Pastors. But now upon both these liberal grants, (lest they should seem too prodigal a gift,) cometh in a restraint. Still the old shift of Evangelist helps all. Yet we deny that Timothy could have had any authority therefore, over the Elders of Ephesus, except he had been an Evangelist. Here is again our old exception. So that, if Timothy were not an Evangelist, our grants are revoked and all is dashed, then had he no authority over the Elders of Ephesus. Nay, that is more hard against him, he could not have had any over them, except he had been an Evangelist. But, he had it; Ergo, he was an Evangelist. Or, The name of eldership. he was an Evangelist, Ergo, he had it. But, if now all lie upon this point: we have said somewhat unto it already, and these words of Paul carry some probability that Paul bids him fulfil the work of an Evangelist. But that infers not any necessity, that he was an Evangelist. We are bidden all of us, His evangelistship doubtful, & not necessary in that matter. in many places to fulfil the work of God. But every kind of fulfilling the works that God bids us do, argueth not that we be God. But, were he an Evangelist, or were he not; how hangs this exception with these grants? For, if the laying on of hands belong to the Governors: And Timothy had the authority of laying on of hands belonging to him, out of these words of the Apostle, lay not hands suddenly upon any: how then, had not Timothy authority of that, that belonged to the Governors? And so, in that point, he had a superiority over them. Except he shall yet reply, that they had this superiority as well as he. And what need had he then herein, to be an Evangelist, more than they? So that, it being granted, that he had so much as the residue had not; it followeth of necessity, were he Evangelist, or were he not, they must needs confess by the virtue of these words of Saint Paul, lay not hands suddenly upon any, that he had a superior authority, and this shift of being Evangelist will not yet bear out the matter. But if this will not serve, well far an other. The most reverend. For Paul himself 1. Tim. 4.14. doth show sufficiently, that the laying on of the hands, was done, in the name of the Eldership itself, not by the authority of any superior. True it is, that Paul useth there the name of the Eldership itself. But doth this impugn, that he which was the person that laid his hands on him which was ordained Pastor, Bridges had in that action no superior authority over him? Was not this action a solemn kind of blessing, and the party laying on his hands, not only presenteth him to God, but representeth God, Imposition of hands pertained to a superior. signifying that God receiveth him, both into his protection, and into that especial function? And the minister thereof in so doing, pronounceth the blessing of God upon him, and prayeth for him, and receiveth him, in the name of God and offereth him to God as a minister consecrated to him. Which reverent ceremony is yet used in the ordaining of ministers. And doth not this rule of Paul hold herein. Hebr. 7.7. out of doubt, that which is less is blessed of that which is greater? So that, if this action pertained unto one more than to the residue: no doubt it betokened in him a great authority in the same. But Beza denieth that it was one man's action, and saith that the hands were laid on him, by the Ephesine Elders. And on this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, the order of the Elders: by the which name (saith he) it is probable, that the company of all those are signified, which laboured in the word, in the Church of Ephesus. Act. 20. d. 17. f. 28. But, because Beza here makes this but probable, & that there is no necessity so to think: Laying on of hands. we may rather herein follow calvin, Bezaes' Master, who saith on the same place, 1. Tim. 4. 14. It was an usual and solemn thing to the Apostles, calvin in 1. Tim. 4.14. to ordain ministers by laying on of hands. And indeed of this custom, and of the original and signification thereof, I have somewhat touched before, and the residue we may fetch out of my institution. Presbyterium, priesthood (or Eldership). They that think this name to be here collective, put for the college of Priests (or Elders) do in my judgement, think well. Howbeit, all things considered▪ I confess, that the other sense doth not fit it amiss, that it should be the name of the office. He put the ceremony for the act itself of the ordaining. So then, the sense is, that Timothy, when as he was called into the ministery, by the voice of the Prophets, and then ordained by the solemn custom: was withal furnished with the grace of the holy Ghost, to execute his function, etc. But, because this is spoken so darkly, that we see not yet, on which sense he resolveth; and that he referreth us to his Institutions: let us see there, what he determines on it. In his Institutions, Calvin. Institut. cap. 8. sect. 50. cap. 8. sect. 50. The rite of ordaining doth remain, to the which in the calling we have given the last place. It is certain the Apostles used no other ceremony, than the laying on of hands, when they admitted any to the ministery. I suppose this rite or ceremony flowed, from the custom of the hebrews, who by the laying on of hands, as it were represented to God, the thing that they would have to be blessed and consecrated. So jacob, when he would bless Ephraim and Manasses, The ancient custom of laying o● of hands. laid his hands upon their heads, which thing our Lord followed, when he prayed upon the infants. In the same signification, (as I suppose) did the jews by the prescription of the law, lay their hands upon their sacrifices. Wherefore, the Apostles by the laying on of hands, did signify, that they presented him to God, whom they did enter into the ministery. Albeit, they used it also upon them, to whom they conferred the visible graces of the spirit. Howsoever it were, this was a solemn rite, so often as they called any man into the Ecclesiastical ministery. Thus did they consecrate Pastors & Doctors: thus Deacons. And although there remain no certain commandment, concerning laying on of hands: yet because we see, it was in perpetual use with the Apostles, that, The force among us of this ancient ceremony. so precise observation of them, aught to be unto us, in steed of a commandment. And verily, it is profitable that by such a sign, both the ministry should be commended to the people; and also that he which is ordained should be admonished, that now he is not his own man, but is addicted into a service unto God, and to his Church. Moreover, it shall not be a void sign, if it shall be restored into his right original. For, if the spirit of God hath ordained in the Church nothing in vain, we shall perceive that this ceremony, Laying on of hands. sith that it came from him, is not unprofitable, so it be not turned into a superstitious abuse. lastly, we must hold this, that the whole multitude laid not their hands on the ministers, The Pastor's hands alone but the Pastors alone. notwithstanding, it is uncertain whether more of them, did always lay on their hands, yea or no. Verily, it is evident, that in the Deacons, in Paul, and Barnabas, and in a few others, that was done. But in another place Paul himself mentioneth, that he, and not other more, laid his hands on Timothy. I admonish thee (saith he) that thou stir up the grace which is in thee, by the laying on of my hands. For that which is said in the other Epistle, of the laying on of hands, of the Eldership, I do not so take it, as though Paul spoke, of the college of the Elders: but by this name, I understand the very ordaining itself: as though he should say, see that the grace be not frustrate, which by the laying on of hands thou hast received, when I created thee a Priest or Elder. And in Caluines' commentary on the said place, 2. Tim. 1. verse, 6. his words are these: calvin in 2. Tim. 1.6. There is no doubt, but Timothy was wished for, with the common wishes of the Church, and not elected by the private will or choice of Paul alone. But it is not absurd, that Paul ascribeth the election privately to himself, of the which he was the chiefest author. Although, here he treateth rather of the ordaining, than of the election of him, that is to wit, of the solemn custom of instituting of him. Furthermore, it is not clearly apparent, whether that, when any was to be consecrated a Minister, all were wont to lay their hands upon his head: Caluines' judgement for the laying on of hands by one only, against the judgement of this most reverend man. or else, one only, in the place and name of all: but the conjecture inclineth rather to this, that there was one only that laid on his hands. Concerning that which appertaineth to the ceremony, the Apostles borrowed it of the ancient custom of their Nation, or rather retained it while it was yet in use. For this is a part of the comeliness, that Paul other where commendeth. Although it may be doubted, whether this present laying on of hands, may be referred to the ordaining. Because at that time the graces of the spirit, of which he discourseth Roman. 12. & 1. Cor. 13. were by laying on of hands, The laying on of hands was the ordaining. given also to many others, that were not ordained Pastors. But I easily gather out of the former Epistle, that Paul here treateth of the office of a Pastor. For this place agreeth with that. neglect not the grace which is given to thee, The Eldership is the office of the Pastor. with the laying on of the hands of the Eldership. Thus thoroughly, we see Caluines judgement, that this laying on of hands was a solemn kind of ceremony, used in the ordaining of ministers, to present them to God, and in the name of God, to bless and consecrate them. Epiphanius argument. Which action was done more commonly by one man only, being a more principal person than all the residue, (as was Paul and other the Apostles) than by the hands of all or many Pastors, joined with him, albeit, it were by their consents and voices, and in the name of all the Church or Elders. Not, that every minister had equal authority, in the action: For, although the whole may well be said, to have a greater authority, than any peculiar part: yet it followeth not, but that there may be difference of authority, and some higher and some lower, in the comparison of the several and particular parts one with another, and one minister superior in dignity to another. As, Paul superior in this action unto Timothy, and Timothy unto other Pastors. And although of Paul it might be said, he was an Apostle: yet in Timothy, here is no other respect had, but that he was a Priest or Pastoral Elder, as calvin expounds Paul's words, when I created thee a Priest or Elder. And this office of Priesthood or Eldership, and not the College or Consistory of the Elders, draweth nearer to the Apostles meaning. And thus much for this most reverend and learned man's confutation of Epiphanius arguments out of the Scripture. Now (saith he) the reasons of the same Epiphanius are these. Bishops (saith he) beget the Fathers of the Church, but Elders the sons, The most reverend. in as much as Bishops and not Elders ordained Bishops. But what is this else, then to ask to have that which is in question: For it may be and aught to be answered, that the Bishops took that authority upon them, without warrant of the word of God, and that the rule is false, which concerning this matter, doth attribute it to the Apostles, which may be showed by the ordaining of Timothy by the Eldership. It seemeth, that this Learned man, accounteth all the reasons which he hath already alleged out of Epiphanius, to be no reasons. Else, Bridges how saith he here? Now, the reasons of the same Epiphanius are these, etc. But how then said he before, The most reverends contradiction to himself. that Epiphanius doth bring forth three reasons: two as it were out of God's word, etc. and when he hath alleged them in the order afore said, (the first place is, 1. Tim. 5.1. etc. another place is out of the same Epistle, etc.) and travailed as we have heard to confute them; then (as though all this while, he had yet alleged or confuted no reason) he cometh in saying: Now, the reasons of the same Epiphanius are these, etc. What reason is in this dealing, especially of such a most reverend and learned man? But if these following, are his only reasons: good reason he should report them right, and not make them other than they be. Bishops (saith he) beget the Fathers of the Church, Epiph words and reasons misreported. but Elders the sons, in as much as Bishops and not Elders ordained Bishops. Doth Epiphanius reason thus? Or, to this purpose? His words are these. To say that a Bishop and a Priest (or Elder) are equal, how is it possible? The words of Epiph. For, the order of Bishops is the begetter of the Fathers, for, it begetteth the Fathers of the Church. But, the order of Priests or Elders is not able to beget the Fathers: it begetteth the sons of the Church, by the regeneration of the washing, but not the Fathers or the Doctors. And how was it possible for a Priest or Elder to obtain, not having the laying on of hands to elect? Or, to say that he is equal with a Bishop? The plain meaning of these words. The plain meaning here of Epiphanius is this: the Bishops beget, that is, ordain Pastors and ministers of the word and Sacraments, which Pastors or Ministers, he calleth Fathers or Doctors of the Church. But these Pastors or Ministers, whom he calleth Fathers or Doctors, being no Bishops, do not again beget, that is, ordain, (or make) other Fathers or Doctors, but do only (saith he) beget the sons of the Church, that is, the faithful people, by preaching the word and baptizing of them: the Bishops therefore having a further authority, to wit, of making ministers, then have the ministers whom they make: how i● the Bishops and the ministers authority equal? This is indeed the tru● meaning of Epiphanius his reason. He that can do more: hath more power, than he which only can do less. But the Bishop can do more than the Priest or Elder can do, for the Bishop can make Priests and Elders which the Priests or Elders can not do. Therefore the bishop hath more power than the Priest o● Elder that is no Bishop. This being in effect the argument of Epiphanius: this Learned man turned all to this, that Epiphanius should say: The most reverends mistaking of Epiphanius words. Bishops beget the Fathers of the Church, but Elders the sons, in as much as Bishops and not Elders ordained Bishops. As though he spoke only of ordaining Bishops; or, by Fathers meant only bishops; and by sons, Priests or Elders of the Church. Whereas, Epiphanius confesseth: bishops, and Priests or Elders, both of them to be Fathers and Doctors of the Church. But in this behalf of ordaining any of these Fathers, either Bishops or Priests; the Bishops had a prerogative above the Priests, and so, their authority is notequall. This is the very argument and reason that Epiphanius maketh. Now, Ep●ph doth not demand but prove that that is in question. what saith our most Reverend and learned man to this argument? But what is this else, (saith he) then to ask to have that which is in question? And why so? Epiphanius here asketh nothing. The question here i● this. The ground of Epiph. argument. Whether Bishops and Priests be in dignity and authority equal and all one? Epiphanius proveth they be not, by this argument: They that be equal and all one in dignity and authority: the one can do in all things as much as the other, and not one more than the other. But the Bishops can make Bishops & Priests, The most reverendes answer. which the Priests themselves can not do: therefore, Bishops & Priests are not equal and all one. That the B. can, or the Priest can not do this, which is here avouched; this is not the question, but depends upon it, or else, he could make indeed no reason. If now, this assertion be untrue; improve it, and never say; what is this else, than to ask to have that which is in question. But, go to now. What reason hath this Learned man to improve it? For it may be, and aught to be answered, that the Bishops took that authority upon them, without warrant of the word of God. I think it may be indeed thus answered, of a man, The most reverends unreverend & untrue answer. that would unreverently slander he cares not whom, and answer contrary to all truth and learning: but, that it ought to be answered so, of any man, and especially, of a most Reverend and Learned man: be it spoken with reverence, I think the clean contrary. Did not this most reverend and learned man himself grant before, The most reverends former grant overthrows this answer. but even on the other side the lease, that Timothy had the authority of the laying on of hands? And what here was that, but ordaining Bishops & Pastors? Except therefore, all those proves be improved, that infer Timothy was B. of Ephesus: and this of Timothy conferred with james and Simeon after him at jerusalem, and Titus in Creta: it is apparent, that Bishops took not that authority upon them, without warrant of the word of God. But thi●, that he saith, it may be, The most reverend. and aught to be answered, stayeth not here, for he addeth: And that the rule is false, which concerning this matter doth attribute it to the Apostles. Here is a rule indeed, for this matter, of ordaining ministers. Did not the Apostles take upon them the authority to ordain Bishops and Elders? Doth not S. Paul confess, that he took that authority on him? Bridges. The most reverendes far more unreverend denying the manifest scripture. And is God's word itself also, become a false rule, which is the rule of truth, that attributeth this matter to the Apostles? What could the open adversaries of the word of God, have spoken worse against the word of God? And how now shall this be showed, that the word of God doth not attribute this to the Apostles? Which may be showed (saith he) by the ordaining of Timothy by the Eldership. The most reverend, And have we not heard even by calvin, the matter clearly and at large showed, that not only the ordaining of Timothy was done by Paul alone: but also that it was the common use to be done by Paul alone? And that this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Eldership, Bridges. signifieth in that place, not the College, Consistory, or company of Elders, but the office of the Elders. Yea Beza also yieldeth so far thereunto. Ordaining & electing So that, the ordaining of Timothy showeth, not by the Eldership▪ that the rule is false: but that the rule is true which concerning this matter, (that is, the ordaining of Elders, by the laying on of hands) doth attribute it to the Apostles. Scythe now, none of all these fetches will serve; have we any more shifts left to help the matter? Again for as much as election is the chief ground of Church offices, The most reverend. which dependeth of the voices of the whole company, and not of the laying on of hands, which made not Bishops, but sent them into their possession after they had made them: we may more truly affirm with the Apostle, that the holy Ghost by the voices of the children themselves, made the Fathers, and not the Bishops. Here is yet one or two devices more together. And first, sith the ordaining of Bishops and Pastors of the Church, Bridges. is so manifest a prerogative of the Bishops: The most Rev. flees from the ordaining to the electing. to elevate the same, and to withdraw us from it, to the election of them, which he calleth the chief ground of Church offices; I can not tell, what he may gather ofthese words, the chief ground: but I take not election to be the chief point, to prove the prerogative of superior dignity and authority. For, as there is a difference between these two, (as is confessed already by calvin): so, though the election proceed from other grounds, as from the causes, why the party is to be elected, and so, tend more to his commendation that is elected, or their profit for whose sake he is elected: The grounds & causes of the election. yet is the ordaining and giving him the office that he is elected unto, many times both the greater dignity and authority to the giver, and the surer state unto the taker. Although, no certain rule can be made hereof. For many a mean man may give possession of a thing, who notwithstanding hath not the gift thereof, nor any voice in electing him thereto. And again, many a one may give a voice in the election, which hath not yet so great dignity and authority, When the people elected, yet were they neither superior, nor equal to the Pastors. as solemnly to invest the party elected, in the office and possession of the same. For, if election (as here is said) dependeth on the voices of the whole company, as, when the people had the election of their Bishop: and it was said, Qui praefecturus est omnibus, ab omnibus eligatur: He that must rule all, must be elected of all: shall we now say, that every one among the people, that had a voice in election of the Bishop; had a superior, or had but an equal dignity and authority, with him that consecrated and ordained him Bishop? And is the action of consecrating and ordaining by laying on of hands, (being indeed an higher action than giving a voice in the election, yea, than is the whole election) so far debased under election, and election so advanced over it, that it is héer● said, it made not Bishops, but sent them into their possession, after they had made them, meaning the people that elected them? And is the electing then to be a B. the making of a Bishop? And is the ordaining of a B, and the laying on of hands upon him & the solemn action which the Apostles used, & whereof Paul gave such a charge & prerogative to Tim. & to Titus, but the sending them into their possession, which other had given them? And did not the Apostles, nor Titus, nor Timothy, but the people make them? Did the people then make Bishops? And had the Apostles less authority in making Bishops, than had the people? And what mean these speeches, that the election dependeth on the voices of the whole company? What is here meant by the company? Are not the people, of the company, as well as the Clergy? And must it needs be the whole company? May not mayor pars, or signior, or sanior: the greater, the signior, the sounder part serve: but that it must depend on the voices of the whole company, Neither di● the election depend on the voices of the whol● company. or else, it is no election? indeed election dependeth not upon the laying on of hands: but rather the laying on of hands upon election. But yet is not this true, that is here said: The laying on of hands, which made not Bishops, but sent them in to their possession after they had made them? For, of the twain, rather, the laying on of hands doth make them: and not send them, but set them in the possession of their office, by making of them officers. Whereas the election (whosoever elected them) did but elect or choose them before, to be afterwards made, by laying the hands upon them. But now, be the election of never so many, and of the whole company; may there not be such a difference also of superior dignity and authority even in the electors, difference of dignity and authority even in the elections. that perhaps a few, yea, some one may carry a greater stroke, than many among them, or than all the residue, and have (as they say) a voice negative, A negative voice in election. to counterpoise all their voices affirmative? When Paul had Titus to ordain or make Priests or Elders in every City in Creta: He seemeth (saith calvin thereupon) to permit too much unto Titus, while he bids him make ministers over all the Churches. For this should be in a manner a regal power. And furthemore, by this means, the right of electing is taken away from every Church, and the judgement from the college of the Pastors. But this had been, to profane all the holy administration of the Church. But the answer is easy. It is not permitted unto the will of Titus, that he alone might do all things, & put into the Churcher what Bishops it pleased him: but only, that he should govern the elections, How Titus moderated the elections. as a Moderator, according as it is necessary. This kind of speech is common enough. So the Consul, or the Regent in the time of vacancy, or the Dictator, is said to create consuls. For that, Interrex. he held the sessions or meetings, in which they were to be chosen. So also speaketh Luke of Paul and Barnabas, in the Act. 14.13. not that they only, as at their commandment, set Pastors over the Churches, neither allowed nor know 〈◊〉 ●●cause they ordained fit men, Superiority in the election. which were chosen or desired of the people. We earn indeed of this place, that there was not then such equality among the ministers of the Church, but that some one man was above them, Caluines clear confession against the ministers equality in the time of the Apostles. in authority and in Counsel: but this was nothing to that tyrannical and profane custom of collations, which reigneth in the Popedom. For the manner of the Apostles was far different. Whereby it is apparent, that there was not such equality in the ministry in the Apostles days, and in the primitive Church, as is pretended, but that as some one, was the principal doer, in the making and consecrating of the Pastors and Fathers of the Church: A principal governor in the elections & what authority Calvin saith he had. so also, some one was the principal governor even in the election. Which, though he used no tyranny, force, self-will, nor absolute power therein, as the Pope used: yet was it comparable to a consuls, to a Regentes, yea to a Dictator's authority in some respects also, in the electing or creating of a Consul. But at least, he was above them, both in Counsel and in authority. And therefore this conclusion which cometh in with the other shift, under the name of the holie-Ghoste, saying: We may more truly affirm with the Apostle, that the holie-Ghoste by the voices of the children themselves, made the fathers, and not the Bishops: Is but a blaze to dazzle men's eyes withal, if not also, a dangerous sin (were it wittingly committed, as I hope it is not) against the work of the holy Ghost. Besides the injury here offered to the Apostle Paul and to Timothy and Titus that had and used this authority. True it is, the Apostle saith: Act. 20. ver. 28. that the holy-ghost made them. And true it is also, that the children may have, and had their voices towards the making of them: but doth this follow, that Paul made none? Or, that Timothy & Titus (being Bishops, as is proved) made none: which is here so peremptorily concluded saying: & not the Bishops? If they made none, they broke Paul's commandment. If they made any, and were Bishops: then Bishops made them, although the holy Ghost made them to. Because, they were not made without the holy Ghost: because, they were made of the Bishops in such godly order, as the holie-Ghoste did allow of: and because, they were men inspired with the holy Ghost, and furnished with his gifts, to do their duties. And such men, because the godly people wished for, (as calvin saith, they did wish for Timothy) or gave their assents and voices of approbation of the Apostles election and ordaining of Tim. & Titus, and also approved both Tim. & Titus his election & ordaining of other godly and learned Pastors over them: therefore, howsoever the holy Ghost by the voices of the children, made the fathers; the holy Ghost, as the principal author, & the sanctifier of them by his invisible or (if visible) miraculous operation in them: and the children, Our Breath. joining with Aerius. by wishing and approving, either by voices, or holding up their hands, at the naming of them: yet, since for the outward form of them, the Government of the elections, lay in Timothy and Titus; and (as calvin saith) in some one man, as a moderator, as a Consul, as a Regent in an interim, and as a Dictator, though, not like a tyrant and a Pope; and sith also after the election done, the laying on of hands, which was the consecrating, ordaining, or making, belonged also most commonly (as calvin saith) to one only, as here to Timothy and Titus Bishops: It may well therefore, and truly be said and justified, without injury to the fact, of the holy Ghost, yea, to the glory of the holy Ghost, & without detriment to the children, or prejudice to the whole company: that the B. made the Pastors or Fathers of the Church, & still may make them, for any thing here alleged to the contrary. Another of his reasons is, (saith this most reverend and learned man, The most reverend. against Ephipanius) a depraving of places alleged out of Paul, that the Church being new borne, Bishops could not be so established every where at the first, as it is to be seen in the election of Deacons. Whom yet can Epiphanius persuade, that it was for want of fit men only, that there were many Bishops in every Church? And is there yet behind another of Epiphanius his reasons, Bridges. & that of places alleged out of Paul? Then was there more than 3. reasons; yea, more than two (as it were) out of the word of God. So truly, this Learned man, told us before, that Epiphanius did bring forth 3. reasons to the contrary, two (as it were) out of the word of God. But, what places alleged out of Paul, hath Epiph. here depraved? Aërius indeed depraved 2. places alleged out of Paul. Whereof Epiph. saith: But his trifling & emulation hath deceived the foresaid Aërius. But he allegeth for his error, & the error of them that hear him, that which the Apostle writeth to the Priests & Deacons, & writeth not to the B. & that he saith unto a B. despise not the gift that is in thee, which thou hast received by the hands of the Eldership. And again in an other place, Our Breath. allegations of the same places against the B. that A●rius alleged. he writeth to the Bishops & Deacons. Wherefore (saith he) a B. and a Priest or Elder is all one. And these places here alleged out of Paul by this Aërius, are now also for the self same purpose, alleged likewise by our Brethren, in their Learned discourse, as we have heard at large discussed: but what saith Epiphanius héereunto? And he knew not (saith Epiphanius) being ignorant of the consequence of the truth, and had not read the most profound histories, that the holy Apostle when as the preaching was new, wrote according to the matter sprung up, even as he had it. For, where Bishops were already ordained, he wrote to Bishops and to Deacons. For, Epiph. reason. the Apostles could not ordain all things by and by. Of Priests (or Elders) and Deacons there was need. For by these two the Ecclesiastical affairs may be accomplished. But where there was not found any worthy of the office of a Bishop: the place remained without a Bishop: but where there was need, & there were men worthy the office of a Bishop: there Bishops were ordained. But when there was no multitude, there was not found among them those that should be made Priests or Elders, and they were content with a Bishop alone, ordained in the place. But it is not possible for a bishop to be without a Deacon. And the holy Apostle put to this care that there should be Deacons to the Bishop for the ministery. Thus did the Church receive the fillinges up of the dispensation: thus were the places at that time. For every thing had not all at the first beginning: but in process of time, those things were gotten, which were requisite for the perfection of things necessary. Thus truly and gravely did Epiphanius answer these allegations of Aërius. And what depraving of places alleged out of Paul is here? Epiphanius depraved not the Apostles places. Was not this apparent, in the Deacons, which at the first, were not any especial office, till on occasion growing afterward? And doth not this stand with good reason, that (the Church being, as it were, new and green among the Gentiles) Bishops could not every where at the first, be so established? And do we not read, how in some Churches sometimes are mentioned only Apostles and Elders, Act. 15. for Ecclesiastical functions? All offices of the ministry not at the first in all places. And in Antioch, Act. 21. Besides Paul and Barnabas, who were also Apostles, are mentioned only, Prophets and Doctors, which Paul and Barnabas Act. 14. made also in the Churches, only Priests or Elders, without mention of Deacons. So that all were not made in every place at once, and at the first: or at least, all are not expressed that were made, as Act. 15. and as to Titus in Creta, Paul mentioneth not that he should make Deacons, but Priests and Elders only, using that name indifferently for Bishops. So that (where the name is not expressed) might not Epiphanius well avouch, The good reason of Epiph. answer. that this maketh nothing against the state in general of the office, in that place not expressed? For, perhaps, it was not yet established there, as afterward it was. And doth not Saint Ambrose confess as much, and more than this, even upon the place of Ephes. 4. so much urged? Ambrose in Ephes. 4. He gave some to be Apostles, and some Prophets, etc. Applying them to the use of the Church after the Apostles times, saying: the Apostles are the Bishops, the Prophets are the expounders of the scriptures. Although among the very beginnings, there were Prophets such as Agabus, and the four Virgins prophesying, as it is contained in the Acts of the Apostles. Howbeit, for to commend the principles of the Faith: Difference of orders at the first. the Interpreters are now called Prophets. The Evangelists are the Deacons, such as was Philip. Although they be not Priests: yet may they preach the Gospel, but without a chair, even as Stephen and Philip mentioned. The Pastors may be the Readers, who with their reading, fatten the people that hear them, because man liveth not in bread only, but in every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. But the Masters are the exorcists, because they appease & correct the disturbers or else those that were wont to instruct and train up with readings, Imbuere l●cti onibus. those infants that were to be instructed As is the manner of the jews, whose tradition made a passage unto us, which is by negligence worn out. Among these, after the Bishop he is understood to be more, who for the hidden sense of the Scriptures opened, is said to prophecy: especially, because he draweth out the words of the hope to come. Which order may now be that, that is of the Priest hood or the Eldership. For all the orders are in a bishop, All the orders are in the Bishop. because first he is a Priest, that is to say, the Prince or chief of the Priests, and he is a Prophet, and an Evangelist, and the other offices of the Church are to be fulfilled in the ministery of the faithful. Notwithstanding, after that in all places, the Churches were constituted, and offices ordained, the matter was composed otherwise than it began. For at the first all did teach, and all did baptise, what days or times soever there was occasion. For neither Philip sought time or day, The difference of the orders at the first. wherein he should baptise the Eunuch, nor interposed any fasting. Neither Paul and Silas differred the time, that they might baptise the chief man under the tribune, (or the keeper of the prison) with all his. Neither had Peter Deacons, nor sought the day when he baptised Cornelius with all his house, neither he himself (did it, Optionem carcevis. ) but he bade the brethren that went with him to Cornelius from joppes. For as yet besides the seven there was no Deacon ordained. As therefore, the people increased & multiplied, it was granted to them all at the beginning; both to preach the Gospel, and to baptise, and to expound the scriptures in the Church. But when as the Church had compassed about all places: conventicles were appointed, and rectors & other offices were ordained in the Churches. That none of the Clergy durst (which was not ordained) to presume upon him, the office that he knew, was not committed or granted unto him. And the Church began to be governed by another order & providence because, that if all might do the same things, it should be unreasonable, and it would be thought a common & most vile thing. From hence therefore it is, whereupon neither Deacons now do preach among the people, neither the Clerks or the laity do baptise. Why the Deacons, the Clerks, and the laity do not now baptise. Neither are the faithful baptised whatsoever day they list, except they be sick. The originals of primacies. The writings therefore of the Apostle in all points agree not, with the ordinance that now is in the Church. For because that these things were written even in the very beginnings, for he calleth also Timothy, that was of him created a Priest or Elder, a B. because Priests or Elders were at the first called Bishops, that the one giving place, the follower should succeed him. To conclude, in Egypt the Priests (or Elders) do * Consignant. Ambroses ●easons why the primacies and government were committed to one. ensign them, if the B. be not present. But because the Priests (or Elders) following, began to be found unworthy to hold primacies or chief governments, the reason was altered, the Council providing therefore, it was constituted by the judgement of many Priests, that not the order, but the desert, should create the Bishop, lest that an unworthy one should rashly usurp, and be an offence to many. Thus doth this most Reverend and learned Father S. Ambrose writ also, even as much or more than Epiphanius doth, on these words alleged by the Apostle. The most reverend. But now saith our most Reverend and learned man: whom yet can Epiphanius persuade, that it was for want of fit men only, that there were many Bishops in every Church? Doth Epiphanius go about to persuade any héereunto? Or had he any cause to persuade this unto them? Bridges. Which if he would have gone about to persuade, The most reverends depraving of Epiph. he should have contraried his own speech, that said, there were some places, where there was no Bishop. This therefore, is rather a depraving of that which Epiphanius doth allege against Aërius: then that Epiphanius used any depraving of places alleged by Aërius out of Paul. Now, to conclude with Epiphanius, (for he letteth slip all his argument, that by comparison he maketh from the examples of so many things in the old Testament, that at the first were not ordained) he saith, for that which he calleth, the 3. reason, out of the history of those times: For that which not only Jerome, The most reverend, but Epiphanius against the Miletians also reporteth concerning them of Alexandria: that is, Alexandria never had two Bishops, as the other Cities, upon what ground the men of Alexandria did it, and followed not the examples of other Churches, let them see to it. Bridges. Nay, let this our most Reverend and Learned man himself see to it, if it please him. If not: let us see to it a little better. For he sets it here down in such sort, that the reader (not perusing the histories for this matter) would think, that all other Churches had two Bishops at once, save only Alexandria. Whereas (except it were jerusalem, that so had by a rare occasion, All Churches aswell as Al●xandria had but one B. at once, except upon some rare occasion. as is declared: or that upon the absence, age, or infirmity of the Bishop, an other helper to him were chosen, which was called Coepiscopus) not only Alexander, but all other Churches in Christendom, Superiority of Bishops. whereof any record maketh mention (I speak within the bounds of my search for it) have even from the Apostles times, (if they were so ancient) usually continued under the ecclesiastical government of one Bishop, as by their successions (set down by Irenaeus, Eusebius, Theodorete, Socrates, Sozomene, Jerome, and others, doth appear. Yea, by Epiphanius himself, wheresoever he reckoneth any bishop, or succession of bishops, (except where there were some sects in any City that had several bishops of their own factions) he mentioneth still but one bishop over the true believing Christians in one City: And in this sort he reckoneth up the bishops of jerusalem. Lib. 2. Tom. 2. writing against the Manichaeans, saying: The generation of the apostles hath passed from Peter (I say) even to Paul, and to john, who also was a great while in the world, even until the times of trajan. james also is past, the first bishop in jerusalem, surnamed the brother of the Lord, but the son of joseph, begotten on her that was his own proper Wife, with the residue of his brethren, with whom was conversant the Lord jesus Christ, borne according to the flesh of the ever-virgine Mary, who in the order of brethren got this, that he was called their brother. There have passed also out of the same his seat, all the saints, and with them simeon, the sons of his Uncle, the son of Cleophas the brother of joseph: Whose times consequently and according to the row, from james the bishop. I have under joined the bishops by succession in jerusalem, and with them every king, even until the time of the foresaid Aurelian and Probus, wherein this Manes was known, being a man of Persia, which begat this strange doctrine into the world: and thus it is, 1. james, (who with a piece of wood suffered martyrdom,) until Nero. 2. Simeon, who was crucified under trajan. 3. Jude, and so forsooth, until he come to Hymenaeus the 37. bishop of jerusalem under Aurelian. In sum, from the assumption of Christ until Manes, and Aurelian and Probus Kings, are 276 years according to some chronicles: according to others, 246. etc. And as of this, so of any other Church that he nameth (as he doth an infinite number other, on divers occasions) of one church he ever nameth but one bishop: so that the church of Alexandria, and all other churches, for any thing here spoken by Epiphanius, or any where else, may well enough justify their having ordinarily but one bishop at one time, Were the B. more than one, yet had they authority over other priests, though some churches (which Epiphanius words here do seem to note) now and then upon some extraordinary occasion, might have had two bishops at once. But were there one or two, they always had superior dignity and authority over all the residue of the Priests or Elders in their churches. And in the same treaty, where Epiphanius noteth the order of jerusalem, he telleth also of a disputation holden between Triphon a Priest and the Heretic Manes at Caschara in Mesopotamia, Whereat the bishop being present, when he would have helped the priest Manes said unto the Bishop: suffer me to dispute against Triphon, for thy dignity (by reason of the bishop's office) exceedeth me. Whereby it appeareth that then also in Mesopotamia, there was a great difference in the dignity and state of a Priest & of a bishop. And because this most reverend and learned man allegeth Epiphanius against the Meletians: this also appeareth no less, The most reverendes alleging Meletius showeth a lamentable pattern of these contentions. if not so much more, even in that treatise of Epiphanius. Besides that, in the story by him there recorded of the sect that sprang from this Meletius, we may see a lively, (if it may not rather be called a deadly, verily a doleful) pattern of this Schism, now occasioned by our Brethren. There is a certain company (saith Epiph. lib. 2. to. 2. haer. 68) in the coast of Egypt, from Meletius a certain B. in Thebaida, of the catholic Church, and of the right faith (for his faith was not changed at any time from the holy catholic church) this Meletius was of one time with the foresaid Hierax, and afterward did succeed him. He was also of one time with the holy Peter bishop of Alexandria, and all these were in the time of the persecution, which was made in the time of Dioclesian and Maximian▪ A schism and sect made in the church, not for religion but for discipline. But the cause of Meletius was in this manner: he made a sect, but he departed not from the faith. This man in the time of the persecution, together with Peter the holy Bishop and martyr, and with other martyrs, was taken of those that were sent of the King, to wit, of the Dukes or captains of Alexandria and of Egypt at that time: The Precedent of Thebaida was Cultianus, and Hierocles of Alexandria, and Meletius was detained in prison together with the foresaid martyrs, & with Peter the Archb. of Alexandria. But Meletius seemed also to excel among the bishops of Egypt, as he that had the second place after Peter in the archbishopric, as it were, for because of helping him, being under him, and under him taking heed unto the ecclesiastical affairs: for this is the custom, that the bishop of Alexandria, hath the ecclesiastical administration of all Egypt, and of Thebais, and of Mareota, and of Lybia, and of Ammoniaca, and of Maroeotis, and of Pentapolis. Now, when as all these captives lived in prison, to the end they should be martyred, and had remained shut up along time: albeit others before them being delivered had suffered the testimony of martyrdom, and had obtained the honour of the reward, & were laid asleep: but these as the princes and greater were reserved till afterward: The repentance of them had fallen in the persecution, desiring to be received into me●cy. when as some had indeed sustained martyrdom, but other some had fallen away from their martyrdom, and had committed the wicked worship of Idols, and being compelled had also sacrificed: they indeed which fell and sacrificed and transgressed, came to the Confessors and to the martyrs, that by repentance they might obtain mercy, being partly soldiers, partly clerk of diverse callings, partly Priests, and Deacons, The schism of the Meletians and others. A commotion was made among the Martyrs, and no vulgar tumult: when as some said, those that once were fallen, and that had renied, and abode not in their fortitude, neither had strived, ought not to be made worthy of repentance, least that those also, which yet remained, should care the less for rebuke and punishment, by reason of such pardon to soon given unto them, and should so transgress and fall to the denial of God, and to the wicked work of Graecisme. And this in deed was very agreeable to reason, that was spoken of these Confessors. And they that so said, were Meletius and Peleus, and certain other martyrs more, and Confessors together with them. The B. Mel. zeal & severity in rejecting them. They therefore declaring their zeal to God, spoke these things, and they pronounced, that the persecution being ended, place to repentance should long time after, be granted to these foresaid parties, in the time of peace being made, if so be indeed they do repent them, and declare the fruit of their repentance. Notwithstanding, not that every one should be received into his proper calling: but after a space of time should be gathered into the Church, and into the community, and into the fellowship, but not into their callings: And this proceeded of the love of the truth, and was full of zeal. But the most holy Peter, endued with mercy, and being as it were the father of them all, entreated and besought them, saying: let us receive those that are repentant, and let us appoint them a penance, that they may sit with other at the church, and let us not cast them off, nor their calling, The Archb. P●ter● mercy to admit them. as the fame is that is come unto us: lest peradventure, those that once were of the devil shattered and bruised unto confusion, through imbecility and infirmity, should also by reason of delaying the time, be clean subverted and not healed, as it is written, The lame ought not be overthrown but rather to be cured, and in deed the speech of Peter was for mercy and humanity, but the speech of Meletius for the truth & zeal. Hereupon, for the face (or show) of the argument, which seemed in both of them to be godly, a sect or schism was made: these affirming this thing, and those that thing which was the other. But when the Archbishop Peter saw, that Meletius with his company, being too much moved with a godly zeal, resisted his counsel of humanity: Peter lift up a veil, and spreading abroad his cloak, to wit, a sheet or covering, in the prison, made an outcry, they that think with me (saith he) let them draw to me: and they that cleave to Meletius opinion, let them go to Meletius: and the multitude of the B. and of the monks, The greater part went to Mele●ius. & of the Priests and of the other orders parted to Meletius very few B. at all, & a few other turned to Peter the archb. & after that these made their prayers by themselves, & also those by themselves, yea and they performed also their other sacrifices either of them separately by themselves. But it happened that Peter suffered martyrdom, and that blessed man departed, leaving Alexander his successor in Alexandria, Peter suffereth martyrdom. Meletius is exiled: for he succeeded in the throne after the foresaid Peter: But Meletius and many other, were sent into exile, being banished into the Phenecan mines, & then after that, those which followed were Confessors with Meletius, and Meletius himself in his travail in prisonment, passing through every region and every place, did constitute Clerks, and bishops, and priests, and Deacons, and did build up Churches to himself, neither those communicated with them, nor they with those: and every of them wrote in his own Church, those that succeeded Peter, Meletius maketh B. priests, and deacons, and erects churches against his Archb. having the ancient Churches: The Catholic Church: but those that cleaved to Meletius: the Martyr's Church. Whereupon also in Eleutheropolis, and in Gaza, and Aelia, when the same Meletius came thither, he elected many in this manner, and it happened that he spent much time in the foresaid mines. But in the mean season the Confessors were set at liberty from the mines. Those also that were of Peter's part: for many yet were alive that were followers of Meletius, and neither had they any community one with another in the mines, or made their prayers together. But it fell out, that Meletius yet for a while lived in the world, yea, that he flourished under Alexander Peter's successor, and was in friendship with him, and took heed to the affairs of the Church, and of the faith. For he oftentimes said, I have had nothing divers and alterated. This Meletius being in Alexandria and tarrying there for a time, having his communion with his company by himself, found out Arius, and brought him before Alexander, because he had found Arius in his declarations to have passed the bounds of the faith. For he was a priest or Elder in Baucalide, a Church so called in Alexandria, for there a priest or elder was appointed for every day, for there were many Churches, but now there are more, and a Church was delivered unto him, howbeit there was another with him: but for what cause this was done, we shall declare exactly in his place, when need thereunto shall be. etc. But now when the blessed Alexander in Alexandria, after the death of the foresaid Meletius the Confessor, having taken a zeal against the sect and discord of the Church, began to seem to trouble in all places, those that were left of Meletius, that had private community among themselves, and to restrain and compel them, that they should not dissent from the Church: but they being not willing, moved troubles and stirred up tumults: and when they were so pressed and restrained of the blessed Alexander: certain of the princes among them, and those that held the chief places both in godliness and also in life, assembled and went unto their company, for because of communing together, to the end to obtain, both that they might offer and have communion privately, and not be impeached, but there was one Paphnutius, a great man, an Anchoret, who also was the son of a woman that had made the confession, yea, he himself also had in a certain sort, attained to the Confession: and john their bishop being also himself a most reverend man, & Callinicus bishop in Pelusium, and certain other that did this thing: who indeed going forth, being brought unto the king, were repulsed and rejected. For those that were in the palace, hearing of the name of the Meletians, and being ignorant what such a kind of name should be, suffered not them to speak with the king. And herein it happened, that Paphnutius & john and the residue, consumed much time in the parts of Constantinople and Nicomedia: What means they made to have access to the Emperor Constantinus Magnus. But then they grew in friendship with Eusebius bishop of Nicomedia, and declared their cause to him, for they knew that he had free liberty of speech with the king Constantine, & they besought him, that by him they might be made known unto the king: Bu● he, after he had promised that he would bring them to the knowledge of the king, and would procure the matter that they desired, requireth again of them this petition, that they should receive Arius with them into their society, to wit, him that feignedly and by a mockery had made his repentance, and they promised that they would receive him. Whereupon Eusebius presenteth them unto the king, and openeth to the king their cause, and it was granted to the Meletians, that from that time forth, they should have their communion by themselves, and be hindered by none. And would to God, these Meletians who showed forth the extremest justice of truth, had rather had communion with those, The Meletians compact to join Arius with them, that without the Archb. let, they might have their communion by themselves. that fell after their repentance made, than to have it with Arius and his sectaries. For, it happened to them, according to the proverb, that fleeing the smoke, they fell in the fire. For, neither could Arius have had his state, nor his liberty of speech, but by this manner of occasion. Which ill conjunction hath happened to them, even until this day. For they which in times past lived purely, and were most just, and in faith Meletians, are intermingled with the disciples of Arius, being in these times removed from the faith. And although some of them abide in the true faith: nevertheless, they are not estranged from foul uncleanness, by reason of the society with Arius, and the Arians. But the conjunction of Meletius and of the Arians, had the original on the foresaid occasion. Thus much at large, and word for word, (upon the occasion of this our most reverend and learned man's observation, of that Epiphanius reporteth against the Meletians, concerning them of Alexandria,) I thought good (though it be long) to set down out of him: to the end, we might more throughly see, what these (not Miletians, but) Meletians were, in many points not much unlike our brethren. At the first, concerning doctrine, Pure in the faith of Christ, which I hope also our brethren yet be, and as sound in the substance of Christian religion (I trust) as either these Meletians were, or we are: but they were so severe in certain points, of their pretended Discipline, howbeit, admitting the superior dignity and authority of bishops over Priests or Pastoral elders, and of Archbishops over Bishops, even in the heat of their sorest persecution, before the time of Constantine the great. As also at the beginning, did our brethren with us, though they dissented in divers other points of Discipline. yet, they still acknowledged, as did the Meletians both the Bishops and Archbishops superior dignities and authorities, which these our brethren now reject, & against whom, they have made such a schism of the Church of God, that we may even look upon, and lament, the like tragical division among us, that for too rigorous discipline fell out among them. In so much, that although both of us profess the faith of Christ aright: yet will not now our brethren join in public prayers with us, but separate themselves asunder, and (as these men did) make private assemblies and orders among themselves in their public prayers & ministration of Sacraments, & make bishops, Ministers and Deacons of their own several churches. But what the issue was of these Meletians, we have heard, and may fear and in part already do feel, among ourselves. God be merciful to us both and give us grace in time to foresee and take heed, that the public adversaries of the gospel, or any other old or new fangled heretical sectaries, neither of the Anabapt. nor other like, have their finger in this pie. And that this great zeal to obtain the having of these separate conventicles, discipline, ministry, communion, & prayers. etc. do not join with them against us their brethren, lest in the end, their former sincerity of faith and life be stained by them. On this occasion, two bishops together (but the one of this faction) might spring up in one City. But the faithful in Alexandria, (where from this sprang) still acknowledged but one, & the same there and then an Archb. and the B. in all that Province and every where else, to be superior in dignity & authority, to all other priests or pastoral elders. Howbeit, Socrates li. 1. ca 3. faith further of this Meletius, that he himself had been before deprived of his bishopric, Socrates. lib. 1. cap. 5. by the Archb. Peter, for the same fault, wherein Mel. showed such rigour against other: whereby this division grew, not only between the right believing Christians, and the heretics: but also among the faithful themselves. Whereupon (saith Socrates) great tumults was raised every where. For ye mightsee, not only the governors of the churches, vexing one another with contumelious terms: but also the multitude of the people to be distracted into 2. parts: whereof the one inclined to these men's opinion, the other to theirs: insomuch that the matter fell out to that mischief & shameful state: that the christian religion was even on the very theatres mocked at, Meletius. with the derision of all men. As for those that dwelled at Alexandria they contended of the chiefest points of our religion youthfully, and not without tauntings. They sent their legates to the other B. of every province: but these dividing their selves on either party, raised up the like contention. Meletius deprived of his bishopric. Yea the Meletians were intermingled with the Arians, who not long before were severed from the church. But of what sort these also were, I think it meet to be declared. Meletius a B, of a certain city in Egypt, was deprived of his episcopal office, by Peter B. of Alexandria, (who in the reign of Dioclesian died by martyrdom,) both for many other causes and chief for that in the time of persecution, he had denied the faith and had offered unto Idols: who when he was deprived, and had very many that cleaved unto his faction. he gave himself to be the ringleader of that heresy unto them, which from that time even till this day, are in Egypt called the Meletians. And when he could allege no just excuse or cause, why he separated himself from the church: he said that he had only in a term, an injury offered him. And he began to revile Peter with railings, and to deface him with reproaches. And as soon as Peter had by martyrdom (in the rage of persecution) suffered death: he turned his reproaches upon Achillas that succeeded Peter in the bishopric, and afterward a fresh against Alexander: who after the death of Achillas, obtained the degree of that dignity. And while these were thus occupied in this strife and dissensions in the mean time was holden the quest, concerning Arius, whom Mel. with those that were of his side assisted, & conspired with Arius against the B. Thus saith Socrates also of this schism. Theoderetus doth tell, li. 5. cap. 3. of another Meletius afterwards in Gratian'S time, that when in Antiochia the chiefest city in the orient, the professors of the apostolical opinions were also divided into 2. parts: & the one part (straight ways after the practices attempted against Eustathius the great) detesting the Arian wickedness & making their assemblies among themselves, had Paulinus to be their B: the other part, after the creation of Euseb. being with the notable Meletius, divided from the wicked, & being exercised among those dangers that we have mentioned, were governed by the doctrine of the most wise Mel. Besides these a third head gave itself to the faction of Apollinaris a Laodicean: who putting on the person of godliness▪ when he was reputed, as though he would maintain the apostolical opinions: not long after he showed himself to be an enemy of them, etc. But the Duke Sapores being entered into Antioch, when the law of the emperor was set forth, Paulinus affirmed that he was of the parts of Damasus. Apollinaris also (who covered his disease) affirmed the same. As for holy Meletius maintained quietness, Flauia●u● a priest and afterward a b●shop. nor lapped himself in their contentions: but the most wise Flavianus, being as yet a Priest (or Elder) first turning to Paulinus, in the hearing of the Duke, did say: if you (my friend) rejoice, in the community of Damasus: see that you prove the conjunction of your opinions For he in the confession of one essence, preacheth manifestly three persons of the Trinity. But you contrariwise take away the trinity of the persons. Wherefore, teach us the consent of your opinions and then possess the Churches, as the law commandeth. With which confutation, when he had stopped his mouth: he said, that he marveled at Apollinaris, that so impudently resisted the truth, when as he knew well enough, that the famous Damasus avouched, that God the word did take upon him our whole nature: to whom he always taught the contrary: For (saith he) thou deprivest our minds of salvation, which accusation if it be false, then deny thou now this imp of thy newfangleness, and receive the doctrine of Damasus, and obtain the divine Churches. Thus did the most wise Flavian allay their boldness, by the truth of his speech But Meletius of all men the mildest, sweetly and gently calling Paulinus, said▪ because the Lord of this flock hath set me also over the custody of the sheep, and other are committed unto thee: sith there is a community of godliness among the sheep: Meletius offer to part the bishopric between them & to govern together for a full union. let us friendly join our folds, and let go the contention of Mastership, and attend in common to the sheep, that go in common in the pastures. But if the seat itself do stop the concord, I also will endeavour to remove this contention. Let us set (I pray you) in the seat, the book of the divine gospel, and let us either of us sit together on either side it. And if so be that I shall die before thee: be thou (O friend) alone the sheeps master. But if this shall happen to thee before me: then will I to my ability, take upon me the care of the flock. When as Paulinus allowed not these his sweet and gentle speeches: the Duke deciding the cause, commended the Churches to Meletius the great. But Paulinus retained the mastership (or remained bishop) of these Sheep, that had long before divided themselves. Here again is another notable story of another Meletius, where more in one city took upon them, according to their factions, to be bishops: and what offer was made to appease the strife, of two at one time to have ruled together, until the decease of the one or the other, and how in the end it was determined unto one. Thus much to this most reverend and learned man's answers to Epiphanius, for the superiority of one bishop, in one city. The residue of his arguments, because they are chiefly on the sentences taken from Jerome, chrysostom, Theophilact, and Theodorete, whose sentences we have before at large perused: I will here for this time, pass them over, save that which he saith of Cyprian, as yet untouched. The most reverend. And whereas Cyprian (saith he) not in one place calleth the bishop's successors of the Apostles, whose authority is from God: Cyprian. and if we take it so, as though by the very commandment of God, these Bishops are the same, that in time past were the Apostles: the thing itself doth confute that, seeing there was always a certain portion assigned to every Bishop. But the Apostles, by the direction of the spirit of God, though not confusedly, did exercise their Ministry, throughout the whole world. The meaning of Cyprian is plain without caviling, as the like saying of many other the ancient fathers, that bishops are the successors of the Apostles, because they succeeded both in the places & Churches by the Apostles founded: and in the chiefest dignity of the Church's orders, as in their times, the function of the Apostles was. As the Magdeburgenses note Cent. 3. cap. 6. tit. de ratione gubernandi. pag. 150. The first and chiefest authority belonged to the Bishops, whom also Cyprian lib. 3. Epistola, 14. calleth Praepositors, placed over the residue, who in government sustained the chiefest part of the Ecclesiastical administration. After them, the next in dignity, belonged to the Priests or Elders, and the third to the Deacons. And that Bishops were then above the Priests or Pastoral Elders, is apparent by Cyprians own words. I have long held my patience (most dear brethren) as though our bashful silence should help to quietness. But when immoderate and abrupt presumption, by the rashness thereof; shall attempt to disturb the honour of the Martyrs, and shamefastness of the Confessors, and tranquillity of the whole people, I must no longer hold my peace. For, what danger of the offence of the Lord ought we not to fear, The Bishop over the Priests by the Gospel & the Lords judgement. when as some of the Priests (or Elders) neither mindful of the Gospel, nor of their place, no nor thinking of the Lords judgements to come, neither that now, the Bishop is placed over them: do with contumely and contempt of him that is placed over them, claim the whole to themselves, which thing was never done at all under the ancestors: Yea and (would to God) that casting flat down the salvation of our brethren, they would not challenge all things to themselves. I can dissemble and bear the reproaches of our Bishopric, as I have still dissembled and borne them. But now there is no place of dissembling, when as our brotherhood is deceived by some of you: who, while without means of restoring the salvation, they desire to be plausible, they rather hinder such as are fallen. etc. Whereby as it plainly appeareth, that the Pastoral Elders were inferior to bishops: so even then, there were of the Clergy, some Priests or Elders, that envied and slandered this their B. Superiority, and would have had the dealing, as far forth. as they in restoring the poenitents, and in all things, equal authority to the bishops. Peter and Paul. Which thing (by Cyprians judgement how plausible a show of reformation soever it had, was very offensive unto God, and never before attempted of the Ministers. A plausible show of reformation but offensive to God And so consequently, this superiority of bishop placed over the Priests or Pastoral Elders, had continued even from the Apostles times. And thus might they well of him be called the successors of the apostles. Not, that Cyprian meant, that there was no difference between the Bishops and the Apostles. And therefore, this is a manifest mistaking to say: If we take it so, as though by the very commandment of God, The most reverend. these Bishops are the same that in times past the Apostles, the thing itself doth refute that seeing there was always a certain portion assigned to every Bishop. But the Apostles, by the direction of the spirit of God, though not confusedly, did exercise their Ministry throughout the whole world, Bridges. Although herein and in other points more, the Apostles were distinguished from and above Bishops: yet might they also be Bishops well enough. For, as this Learned man saith: they did it not confusedly: so their charge to go into all the world, and preach the Gospel unto all nations, was not so, that every one of them should travel over all the world, and preach unto all nations: But that by the world (being name● per fynecdochen the whole for the parts,) and that among them all, some here and some there, by the direction indeed, of the spirit of GOD, they dispersed themselves at length in diverse parts of the world. And there also diverse of them, did settle themselves, so long as they lived, as is recorded in the most credible histories of their travels. And some tarried still at jerusalem, as james, and after him simeon. Of which james it, is not only in all the most ancient and not suspected records, constantly & expressly avouched, that he was the Bishop of jerusalem: but even junius himself, (as precise otherwise as any of our Learned Brethren, and no less Learned,) in his book of Notes upon the Epistle of Jude, fol. 5. confesseth, saying: Fowrthlie, he is called judas the brother of james, not only in this salutation: jonius referring him self for james B of jerusalem. but also Luc. 6.16. & Act. 1.13. Because the name of james was most famous among all men: as he that most of all was the Governor of the Church of jerusalem. Who was called the brother of the Lord, who was accounted just, who was surnamed Cholih-ham: or, as it is commonly written Oblias, by the sentence of all men, that is to say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the bulwark, (or compassing about) of the people in righteousness, as Clemens doth interpret it, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the wall of the people, as Epiphanius expoundeth it. As though he contained the people, and environed them with defence round about, by the purity of his doctrine, and by the holiness and righteousness of his manners. For Moses Exod. 32.35. affirmeth, Bishops the Apostles successor. that on the contrary, the people by ungodliness and impureness are made naked. Of these things▪ we have most plentiful witnesses. Peter Act. 12 17, Luke, Act. 15. & 21. Paul, Gal. 2.9. joseph lib. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his history of Antiquities. Clement and Eusebius lib. 2. of his Ecclesiastical history, cap. 23. which three last testimonies as we have already perused, do confirm that james was the very bishop of jerusalem. But (saith this most reverend and Learned man) if this be true, The most reverend, there should have been more Bishops in the Church of Rome itself: namely Peter and Paul, which yet afterwards was counted peculiar to one. And must this needs follow, Bridges. that if bishops were the successors of the Apostles. Peter and Paul must needs have been bishops of Rome? Peter and Paul not B of Rome. Such lose conclusions indeed the Papists make. And why not at other places so well as at Rome, where more than one of the Apostles were together? as at Samaria, and especially at Antiochia. But though bishops succeeded the Apostles in some things, yet it follows not, that they succeeded them in their Apostleship? And some of the Apostles were bishops also, as some were both Evangelists and Prophets, even in the most proper signification of those functions. Yet for all that, were they Apostles still. But who maketh Peter and Paul bishop of Rome, because they were both at Rome? As for Paul, it is apparent he was there, and continued also there in teaching 2. year at once together▪ and yet we say not, he was Bishop there, nor Peter neither. And yet had they been both Bishops there also, and at one time, why might they not for all that, have afterwards had but one Bishop at once, and that one, The most reverend. successor well enough unto them both? but he replieth. And surely, there cannot be more, the chief in one and the same company at one time. And cannot two be chief together, in respect of other inferior to them both, though in one and the same company? Bridge's There were 2. Consuls at Rome, both chief alike together at one time, Both superior government & supreme too, may be in more than one over the residue. over all the other Senators, their-selves being of the same order and company of Senators. There have been two or three Emperors also of Rome, who were all of one and the same company, and parted the Empire among them at one time, and all had chief authority together, over all the civil state of Rome. and might it not be so in a Bishop's office, yea two or three together, upon some extra-ordinary occasion, and yet all alike superior to all the other Pastors in that Church or Diocese? The question of equality, is of quality, not of quantity: the number doth not appeach the superiority The most reverend. And (saith he) whereas the name of bishop, is said of the Apostleship, Act. 1.20. it maketh nothing to the matter, except a man by like reason, would have the Deacons to have been Apostles, because Paul calleth his Apostleship a Deaconship or Ministry. Indeed, if we would have Bishops to be Apostles also, than he said something to the matter, Bridges that Deacons should have been Apostles; because Paul calleth his Apostleship a Deaconship or Ministry, understanding the name of Deacon, in his usual and proper signification. But Paul doth not so call himself a Deacon; and yet now and then, he exercised the proper office of a Deacon. Yea, all the Apostles did so, until (Acts 6.) they made a peculiar office of the Deaconship. It followeth not, that because some Apostl. were Bishops: all bishop must be Apost. Howbeit not so, that they excluded themselves, or other Pastors, that they might never jointly exercise also, a Deacons office. So might an Apostle be a Deacon, though a Deacon might not be an Apostle. As the higher office might include the lower, though the lower include not the higher. And so the Apostles might be Bishops, although the Bishops succeeding them, might not be Apostles. But, though their Apostleship itself Act. 1. be called a Bishopric improperly: what hindereth this in them, that the name and office of Bishop in his proper sense, might not be compatible, though not all one with the name & office of their Apostleship also? And yet, if it could not neither, notwithstanding, sith that the Apostles made Bishops, and made them in the highest degree, of the Ministers ordinary and perpetual orders; as the Apostles were for their extraordinary time the highest: so might they well of Cyprian be called the successors of the Apostles. so not only Cyprian, but (besides the ancient Fathers already cited,) S. Augustine calleth the Apostles, Bishops: and Bishops the Apostles successors. Tom. 4. de quaesti. ex novo Testam. quaest. 97. For (saith he) no man is ignorant that our Saviour instituted Bishops for the Churches. August Tom. de quest ex novo Testam. questione 97. Aug. tom. 8. in Psal. 44. For even he himself before he ascended, laying his hand on his Apostles, ordained them Bishops. And more at large, Tom. 8. on the 44. psalm: that they succeeded the Apostles. In steed of thy Fathers, are Sons borne unto thee. The Apostles have begotten thee. They themselves were sent, they their selves preached, even the father's theirselues: but could not they be always bodily present with us? If one of them said, I desire to be loosed, and to be with Christ: much more is it the best. It is necessary to tarry in the flesh, for you. Thus indeed he said, but how long could he tarry here? Could he until this time? Can he for ever hereafter? Is then the Church desolate by their departure? God forbidden. In steed of thy Fathers, Sons are borne unto thee. What meaneth it, In steed of thy fathers, sons are borne unto thee. The fathers, the Apostles were sent. In steed of the Apostles, (or for the Apostles) sons are borne unto thee, there are ordained bishops. Augustine For from whence are the bishops borne, that are at this day throughout all the world? The Bishop in steed of the Apost. The Church herself calleth them Fathers, she herself begat them, and she herself placed them in the seats of their Fathers. Therefore, thou thinkest not thyself desolate, because thou seest not Peter, because thou seest not Paul, by whom thou art borne: a Fatherhood is grown to thee of thine own Children. In steed of thy Fathers are children born unto thee, whom thou shalt make Princes in all lands. What can be plainer spoken than these sayings of S. Augustine, both that the Apostles were also Bishops, and that (as Cyprian said,) bishops are the successors of the Apostles? As for that which is here added of Hieromes former sentence, though I have sufficiently and at large discussed the same: yet, sith this most reverend and Learned man also, hath somewhat more to say thereto: let us likewise hear it. The most reverend, But we are (saith he) to look into that also, that Jerome might seem to be of the mind, that this kind of Bishop began then, when as Schisms arose up in the Church. Very true, even so saith Jerome, and (as we have noted) it followeth thereon, that this kind of bishop began, even in the Apostles times. Bridges. And what here can this most reverend and learned man, or any other say, to deny this conclusion, except he will deny Hieromes saying? If he will deny it: why doth he bring it for him? Well, what of that, there is no remedy, he will deny it flat. yea, he suspects, whether Jerome were of that mind. The most reverend. But we are (saith he) to look into that also, that Jerome might seem to be of that mind, that this kind of bishop began then, when as schisms arose up in the Churches. Nay, never say (for shame) he might seem to be of that mind, Bridges For if a man's mind may be known by his speech, he speaketh it plain, and nameth what kinds of schisms they were, when the people said, I hold of Paul, I of Apollo, I of Cephas. So that he plainly thought, Ieromes mind is most apparent that the pecullarizing of the name & office of B. ●as in the apostles time. it was in the Apostles times. Yea, and he plainly so avouched, in the sentence also before alleged out of Jerome, by this Learned man himself: For at Alexandria (saith Jerome) from the time of Mark the Euangeliste, till the time of Heraclea and Dionysius Bishops: The Elders placed one in a high degree or place, chosen by themselves, whom they called, the Bishop. So that, this was the plain mind of Jerome, (sith that diverse of the Apostles survived Saint Mark) that the original of this kind of Bishops, began in the Apostles days. That this is not so (saith he) we may gather out of Paul himself, who, of purpose writing to the Corinthians about the same matter, Jerome. doth not only pass over this remedy: The most reverend. but also as foreseeing such a matter, doth in the title of the Epistle, join unto himself Sosthenes, to teach by his example, how carefully this Primacy is to be avoided in the Assemblies of the Church, who (as it is evident, were not only the first in Order next unto Christ, but also highest in degree,) did execute their ministry in common. Hear Jerome is flatly challenged for an untruth. And what proof against Jerome that this is not so? Bridges Forsooth, we may gather it. And is this all, Jerome challenged of untruth. it may be gathered? Shall we infer a necessity, on a probability? Well, what may we gather out of Paul himself? Because he wrote of purpose against schisms, and passeth over this remedy: Ergo: This was never used at all for any remedy against schisms in the Apostles times. Let us see the goodness of this argument by the like. S. Paul wrote of purpose, The f●iuolousnesse of the most rev. argum. against our natural corruption, whereby we and our infants are all borne in sin. Against which the sacrament of our regeneration is a remedy: But S. Paul passeth over the baptizing of Infants: Ergo: it was not a remedy in S. Paul's time, S. Paul also in the same Epistle that he speaketh of schisms, writeth of purpose, against whoredom, whereof divorce is a remedy: but he passeth over the remedy of divorce, in the cause of whoredom. Ergo; there was then in that case, no use at all thereof. Saint Paul writeth of purpose against the abuse of the Lords supper, with their drunkenness, surfeiting, and making no difference of it from other meat, whereof it is also a remedy, to have only the elements of bread and wine, and to remove all other meat at such times as it is ministered: but S. Paul passeth over the forbidding of those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (or love Feasts) which were used to be made when they came thereto: Ergo: The Lord's supper was never used only with bread & Wine in the Apostles times, but always with another supper joined thereto. On this fashion, we might reason of many more things, But one for all Saint Paul writing of purpose against the same matter, to wit, against the Corinthians schisms, doth pass over this remedy, the aequalitye of all pastors in the Church: Ergo: In S. Paul's time the pastors were not all equal. If it be replied. But yet these things are written of, in other places, either by S. Paul, or by some other: so that those remedies notwithstanding, remain entire, although they be not there touched: And doth not this fully answer this most reverend and Learned man, if this superiority among pastors, be showed in other places: as in 2. Gal. and in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus? etc. Yea, what if in the self same place, the Apostle writing of purpose to the Corinthians about the same matter, do sufficiently and plainly gather the superiority among the pastors? Doth not S. Paul name himself, besides Apollo and Cephas, on whose names the Corinthians pre●ended their schisms? And were not all these three, Elders, for all 〈◊〉 were Apostles? Were not Paul and Apollo, of the same function that was Peter? Who (as this Learned man by and by his self confesseth) called himself fellow Elder: Ergo: an Elder. And was this S. Paul's purpose, in writing of purpose against this schism), that where the Corinthians thought too much of these three Pastors, and made schisms about their affections to them, that for remedy hereof, they should so abase their estimation of them, that they should count them but equal to all other, and all other pastors (set aside their Apostleship) to be equal, and all one in dignity and authority with them? Difference of the persons dignity & authority in the equality both of Apostleship &, Eldersh. No, howsoever the order and function of the Apostleship, was all one and equal in all the Apostles, and the Eldership among the Elders: yet neither as Apostles, nor yet as Elders, the persons were of like gifts, nor of like dignity, and authority, in all places and respects among them. Which superior degrees and estimation, Saint Paul appproveth and alloweth: and neither to the Corinthians, nor any where else, directly nor indirectly doth improve the same. The most reverend. But (saith this our reverend and Learned man) that S. Paul foreseeing such a matter, doth in the title of the Epistle join to himself Sosthenes? And did Saint Paul and Sosthenes, execute their Ministry in common as aequals: Bridges. because he joined him to himself in the title of his epistle, and in his salutations? He joined Timothy unto himself, in his other Epistle to the Corinthians: and besides Timothy, Silvanus in both his Epistles to the Thessalonians: Doth he therefore execute his ministry with them in common, and as his aequals? and how then doth this Learned man himself even here confess of the Apostles: (who it is evident, were not only the first in order next unto Christ, but also highest in degree.) if these men whom in these salutations S. Paul joineth unto himself, did execute their Ministry in common: and therein were equal unto him? These things hang not together. Whatsoever S. Paul in joining Sosthenes unto himself in his salutations did sore-see: this Learned man foresaw not, no, nor after-saw his apparent contradictions to himself: and much less saw he, what S. Paul foresaw herein, clean different from that that he imagineth. The most reverend. Wherefore (saith he) no not the same Paul alone would excommunicate the incestuous persons, by his Apostolical authority, but by the authority of the whole Eldership: Neither doth Peter doubt to call himself fellow Elder. Paul & So●henes. Neither doth this debar, but that still even in excommunication S. Paul had a superior authority over the whole Eldership, Bridges. even as calvin himself confesseth on that place, 1. Cor. 5, 4. S. Paul's author. superior in excommunic. Caluinon 1. Cor. 5. ●. We must note (saith he) that Paul though he were an Apostle, doth not excommunicate after his own lust alone, but participate counsel with the church, that the matter may be done by a common authority: he verily goeth before them, and showeth the way. but in that he joineth associates with him, he signifieth enough, that it is not the private power of one man. To the which Marlorate addeth, and that as out of calvin also: first upon these words, I have already decreed, for I have also (saith he) already judged and pronounced the sentence which you ought to follow. Marlorate on 1. Cor. 5. And again, as out of Martyr. Verily, the Apostle goeth before other in judging, which also it beseemeth those that in the Church are the greater, to the intent that the unskilfuller people, may be in judgement directed by their voice going before. And further, as out of calvin he saith: The ancient Church had an order of Priesthood or Eldership: whereof the Apostle mentioneth. 1. Tim. 5. c. 17. and these Priests or Elders were of two sorts. For, certain of them both taught and administered the Sacraments; yea rather, together with the Bishop, did govern the Church, because the Bishop was of the same order that they were of. Neither behaved he himself otherwise towards them, than the Consul of Rome towards the Senators. Whereby it plainly appeareth, that the Apostle, whether he joined unto him (after he had fore-iudged and decreed the same) the whole Church of Corinth, If the priests or Elders minist. of the word & Sacram. did then together with the B. govern the Ch. then were B distinct from Elders of the word & sacraments or the Seniory, (of what sort of Elders soever they understand it) to denounce in their assembly, the sentence already decreed of excommunication: yet notwithstanding was Paul their far superior: Yea, that every Bishop in his Diocese, joining with his signory, being of such Priests or Elders as are of the order that the Bishop himself is of; nevertheless, still he remaineth their superior, not only in other points of dignity, but even in the voices that they all jointly assembled give, in denouncing the party to be excommunicate, with their assents, whom the Bishop before hath pronounced judged and decreed so to be. And that he is as a Consul towards the Senators, to wit, of a far higher authority than any one, or than all his brethren in the Senate. And that this was the order in the ancient Church of the Eldership, whereof the Apostle maketh mention in the 1. to Timothy, 5. c. 17. All which if it be true, A privy custom. that Marlorate (as out of calvin) doth here avow: then is it plain, that in the Apostles times, there were Bishops of the same order, that the other Priests or pastoral elders were, who both taught and administered the Sacraments, and though with the Bishop, they did govern the Church together: yet had he a far superior dignity, than any one, or then all they had, as a Consul among & yet above his Senators. Which is the very principal point in question. And how is not then this Bishop, that here in contempt is called the Bishop of Man, the Bishop of God also? As for excommunication, we will refer to his proper place. And for Peter's calling of himself a fellow Elder, because our Brethren, the Learned Discoursers, discourse better on it, I will likewise refer it, to their further calling on the same. The residue here noted by this Learned man, for Ieromes sentence, is already answered, save that he addeth this: And whereas he saith in the same place, The most reverend. that it was decreed throughout all the word: we are to understand it no otherwise, than of a privy custom, brought in by little and little. How privy it was, and by little and little brought in, the Reader may understand by that we have showed already: Bridges that it began in the Apostles times, the apostles not unwitting thereof: but willing the same: yea, some of the chief apostles themselves parties: Open to all the world in the most famous Churches, jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Ephesus, Rome, and all Creta over: spread from these places, throughout all Christendom: begun in the age of the apostles, and so continued in the Primitive Church, and held in reverence among all these ancient reverend holy, and learned fathers, confessors, and Martyrs, before the errors, superstitions, pride and tyranny of antichrist began: recorded & testified by so many and so credible witnesses: confessed and granted unto even by the most reverend and best learned men indeed of our own times: yea, by these our brethren themselves that do impugn it, and yet in effect do thus confirm it: and shall we now dare to call this a privy custom brought in by little and little? But what dare not this man from beyond the Seas (under the name of most reverend & learned) presume to conclude, that dare fold up all this matter thus? And whatsoever is found in Ignatius or other ancient Writers, when the Bishop of Satan was not yet found out touching the authority of the Bishops or overseers (as justine speaketh) is to be understood of this kind of Bishop. The most reverend, Thus doth this most reverend and Learned man, shake off all these ancient writers, and holy fathers. Ignatius here named, Bridges. immediately succeeding the Apostles, and living in Antiochia, before the destruction of jerusalem▪ not only in S. john's and Simeons' days: but while many other of the Apostles and Disciples lived, as Eusebius in his Chronicle witnesseth. Yea, though Beza also allow the title and office in Timothy, that justine ascribeth to bishops: What of all this? Whatsoever justine speaketh; yea, whatsoever is found in Ignatius, or other awcient writers whosoever they be, whatsoever they speak or write, never so-good, never so holy, never so true, what though it were, when the bishop of Satan was not yet found out; if it once be touching the authority of bishops & Overseers, it is all to be rejected with this contumely: It is to be understood of this kind of bishop, which is called. The bishop of Man, that is to say, brought into the Church, by the alone wisdom of man, besides the express word of God. Thus doth this most Reverend and Learned man from beyond the Seas, in a round conclusion, give his judgement of them, and so he leaveth them. Let us now therefore leave him also, to return a God's blessing beyond the Seas, from whence he came, and with all due reverence taking our leave of him, in expectation of other reverend and learned Fathers, judgements from beyond the Seas also: Let us now for the present, return home to our Brethren where we left them in their Learned Discourse of Ecclesiastical government. THE ARGUMENT OF THE FIFT BOOK, PROCEEding still further on the Pastors. THis book treateth specially on the judgements of other reverend and godly learned men, from beyond the seas also, in the late reformed Churches concerning this superior authority & dignity of one pastor in a city; or Diocese or Province over his brethren and fellow pastors. Which one was called in a city, or diocese, bishop. in a province Archb. To the proof whereof are, alleged upon our brethren's allegation of Titus. What superior authority he had over all the pastors of Creta: with the judgements of Bullinger, calvin, Aretius Hemingius, Herebrande with the orders of other reformed Churches for their Superintendents special and general. The B. and Archb. of the fathers and other canons of the ancient church's regiment approved by calvin in Geneva, with the approbation of Ieromes sentence, and that this order was in the Apost. times, and not contrary to the Apostolical Doctrine: with Caluines epistles to diverse B. and Archb. & to the King of Polonia, approving this superior authority: and his general rules for all popish B. converted to the gospel. The judgement of Zanchius and Bucer for those old orders, specially of bishops & Archb. & for the old clerical discipline and regiment due unto them: of the objections to the contrary out of Peter, and of the Titles proper to Christ: and whether the name Archb. be competent to any Minist. & of Peter's Title of fellow Elder: and of Christ's prohibitions of Titles & rule, & of his example of washing his Disc. feet, etc. and of humility & Lordship: of bishops holding temporalities & royalties: & of obedience unto them in the same, & of Diotrephes. with caveats for the Ministers lawful authority: and against unlawful liberty by equality: lastly of Bezaes' judgement on these matters, for the Apostles and the ancient orders: & of the renewing those orders in the state of Geneva. Titus' authority. The Learned Discourse. IN the same manner of speaking, he describeth the qualities of those, which were to be chosen Bishops and Deacons. Pag. 24. Likewise unto Titus. 1.5. 1. Tim. 3.2.8 Ti●. 1.5.6.7. He calleth them elders, and immediately after, describing the qualities of such, as were meet to be ordained elders, he calleth them bishops: saying For this cause did I leave thee in Creta, that thou shouldest continue, to redress the things that remain: and that thou shouldest ordain elders in every City, if any be unreprovable: the husband of one wife, having faithful children: which are not accused of riot, nor are disobedient. For a bishop or overseer must be unreprovable, as the steward of God, not froward. etc. COncerning, the communicating of these names, Pastors, Bridges. Priests, or elders, and bishops, indifferently, or the being of the office all one and the same, until further order in the Apostles times were taken: we have at large before declared. But as for the matter, that among these Pastors, Elders or bishops, some one Pastor, elder or bishop, had a superior government over many of the residue in the same order: as we have plainly proved it by Saint Paul, throughout all the same his Epistle to Timothy here alleged, and also out of the other Epistle unto him: so, for this Epistle likewise unto Titus. 1.5. Which Epistle appeareth to be so late written by Saint Paul, that there is no such journey, or abode, in any such place mentioned, in all those journeys which Saint Luke so diligently in the Acts recordeth: & therefore it should rather seem, to be written after that time. Bullinger, in his Preface on this Epistle to Titus saith: when it was written, either before or after the Apostle was taken, it is not evident enough. The time when the Epistle to Titus was written. Theophilacte thinketh it written before his bonds, and before the later to Timothy were published. Certainly, he that will search it more diligently, shall not want conjectures, whereby it may be gathered that it was written, after that by the sentence of Caesar, he was at Rome acquitted. But were it written then, or after, or before, or as Chytreus also in his Onomastichon gathereth: Chytraeus in Onomasticho. yet maketh it no less, if not much more, unto this purpose, that even at that time, while the name of Priest or Elder and Bishop was yet used in common: notwithstanding there was, yea, and that no small difference, among these priests or elders and Bishops, in the degree of superior government: which is apparent by the text itself, wherein Saint Paul giveth Titus being a priest, or elder, or pastor, or Bishop, a great deal more authority and superior dignity, then ordinarily appertained to every Priest or elder or Pastor or Bishop, or by what name soever they were termed. Which calvin himself upon these words, For this cause have I l●ft thee in Creta, etc. doth note saying: This beginning doth clearly show, Cal●in 1. Ti●. that Titus is not so much admonished for his own sake, as commended unto others) least any should hinder him, the Apostle committeth unto him, his own turns. Wherefore it behoveth, that he be acknowledged of all men, for the Apostles Vicar, and be reverently received. For sith that no certain station was assigned to the Apostles, but an office enjoined to them, of spreading the Gospel throughout all the world: whereas therefore they travailed out of one city into another, they used to substitute fit men in their place, by whose labour that which they began, should be finished. Praedicas. So Paul boasteth that he founded the Church of Corinth, but other were the master workman which ought to build thereupon, that is, to further the building. This indeed belongeth to all Pastors. ●or, the Churches shall always have need of encreasinges, and of furtherance, so long as the world endureth. But beyond the ordinary office of pastors, a care of ordaining the Church was committed to Titus, for pastors are wont to be placed over Churches, that be already ordained, and form in a certain manner: But Titus sustained a certain burden more, that it is wit, to give a form to churches not yet orderly framed, that he might establish a certain manner of policy together with Discipline. Thus hath Titus being an E●der, or pastor or bishop a Superior authority given him above other Elders, pastors or bishops, were they then distinguished or all one. As for the office of Titus, it is divided (saith Aretius) in two parts, the one is parted into correcting the other into ordaining. These two we have in the Apostles proposition: That thou mightest correct the other things, and Town by Town ordain Elders. That therefore, should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Correction, but this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ordination. Aretiu● in tit. Correction containeth all that, that is vicious in the manners of men, and aught to be and may be amended, according to the rule of God's Law. In which part the Apostle had indeed corrected many things, but not all, nor the whole. Hereupon was the precept of the amendment of the residue. etc. Whereby we are admonished, that always and every where, we have need of amending. Moreover, that there can be no vigilancy so great of Godly Ministers, that can in the hearers correct vices to the full, but that still that saying of the Apostle is to be often repeated, Correct the other things. etc. The other office of Titus, is to ordain priests or Elders Town by Town. This is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the ordination of Ministers: a place most ample and needful to be known. It is wont here to be inquired, who ought to ordain and then who are to be ordained. Concerning the former, the Apostle in this place attributeth this to Titus alone: Titu● ordained Elders alone. for there were no other in Creta that regarded this matter, or that could have performed it: and all the Magistrates were as yet heathen, and Titus was most rightly instructed of the Apostle, and endued with gifts of the holy ghost. At this day there is another reason, we have faithful Magistrates and Christian people: And therefore the force of the election pertaineth not to the only Ministers, although here it appertain to Titus alone. And therefore our Churches. (He speaketh of the territory belonging to the Lords of Berne in Helvetia) do keep this manner, that the Ministers do indeed elect, notwithstanding, they offer them to the Senate (as if we should present the election to the queens Majesty, & to the Counsel) Which either alloweth or disalloweth all the election, according as they understand the matter. Oftentimes also the consent of the whole Church is sought, over whom the Minister is to be preferred. Thus saith Aretius not only of their order in ordaining Ministers, both different from this example of Titus, and from the rules prescribed by these our Learned discoursers: but also to show, that Titus had there and then, the whole and only government of these things. Neither availeth that, which calvin answereth to his own objection: which though we have noted once before, in answering the most reverend and learned man, when he urged Election as the chief ground of Church offices, Caluines' objection and answer for Titus' authority in electing & ordaining Pastors. which dependeth on the voices of the whole company: Yet once more, (if it be pardonable) let us again consider his objection, and his answer: But he seemeth (saith calvin) to permit too much to Titus, while he commandeth him to set Ministers over all the Churches. For this were almost a Kinglike power: and moreover by these means, is taken away from every Church the right of electing, and the judgement from the college of the Pastors: but this were to profane all the holy administration of the Church. But the answer (saith calvin) hereunto is easy. Not that it is permitted to the will of Titus, that he might do all things alone, and place bishops over the Churches whom he pleased: but only he commandeth him to govern the elections, as a moderator, even as it is necessary. This is a speech common enough: so is the Consul, or he that supplieth the place of the King in the vacancy, or the dictator, said to have created the consuls, Inequality of Ministers. because he held the court where they were to be elected. And so saith Luke of Paul and Barnabas in the Acts: not that they alone did prefer, as at their commandment, the Pastors of the Church, either tried or known: but because they ordained fit men which were elected or desired of the people. I omit here, in this matter (concerning Titus ordaining Ministers,) the contradiction of these two so notable learned men calvin and Aretius: the one saith, the ordaining and the election of them pertained to him alone: the other saith, not to him alone, the one saith, they were elected or desired of the people: the other saith, none regarded this or could do it: and yet both of these (thus varying) excellent men. But to reconcile them both as well as we may, yea, to yield to calvin as the signior, and the more renowned, and the nearer favouring these our brethren's Discourses, and being himself the chief Pastor even in Geneva, whereunto they would nearer level our Ecclesiastical government: let Caluines own conclusion answer his own self, and our brethren's pretended equality of their Pastors. Indeed (saith calvin) We learn out of this place, Caluine● conclusion that the ministers were not all equal in authority in the Apostles times. that there was not then such equality among the Ministers of the Church, but that some one was above them in authority and in counsel. Howbeit, this is nothing to the tyrannical and profane manner of Collations which reigneth in popery: for the manner of the apostles was very far different. What can be plainer said, than this conclusion of calvin, that there was not then such equality among the ministers of the Church, but that some one was above them, not only in Counsel but also in authority? Neither is this confessed of Titus only, but of the whole state of the Ministry then, to wit in the Apostles times, and for all the continuance of the Ministry after them, that there should not be among the Ministers of the churches (and by Ministers there, he speaketh of Pastors) such an equality as our Brethren here pretend, but that some one, both in Counsel and also in authority, should be a Governor and Ruler▪ fet over above his brethren and fellow Ministers: and by what name could they or can we call him better, than a Bishop? The ancient Fathers therefore, having by continual succession received this Title, for a Superior in authority and counsel, among the Ministers of the Church, as not equal, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by a kind of prehemito call him a Bishop: The ancient fathers acknowledging Titus to be B. of Creta. and finding Titus to have such Superiority committed unto him, over a whole Isle, having an hundredth Cities or good Towns therein; do call him Bishop of Creta. Titus (saith Jerome) the Bishop of Creta. In which Isle and the Islands lying thereabouts, he preached the Gospel of Christ, and there died. Titus' authority Hemingius a famous and yet living learned man, writing upon this Epistle of Paul to Titus, in the sum of the first Chapter, saith on this wise: The sum of the first Chapter is, that a Bishop ought Town by Town, to ordain Ministers of blameless life, and of sound doctrine. Whereby he may stop the seducers mouths, and blame such as teach perverse things, Titus a B. and his authority a pattern to all other B. that they may at length become sound and repent. In which words, he signifieth, that both Titus was a bishop, and that generally all such as are Bishops have a Superiority over Pastors and Ministers, both to ordain them, and to correct them. And upon these words, For this cause I left thee in Creta, etc. He saith: Having finished the Preface and salutation, he treateth of well ordaining those things, that were of Paul omitted, by reason of his sudden departure, and of ordaining bishops in every Town. Because he would not have a want of government in the Church, but that all might be done in order and decently, he would that some man notable in life and Doctrine, should be the governor to ordain the Ministers, and to dispose all things rightly in the Church, which should take heed that no heresies should arise: The pope's superiority not established by this superiority of a bishop. Which (to conclude) should study that all things should be done orderly, neither yet hereupon, is the primacy of the Pope, nor their tyrannical 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or freedom of living after their own laws, and jurisdiction of the papists, which they challenge to themselves, established. For they serve not our Lord jesus Christ, but endeavour themselves with all their might, to extinguish the light of the gospel, that by the goodness of God is kindled. Albeit they are greatly defeated of their opinion: for the blood of the martyrs is as it were the best oil, for it causeth that the light of the gospel being kindled, doth burn the more. That thou mayest correct the things that are desired: that is, that thou shouldst rightly dispose those things, that are desired in the ecclesiastical ordination. For Paul as it seemeth having laid the foundation, went unto some other place, as he that was the Apostle and doctor, not of one Nation, but of the Gentiles, leaving in the mean season, among the Cretensians, Titus, which should set in order those things, that he himself in so short a time had not furnished. Note, that the office of a bishop in general, is to dispose rightly all things in the Church. And that thou shouldest in every Town ordain priests or Elders. And the chiefest part of the Episcopal office is to ordain fit Ministers of the word. etc. Neither only doth Hemingius write thus, on the occasion of these words of the Apostle to Titus, than the which, we need no plainer testimony: but also upon the fourth of the Ephesians, concerning Pastors (under which name our Brethren would shelter priests or Elders, and bishops, not only to be always equal, Ecclesiastical promotion. but all one and the same. Hemingius saith, Pastors were those, whom at this day we call Parochos, Parish priests, these were placed over certain Churches, that by preaching, by administering the Sacraments, and by a certain holy Discipline, they mought govern them. These are not for a time, but their office is necessary in the Church, even until the judgement. Doctors are these, whom the Church in times past called Catechizers: whose office was to prescribe the form of Doctrine, and to deliver the foundations of the Doctrine, which the Pastors afterwards should follow. Such as at this day, teach the youth Religion in the schools. These have regard that the true interpretation, and a just measure of teaching, be retained in the Church. Howbeit notwithstanding in the time of the Apostles, the manner of promoting as it is now in use, was not yet received. Nevertheless we must understand, that the godly governors of the Churches, and of the schools, ordained the degrees of promotions, upon good and profitable counsel, both that the arrogaunte should not usurp to themselves this Title of honour, without the judgement of the Church: and also that such as were fit men, might be acknowledged by the public testimony, and be had in price. Neither this contrary to the dignity of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, which is commendeth order and comeliness to the Church: it leaveth unto her the right of ordaining the customs, which seem to make for order and decency. Wherefore there is no cause, that we should regard these speeches, of the proud spirits of such as contemn these Ecclesiastical degrees: if so be, that they unto whom such degrees are collated, shall remember, that they are not the badges of the contempt of others, or of arrogaunte Supereminency: but rather, the public Testimonies of the duty, that they own to the Church, and whereunto (as it were with a public Sacrament) they be bound. But perhaps the adversaries object, that the Church may not know Pomp: but should have the trial of Faith, and of holy life, of prayer, and the laying on of hands. I answer: it is nothing unfitting for Christians, to bestow or collate the Testimonies of learning and honesty, upon those that are godly and learned men, that the Church may know, unto whom she might safely commend the government and the care of Doctrine. Neither hindereth it, that such promotions have now of long time been abused: so that, the defilings of them being wiped away, we may retain the things that to the Churches and to the Schools are profitable. Inequality of dignity. Again they make exception, and say, that the Lord prohibited to be called Rabbi, and Masters on the earth, because one is Master. I answer the same L. saith, we must not call father on the earth: who notwithstanding in his Law commandeth the parents to be honoured. Wherefore, that forbidding is not to be understood of the appellation or naming, but of another matter beside, that the circumstance of the place doth sufficiently convince, what is the meaning of that forbidding. For he addeth: He that is greatest of you shall be your minister. Christ forbiddeth the superiority or the title thereof, but the ambition & abuse of it. Again, he that exalteth himself shallbe humbled, The Lord therefore would not, that the appellation of Father, or of Master, or of doctor should be taken away: but the arrogant trust therein. He would not have that we should like of ourselves, if we seem to excel in any gifts. He would have us that we should not arrogantly prefer ourselves before others, but rather that he which is the greatest, should make himself the Minister unto all. He would not have us devise any new Doctrine, but that in matters of salvation, we should follow our only Master jesus Christ. But, as for that they urge the saying of the Apostle james, who saith, My Brethren, be ye not many masters. knowing that ye shall receive the greater judgement: It is easily refelled. For james in his forbidding, setteth down this reason. For we slip all of us in many things. The sense therefore of this forbidding is, that we would not be rough controllers of other men's manners. Thus saith this excellent learned man Hemingius, Hemingius of these degrees and Titles of Schools and Ecclesiastical promotions, and in his Sintagma. Syntagma Tit. De gubernation ecclesiae Sect. 12. ●it. or arg. Bern. Eccle. He descendeth further unto the particular Titles and degrees, which these our brethren especially do forbid: saying, Moreover, sith that the Kingdom of Christ is governed by the word and spirit of Christ the Monarch, there are therein two kinds of men, that is to wit, the setters forth of the word, and the hearers of them: who no otherwise than the Fathers and the Sons, The spiritual jurisdiction all one but the degrees of dignity not equal. reverence and worship the one the other. And although the spiritual jurisdiction of these setters forth of the word (of which jurisdiction we shall speak afterward) be all one: notwithstanding the Degrees of dignity be not equal, and that partly by the Law of GOD, and partly by the approbation of the Church. For as Christ ascending from on high gave Gifts to men, Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Doctors and Pastors: So gave he unto his Church power to edification. By this power the Church ordaineth Ministers for her profit, that all things might be done orderly, to the increasing of the body of Christ. Hereupon the pure Church following the times of the Apostles, did ordain some patriarchs, some Bishops, some Bishop's Coadjutors, whom justine the Martyr calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, whom we call Prepositors, some Pastors and Catechisers. The reformed Churches, after the darkness driven away, which the Pope brought into the Church, The degrees that the reformed churches do acknowledge are content with fewer degrees, lest by little & little, the matter might pass into a tyranny. They have Bishops, Doctors, Pastors, and Ministers inferior unto Pastors, whom by a fond term, they call Chapleyns'. Among these, he that excelleth in the excellency of gifts, in the greatness of labours, and in the degree of calling, is preferred before other in dignity. Not indeed that he should exercise a dominion upon other, but that he should rule other in wisdom and Counsel: so be, that he shall show the reason of his Counsel drawn out of the word of God, and out of the lawful ordinance of the Church. For when Christ only in his kingdom is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, free from rendering any account: it is fit that they which be subjects to him, should render a reckoning of their doings. Thus reverently writeth this Reverend and learned man Hemingius, on these titles and difference of dignities, in the offices & promotions of the pure and primitive Church, succeeding the time of the Apostles, and of the reformed Churches in these days. Unto whom also accordeth Herbrandus, a famous Protestant writer, now living, though differing from us in the controversy of the sacrament, who in Compendio Theologiae, loco de ministerio. Herbrandus in comp. Theol. lo, d● minist. Upon this question whether there are, or aught to be, degrees among the Ministers of the Church? Yea, (saith he) for God himself made and ordained these degrees, with different gifts. Ephes. 4. He gave some Apostles, but some Prophets, but some Evangelists, but some Pastors, and Doctors, to the filling up of the Saints, into the work of the ministery, to the building of the body of Christ. Also Paul nameth Bishops, Priests or Elders, and Deacons. Moreover, by reason of order, for good order or discipline sake, and to preserve consent, concord and unanimity, let some be superior unto other. Lest there should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a dissolute state without government in the Church, orders were ordained among the ministers by a profitable Counsel. As among us, Superintendents special and Superintendents general over Pastors. (meaning the German reformed Churches) are Subdeacons, Deacons, Pastors, Superintendentes special, over whom do rule Superintendentes general. (as we use the names of Bishops, and Archbishops, after the old and usual name) Unto these, other chief and choice men, (as well Ecclesiastical as Polyticall, adjoined) do make the chief Senate of the Church. But this primacy is not of power, that for his higher degree, a greater authority, licence and power should be granted to any man, of decreeing any thing, Caluines' judgement of Bishops. or of commanding in the Church, or of ordaining at his pleasure, or of determining in the controversies of Religion: for here as much prevaileth, and aught to prevail, the sentence of the lowest, as of the highest, which resteth on better and firmer testimonies of the holy Scripture, and of arguments brought from thence, in what place or degree soever any man be placed. But it is a Primacy of order, in the residue of the government and policy of the Church. Thus saith Herebrande of the German Churches. But if now, for admitting a bishop and distinguishing him from Priest or Elder: for allowing subdeacons, which we do not: for having superintendents special and general: and for making this distinction for primacy of power and order in this sense, that this power of order, is of a standing and continuing degree of dignity, superior to Elder or Pastor: if for these points, Herebrande and all those reformed Churches in this matter be rejected: let us then come even to calvin himself, who doth yet more reverently write of these titles and dignities of order, where they are not retained, than these our Brethren do among us, be they never so godly used. For, calvin in his Institutions, cap. 8. de Fide. sect. 51. ●aluin. Ins●it. ca 8. sect. 51. Hitherto (saith he) we have treated of the order of governing the Church, as out of the pure word of God it is delivered unto us, and of the ministries as they are ordained of Christ. Now, to the end that all things may be made manifest more clearly and more familiarly, and may also be better fixed in our minds: it shall be profitable to recognise the form of the ancient Church in those things, which shall represent unto us before our eyes, The Canons of the ancient B. how little they varied from god's word. a certain Image of the equal divine Institution. For, although the Bishops of those times have set forth many Canons, wherein they might seem to express more than were expressed in the holie-scriptures: they composed notwithstanding all their whole domestical administration, with such heedfulness, to that only level of the word of God: that you may easily see, they had in this part, almost nothing varying from God's word. Yea, if any thing might be wished for in their ordinances, notwithstanding, because they endeavoured with a sincere study, to conserve the institution of the Lord, and swerved not much from the same: it shall very much avail, here briefly to collect what manner of observation they had. According as we have declared, three kinds of Ministers to be commended unto us in the scripture: so, whatsoever Ministers the ancient Church of God had, she distinguished them into three orders. For out of the orders of Priests or Elders, partly were chosen Pastors & Doctors: the other part governed the censure or controlment of manners, and corrections. The care of the poor and dispensation of the Alms was committed to the Deacons, as for the readers and Acolytes, were no names of offices that were certain. But those whom they called Clerks, they acquainted them with certain exercises to serve the Church, whereby they might better understand whereunto they were appointed, and in time, might come the more ready prepared to their office, as I shall anon more at large declare. And so Jerome, when as he set down 5. orders, he reckoneth up Bishops, Priests, Deacons, the faithful, and those that learn the Catechism: to the residue of the Clergy, and to the Monks he attributeth no proper place. Caluines' confession of the primative church's order for superiority of B. They therefore called all them Priests or Elders, to whom the office of teaching was enjoined. They elected one out of the number in every City, to whom especially they gave the title of Bishop, lest that by reason of equality (as it is wont to come to pass) discord should spring up. How-beit, the Bishop was not so superior in Honour and dignity, that he had dominion over his Colleagues: but what parts the Consul hath in the Senate, to propound the businesses, to demand the opinions to go before, or govern the other in Counseling, admonishing, exhorting, to rule all the whole action by his authority, and to put in execution that which by the common counsel shall be decreed: that office did the Bishop sustain in the assembly of the Priests or Elders. And that this for the necessity of the times, was with consent of men brought in, the ancients themselves confess it. So Jerome on the Epistle to Titus. A Priest or Elder (saith he) was the same that a Bishop, & before that by the instinction of the Devil, factions began to be made in religion, and that it was said among the people, I hold of Paul, I of Cephas: the Churches were governed by the common Counsel of the Priests or Elders. afterward, that the seeds of dissension might be pulled up, all the carefulness was surrendered unto one man. As therefore the Priests or Elders know, that of the custom of the Church, they are subjecteth to him that ruleth over them: so let Bishops know, that rather by custom, than by the verity of the Lords disposing, they are greater than the Priests or Elders, and they ought to rule the Church in common. Howbeit, he teacheth in another place, The ancientness of this institution from S. Marks time. how ancient an Institution it was. For he saith, at Alexandria, from Mark the Evangelist until Heraclas and Dionysius Priests or Elders, they always placed in a higher degree, one that was chosen from among themselves, whom they called the Bishop. Every City therefore had their College of Priests or Elders, which were Pastors and Doctors. For all of them exercised also among the people, the office of teaching, exhorting and correcting▪ which Paul enjoineth unto Bishops. (and here by the way, note, that then, which was yet in the Apostles times, the Doctors as well as the Pastors, calvin. had the exercise of exhorting and correcting as well as of teaching. Limitation of Regions to the cities whence the Priests should be taken. ) And to the end they might leave seed after them, they traveled in instructing the younger sort, that had enroled their names into the sacred soldage. Unto every City was attributed a certain Region, which from thence should take their Priests or Elders. And it should be reckoned as it were unto the body of that Ch. Every one of the Colleges (as I have said) only for because of policy and of conserving peace, was under one bishop. Who, so excelled the other in dignity, that he was subjecteth to the assembly of the brethren. But if the field or territory, which was under his bishopric, were more than that it might suffice for the bishop, every where to do his office: there were certain Priests or Elders assigned in certain places through that field, who in meaner affairs did serve his turns. Those they called Chorepiscopos, Bishop's deputies, (or as we call them bishops suffragans) because they represented the bishop through out that province. The fathers in composing all this form of government by the only rule of God's word though it be not expressed therein. In which words Caluine plainly confesseth, that although all these degrees of dignity be not expressed in express words in the Scripture: yet the Fathers had such a care to compose all their form of government by the only rule of God's word, that almost nothing is different from God's word. And that bishops were but one ordinarily in one City, who had Regions, and Provinces, and many Priests or Elders, yea, Colleges of Elders of Priests, under them: & that some of their Provinces were so large, that they had deputies or suffragans also to supply their turns. Which withal inferreth that this their dignity over these persons, could not be only for the present time of this or that action or assembly, but was still standing and continual, even as those Regions and Provinces allotted to them and as were the numbers of Pastors and Colleges of Priests or Elders in every City (as are our Cathedral Churches) likewise abiding and continuing. And this dignity of one B. above the Priests or Elders, arose not of any ambitious aspiring: but of very necessity to avoid it. And that of the equality of Priests or Elders, dissensions and sects would spring. And that this dignity is so ancient, that it was used in Alexandria a most famous Church, even from Saint Marks time. Who, as Eusebius in his Chronicle noteth, died four or five years before either Peter or Paul, and while many of the Apostles and Disciples were yet living. For, to reject that which Eusebius speaketh of Peter (or rather which is manifestly foisted into his Chronicle) that he was Christianorum Pontifex primus, Eusebius chronicle corrupted & not agreeing to his eccl. hist. the first or chief Bishop of the Christians, and that when he had founded the Church of Antioch, he went to Rome, where preaching the Gospel, he continued 25. years Bishop of that City: because this agreeth not with the holy Scripture, no, nor yet with that which Eusebius citeth, concerning Peter out of Dionysius Bishop of Corinth, Li. 2. Hist. Eccl. cap. 25. as is aforesaid, is therefore worthy to be repulsed: The credit of Eusebius report and proof in his eccl. hist. yet this which Eusebius hath both in his chronicle and in his Eccl. history, of Annianus or●●yned the first Bishop of Alexandria after Mark the Evangelist: and of, Euodius ordained the first bishop of Antioch, another more famous Church, the 45. year of the L. that is, the 12. year after the lords ascension: and that james the brother of the Lord was ordained of the Apostles the first Bishop of jerusalem, the most famous Church of all in those days, and that in the very year of Christ's ascension: how soever the Scripture express it not, or that Jerome say it was done by consent of men, or custom of the Church, and not of the verity of the lords dispensation; yet sith this consent is of so many and so holy men, and this custom so ancient and of these so notable Churches in the Apostles days: if this order had been any breach of the verity of the lords dispensation, The Apostle not improving, but approving these orders or of any perpetual order set down and commanded by the Apostles; or not good and necessary, but dangerous and hurtful to the Churches of Christ, by them both before and after planted: or had been any direct occasion to the tyranny of antichrist: no doubt they should have known it, and foreknown the event, and would never have permitted, but impugned, and expressly written against the same. Therefore, we must either set on a bold face, to deny this ancient original of it, which calvin dare not do, but in this reverent manner acknowledgeth and yieldeth unto it: or else we must needs grant, that this superiority of one Priest or Elder over the residue, to whom more especially this title of Bishop should appertain, is a godly and necessary order for the Church's government, and Apostolical: as approved even by the Apostles. We grant that bishops since that time have encroached, especially the Popish Bishops, and most of all the Pope. But what is that to our Bishops? Let our Brethren yield them that, which here and in many other places calvin granteth that the Bishop should have a continuing superior dignity, whether the assembly hold or no: that in the assembly of the Priests or Pastoral Elders, he should so be subject, that notwithstanding, he should rule all the action, and be towards them as a Dictator, or but as Viceroy, or but as a Consul towards his Senate, may rather, not so much by many parts: for, our Bishops take not upon them, any such superiority over their Clergy, but far inferior to all these examples: let them either therefore reject calvin too: or else, with what face can they deny, this lower & more moderate superiority, than calvin thus commendeth to be exercised over their fellow Ministers by our Bishops? Caluines' judgement of the titles of B. and Archb. and their superior auth. But that we may see, not only Caluines judgement, for the beginning of these superior dignities, in the primitive Church: but also what he will allow or disallow, in the reformed Bishops of our times, both for the remainder of their Titles of Bishops, and of retaining their superior dignities with the same: as he writeth any Epistles to Archb. or Bishops, professing the gospel, he both calleth them Reverend Fathers, & Archb. and Bishops of such and such places, and inciteth them to remember the place that they be called unto. And the like titles also unto such persons, useth Beza himself, (I hope with good conscience, and thinking as he speaketh.) Epist. 295. When calvin writeth to the Bishop of London (Epist. 295.) to wit, unto grindal, he not only saluteth him by that name: but he acknowledgeth also his superior authority over all the Pastors there inhabiting: Although (saith he) most Renowned man, and Reverend Lord, you expect not till I give you thanks, calvin acknowledgeth London and diverse other places to appertain to the Bishopric of one. for that duty of godliness which you have performed unto the Church of Christ: nevertheless for that care that you have vouchsafed to take of our countrymen, which inhabit in the chiefest City of your Bishopric, that not only by the benefit of the Queen, they might have liberty given them of invocating God purely, but also from hence to call for a Pastor: except I should co●fesse myself bounden unto you: I were to be condemned both of folly and inhumanity. And sith you have not disdained voluntarily to request and exhort me, to provide a fit Pastor to be chosen for them: there is no need that I should commend them to your trust and protection, for whose health I see you are so careful. And verily, as ye have hitherto testified your rare and singular study of godliness, in so liberally helping them: so shall it now pertain to your constancy to maintain your good deed even to the end. Thus doth calvin acknowledge the Bishop's authority, and so commendeth unto him Galasius the French Churches Pastor in his Diocese. True it is that in the same Epistle he afterward hath these words also: It grieveth me greatly, that all the Churches of the kingdom are not so composed, as all good men would wish, or at the beginning they hoped for. But an unweriable endeavour is needful to overcome all stops. But it is now expedient and very needful that the Queen do know, that you so willingly forego, yea reject from you, what soever savoureth of earthly Lordship, that you may have the lawful authority, & that, that God hath given, to exercise the spiritual office. This shallbe the true height & excellency thereof. calvin still acknowlegdeth the name of L. in a Bishop. Then shall it hold the highest degree under Christ the head, if it stretch out the hand unto lawful Pastors, to execute those parts that are enjoined to you. In which words (if we shall mark them well) he still alloweth the B. a superior authority over other Pastors, whom they ordain, and join assistance unto them. And he yieldeth in these titles. Reverend Domine, & ●bseruande Domine, the name of Lord, (except we translate it, Sir) still unto them. But, for the matter, he still acknowledgeth a superior authority to be in them. And as he doth this to the Bishop of our countries: so to the Bishops in other countries, such as professed the Gospel. Caluines reverend style. As Epist. 272. he not only for fashion sake useth this style (which if it were unlawful he ought not to flatter him withal) john calvin to the illustrious and Reverend Lord, james Ithave Bishop of Vladislavia, worthy of me to be reverenced for his excellent virtues: but when he comes to the matter: he saith: Epist. 272. This is my reason and matter of writing, that the light of the Gospel being now risen up among you, sith that God hath opened your eyes that you are thoroughly awakened, for, I hear that you have not only tasted the true doctrine of godliness, but that you are endued with that knowledge thereof, that shaketh off all pretext of error and ignorance. But you for your prudence are not ignorant, how intolerable the profaning is of the heavenly grace, when as of set purpose we stifle it. And although this bright dignity in the stage of the world, doth procure an applause (or rejoicing) unto you: notwithstanding you must diligently take heed, that the deceitful flatteries do not smooth you: by the which snares, sathan at this day draweth many into a deadly labyrinth. So it cometh to pass, that they which exercise their cunning to seek shifts, at length when they see their colours vanish away, they openly oppose themselves against God, yea rather they, breakefoorth into manifest fury. Of this matter there are extant (no doubt) before your eyes too many examples. While some violently with sword and fire assay to extinguish the heavenly doctrine. Other, that they may safely lie drowned in their filthes, do not only make much of their sloth: but after the fashion of beasts, astonish their consciences. From this pestiferous infection of the Epicures: whosoever (being in his delights) doth not earnestly and attentively take heed to himself: it can hardly be brought to pass, but that he shall wax profane, & casting aside the fear of God, hurl himself into the same wantonness with them. What therefore ought you to do? Discords are hot among you: the one part desireth the entire worship of God to be restored: the other part stiffly defendeth the wicked superstitions. For you to stand in the middle, whom God (as it were with his hand reached out) calleth to the protection of his cause: it is shame and wickedness. Think what place you occupy, and what a charge is imposed upon you. Add this, that the enemies of godliness, while in their clutterie darkness, He exhorteth the B. to bethink him of h●s place and charge. they can not abide the small sparks of your godliness: they (as it were) thrust you out of their faction, which you voluntarily should have fled from. Pardon me of your courtesy, if in one word. I be more sharp (because that to profit you, I must speak freely that I think): when you shall come to the heavenly judgement seat, the offence of betraying can not be washed away, except in time you withdraw yourself from that band, that openly conspireth to oppress the name of Christ. But if now it be grievous to you to be diminished, that Christ may increase in you: think on Moses example, which under obscure shadows, did yet not doubt, to prefer the rebuke of Christ, before the delights and riches of the Egyptians. But although peradventure I have been more bold with your Excellency, than was meet: notwithstanding (sith my purpose was, to regard your saluotion) I hope my liberty shall not be odiousto you, etc. Far you well, most excellent man, illustrious and Reverend Lord: etc. But here again, lest we might think, he goeth about to persuade him to leave his B. as a dignity that he could not lawfully retain with the profession of the gospel (which was not his drift, but to have himretain still his place and dignity, so far as he might do it, without hovering between the Papists and the Epicures: and thereto, he willeth him to think on the place he occupied, and what charge was laid upon him: and yet, to renounce it, rather than to join with those enemies of the Gospel) to show this better, calvin setteth down more fully in his Epistle to the King of that country of Polonia, calvini Epist. 190. ad Regem Poloniae. (Epist. 190.) what manner of superior dignity and authority, he not only alloweth to remain in a Bishop: but also in an Archb. so little shunneth he, or disalloweth, either the name or the office of them. To conclude, (saith he) only ambition and pride hath forged that Primacy that the romanists oppose unto us. Caluines' allowance of an Archb. and B. under him. The ancient Church indeed did institute Patriarchies, & did appoint also to every of the Prouin●●●●ertaine Primacies, that the Bishops by this bond of concord, might 〈◊〉 better knit together among themselves. Even as, if so be, at this day in the most noble kingdom of Polonia, one Archbishop were over the residue. Not, that he should overrule the residue, or snatching the right (or Law) from them, arrogate it unto himself: but that, for because of order, he should in the Synods hold the first place, and nourish an holy unity among his colleagues & brethren. And furthermore, there should be either Provincial, or City Bishops, which peculiarly should give attendance to the conserving of order. Even as nature suggesteth this unto us, that out of all Colleges, one ought to be chosen, up on whom the chiefest care should lie. But it is one thing to bear a moderate Honour, to wit, so far as the faculty (or power) of man extendeth itself; another to comprehend th● whole compass of the world in a government unmeasurable. Thus doth calvin most clearly (though he condemn the Pope's usurpation) approve both the superiority of Pastorship, not only in Bishops over Cities and Provinces, where many Pastors be: but also of Archb. and of one Archb. the chief and primate of a mighty kingdom, more th●n five times as big as England, to be over all the residue. And this being well used, (without offering injury to the right of other bishops under him:) he thinketh to be both good and necessary. So far off is he (as our Brethren here do) from condemning the very name of Archbishops. No, he alloweth both the office and the name, even here in England also: as appeareth by his letter unto the Archb. of Canterbury Epist. 127. Epist. 127. calvinus Cranmero Archiepisc. Cantuariensi salutem: When as at this time it was not to be hoped, which was most to be wished, that every one of the chiefest teachers, out of diverse Churches, which have embraced the pure doctrine of the Gospel, should come together, and out of the pure word of God should set forth to the posterity, a certain and clear confession, of every one of the capital points at this day in controversy: I do greatly commend (right Reverend Lord) the counsel which you have begun, that the English men might ripely establish religion among them, that the minds of the people should not stick longer in suspense, while things are uncertain, or less orderly composed, than were meet. To which purpose, The place & office of an Archb. enjoined by God. it behoveth all those that have the government there, to apply in common their studies: notwithstanding so, that the chiefest parts be yours. You see what this place requireth, or rather, what God according to the reason of the office which he hath enjoined unto you doth by his right require of you. The chiefest auth. Eccl. in an Archb. In you is the chiefest authority which the nobleness of honour doth not more procure unto you, than the opinion long since conceived of your prudence & integrity, etc. Thus doth calvin where he still calleth upon, for increase and speed of further, and full reformation) acknowledge both his title of Archbishop, and his office of Primacy, with the honour and authority thereof, above all other in the Church's ministery, to be good and lawful. And to show further, how he alloweth the general practice of Episcopal authority, where, when, and whosoever Bishop should receive the Gospel: whether he should give over, or retain still a Superior authority in his Diocese, over the other Pastors in the same: he hath fully decided this Question, Epist. 373. Si Episcopus vel curatus ad Ecclesiam se aediunxerit. If a Bishop or a Curate shall adjoin himself unto the Church: calvin answereth on this wise. Being asked my sentence or opinion, concerning Bishops, Curates, and others of like degree, or whom they call Graduates, Caluines' resolution how B. converted to the Gospel, should behave themselves. if that the Lord should vouchsafe any of them his grace, that they would adjoin themselves unto the Church; how must they behave themselves towards them, etc. Here, after his excuse for brevity, by reason of his rheum, he saith: If therefore it shall happen that in Popery, any to whom the cure of souls shall have been committed, that is to wit, a Bishop or a Curate, shall receive the grace of the Lord, so that he profess the pure doctrine of the Gospel: if he shallbe found not to be so fit for the office of a Pastor, nor to be endued with that knowledge and dexterity that is requisite: he should altogether do very rashly, if he would intermit himself into so great a matter. The fruit therefore, of his conversion shall consist in that, if so be he discharge himself of all cure, and do so acknowledge that gross abuse, that he did bear before a void title without matter, and thereupon give place to a fit successor, that may lawfully be instituted, it shall suffice for him, if he hold the place of a sheep in the lords fold. But if so be, that any such one shall be endued with learning and dexterity, yea and with affection to teach also hereafter: let him first of all make a confession of his faith, and holily testify that he cleaveth fast unto the pure and sincere Religion; and furthermore, that he acknowledge that his vocation, to have been joined with mere abuse: and that he desire a new approbation: and namely, that he profess, that to be frustrate that he was instituted before by the Pope's authority: and withal, that he renounce all means unlawful, and repugnant to the order which the Lord jesus hath ordained in his Church. These things praemised: I see not what should let, that he may not be admitted to the office of a Pastor, so that he promise, and do in very deed perform that faith, which is required to the executing of the office: and especially that he join himself, with the company of the Ministers that purely teach the word, and submit himself to the Discipline and policy which hath place among them. As for the memory of his former life, let that remain buried, neither let any thing be imputed unto him that then was committed, only that he be admonished of the performing of his duty hereafter lawfully. If that Canon of Paul be objected, wherein is delivered that a Bishop must be unreprovable: I answer, here is not dealt with (in my judgement) concerning a simple and absolute election, but concerning the approbation and restitution to a certain office, because of the corruption passing between, etc. Here, after he hath proved that point, he cometh to the conclusion, saying: These things being presupposed, the parts shall be of such a Bishop as this, How a converted bishop shall retain his jurisdiction and superior authority. to do his endeavour so far as in him shalt lie, that all the Churches which appertain unto his Bishopric, shall be repurged from all errors and worships of Idols, while he himself shall by his example go before all the Curates of his Diocese, and shall induce them to admit the reformation, unto the which by the word of GOD we are invited, and the which shall wholly answer, both to the state and to the use of the primitive Church. As for that which appertaineth to those goods, which are called temporalties, whether they consist in jurisdiction, or in annual rent; although the original of them sprang out of that corruption, that is by no means to be borne, with the pure simplicity of the spiritual ministery: notwithstanding, so long as things remain thus confessed, the possession after a sort of suffering them, may be left unto them: So be, that exhortation be given unto them, that they look to it, how they dispose those things, which they shall have known to be dedicated unto God, both that they profane not things consecrated to god, and also that they contain themselves in the modesty which may beseem true Bishops, etc. Thus, by Caluines plain opinion, for a reformed Bishop to have a Diocese, and government therein of Curates and Pastors under him, is not contrary to the state and use of the primitive Church, nor to the reformation unto the which by the word of God we are invited, nor any unlawful means, or repugnant to the order which the Lord jesus hath ordained in his Church, but may answer wholly thereunto. And so that Bishops do these things, both for themselves, and for their office, and for their Diocese, and for their goods and temporalties and jurisdictions, that calvin here would have them do: though he do but tolerate the dispensation of their temporalties: etc. yet he manifestly alloweth them to remain Bishops still, and to retain their Dioceses, and to go before or guide the Curates and Pastors, and all the Churches appertaining to their bishoprics. And he seethe no let, but they may so continue. Thus sayeth calvin of these Protestant and Reformed Bishops. But above all other Reverend and Learned men's judgements, from beyond the seas in any reformed Churches, that notable and godly Learned man Zanchius, who is also yet living, hath most pythily to this point (me thinks, be it spoken without contempt of any other) set down his grave judgement on these matters. In his last book of the confession of his faith concerning Christian Religion: Zanchius in confess. Christ. relig. Who first in the 24. Chapter, in the title of the Militant Church, the 6. Aphorism or distinction being this: From what kind of succession of Bishops can it be showed, that any Church is Apostolical? To which he answereth: We do so acknowledge, that from the perpetual succession of B. in any Church, How far succession of Bishops holdeth. not what kind of succession soever, but that which hath adjoined therewith, a continuance of the Apostolical doctrine, may rightly be showed to be an Apostolical Church. Such an one, as in the old time was the Church of Rome, and the succession of the Bishops thereof, until the time of Irenaeus, of Tertullian, and of Cyprian, and of certain others. In so much that not unworthily, Zanchius. those fathers were wont to appeal and cite the Heretics of their time, unto that Church, and to other men like to them, etc. But in all these Father's times, and many other like to them (as we have showed) this perpetual succession of Bishops, Bish: auth. agreeable to the Apostles doctrine. was of such as were superior in dignity, to the residue of the Pastors in those Churches: Therefore, this continuance of superiority in Bishops, and such titles of dignity in the ministery, is not repugnant to the Apostolical Church, nor to the Apostolical doctrine. Now, this Zanchius may the better be allowed of these our brethren, for that in some of the foresaid points, he favoureth in some part their opinion: Wherein Zanchius favoureth our brethren's opinion. as, for their Elders that were not Pastors, cap. 25. Aphorism. 7. For their division of Doctors distinct from Pastors. And for the name and order of Elders, to be used in the Scripture as all one with Bishops and Catechizers: Aphorism. 9 Which thing also we grant as before is noted, the substance of the order to be all one, and the difference only to be in the degree of dignity and authority. And also for Doctors to teach only, but not with such teaching, but that they did withal exhort, as he showeth after: Aphorism. 10. yet notwithstanding (saith he) we do not in the mean season disallow the Fathers, Approbation of orders multiplied. for that according to the diverse manner, both of dispensing the word, and of Governing the Church, they multiplied the orders of the Ministers: when as that thing was free for them, even as also it is for us. And when as it is apparent, that that was done of them for causes which were honest, pertaining, according to that time, to order, to comeliness, and to the edification of the Church. Aphorism the 11. Aphorism. 11. The confirmation of the same sentence, with the explication of certain Ecclesiastical orders in the primitive Church. For we know that our God is the God of order, not of confusion, and that the Church is kept by order, and lost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by lack of order. For which cause he hath instituted many also and diverse orders of ministers, not only in times passed in Israel, but also afterwards, in the Church, gathered together of the jews and of the Gentiles: and also for the same cause, he hath left it free unto the Churches, that they might add more orders or not add them, so that the same may be done to edification. Whereas therefore, (when all the Ministers of the word were called equally both Pastors, and also Bishops, & also Priests or Elders, The original of one to be superior and B. ) and whereas they were of equal authority; one afterward began to be preferred above all his Colleagues, howbeit not as their Lord, but as the Rector in the university above his other Colleagues: & to this man in principal, the care of the whole Church was committed: whereupon, and by a certain kind of Excellency, he alone was accustomed to be called by the name of bishop and Pastor, the residue of his fellow Ministers being contented with the name of Priests or Elders, in so much, that in every City there began to be one only Bishop, and many Priests or Elders. This thing we judge cannot be disallowed. Of which matter, the declaration and the sentence of Jerome both otherwhere, and also in the epistle to Euagrius, and in the commentaries of the Epistle to Titus chap. 1. is of us approved. Who saith, all this came rather of custom, than of the verity of the Lords disposing: that the plants of dissensions & of schisms, might be taken away. Verily by this reason, those things also that were ordained concerning Archbishops, yea, and of the 4. patriarchs, even before the Nicene Council itself, The same reason that served for B. serveth for Archb. we think may be excused and defended: although that all things in success of time afterwards, were drawn away unto the greatest tyranny and ambition: which is the cause why that the nearer we approach in those orders to the Apostolical simplicity, so much the more is it also of us allowed. And we judge, that every where they should endeavour to approach thereto. Now when Zanchius hath added certain other Aphorisms, concerning the Church and the lawful Ministers thereof: he setteth down (Aphorism. 20.) their authority, saying: We believe also, Whereto & how far the ministers auth. stretcheth. that great authority is of Christ given unto the lawful Ministers, to wit, to perform those things whereunto also they are called: to preach the Gospel: to interpret the holy scriptures according to the analogy of the faith: to catechise: to teach the people what is the will of God: to reprove and rebuke as well the great as the small: to remit or retain sins ministerially, to bind the impenitent and to lose the repentant: to administer also the Sacraments, which Christ instituted, and according to his manner delivered: to exercise Discipline after the prescription of Christ, and also by the expounding of the Apostles: to conclude, to all those things also which though they be not expressed in the holy scriptures, notwithstanding do appertain to order, and to comeliness, and make to edification, but not to destruction, according to the general rule delivered of the Apostle, That all things ought to be done in order, decently, and to edification. For neither do we believe, 1. Cor. 14.40. that any authority is given to the ministers, that aught to be stretched beyond the bounds of God's word, or unto any other end, than to the edification of the Church. And therefore, we utterly deny, that any Bishop, How far it is debatted. yea, or that all of them together, have authority of ordaining any thing contrary to the scriptures: of adding any thing unto them, or of taking any thing from them: of making new articles of the faith: of instituting new Sacraments: of bringing into the Church new worships: of setting forth laws that should bind the consciences, and that should be made equal in authority to the law of God: or of having dominion in the Church and consciences of the faithful: of forbidding those things that God hath granted, and would have to be free. Or finally of commanding any thing that is without the word of God, as though it were necessary to salvation: sith that it can not truly be said, that indeed the whole Church hath not this authority. Having thus in every particular, set down and limited the authority of the lawful Ministers of the Church, according to the word of God: he proceedeth (Aphorism 21.) unto this: Aphor. 21. that the politic authority of Bishops which also are Princes, is not to be denied, for any thing before restrained. That B. may have also political authority. In the mean season we deny not, that Bishops which withal are also Princes, besides the authority Ecclesiastical, should also have their laws politic and powers secular, yea even as the rest of Princes have: the right of the commanding secular things, the right of the sword: some of them the right of Electing and confirming kings, and Emperors: and of ordaining and administering other politic things: and of compelling the people subject unto them to yield them obedience: and there-upon, we confess, that unto their politic commandments, which without the transgression of God's law may be kept, their subjects ought to obey, not only for fear, but also for conscience. Rom. 13.5. For we know, that all power is of God, and who-so-euer resisteth, resisteth the ordinance of God. Rom. 13.1.2. And that moreover, kings are to be honoured, and we ought to be subject to Princes and Lords in all fear, not only to those that are courteous and modest, 1. Pet. 2.17. but also to the froward and wicked. To conclude, when he cometh to Ecclesiast. Discipline, which (Aphorism 36.) he divideth into popular and clerical: in the 3. part of the clerical discipline, (Aphorism 38.) he saith: The third is, that they should promise peculiar obedience in things that are honest, Obedience to Metropolitan. unto their Bishop, and to the Metropolitan of the Bishops. Now although by all these Aphorisms, of this excellent Learned man, and great light of our age, Zanchius, it is most apparent what his judgement is, of the superiority of Bishops, and with what reasons he proveth and confirmeth the same, to be in all points agreeable to God's word. Yet, for the further confirmation of these things, and to satisfy all such as should, or did mislike any thing contained in them: let us also not think it tedious, to peruse certain other observations, that he hath lastly adjoined to these Aphorisms, in the foresaid confession of the faith, with the preface of his reasons for the same. The observations of the same Zanchius, upon his confession. Neither few nor light are the causes, with the which I was drawn, Zanchius' confirmation of his confession in these things. that I had leaver add these observations to my confession, apart by themselves, than to alter any thing therein. There are not a few unto whom it is known, on what occasion, at what time, by whose commandment, in whose name, and to what ends, I being indeed unwilling and compelled, wrote the sum of the Christian Religion. Upon what occasion Zanchius set out these observations. But although each man seethe▪ that this confession was never (as it was hoped for) set forth in their name, for whose cause it was written: notwithstanding how this was done, and upon what causes it was done, all men do not clearly understand: while many men marvel at the doing, but are ignorant of the true causes of the matter. Hereupon how diverse suspicions might have happened unto many: how diverse judgements might have been made, both of me and of the confession itself, I will not say of private persons, but also of the very Churches: to conclude, how diverse and sinister reports, might have been scattered among the common people: what one is he among men that doth not know? It behoveth me therefore, before I shall die, to stop the sinister & naughty suspicions, judgements, reports, concerning my doctrine. Which thing I judged, could of me be done by no better mean, than if I should provide, that both my confession, even as it was of me written, should be set forth severally by itself: and also severally by themselves, my observations thereon, by the which, if any things were dark, they might be made plain: if any things were doubtful, they might be confirmed: and that I should leave the judgement of the whole business, unto the whole true Catholic Church. Moreover I thought, that to remove false suspicions out of men's minds, (if any were conceived) I should do no little good, if, what judgements were made of learned men, concerning the confession: I should even by their own letters make them known to all the godly: especially sith that also out of the same, every man might easily understand, for what causes the confession was not set forth, in that manner that it was purposed. A certain great man wrote unto me of that matter, in these words: Concerning that which you writ of your confession, A Noble man's letter to Zanchius on this matter. it was read over of me, and of N. and of others, with great pleasure. Which both was written most learnedly, & with a most excellent Method. And if so be, you except that, which in the end you add, concerning Archb. & the Hierarchy, it liked me exceedingly well. But when we did deliberate with our brethren N.N. the which are here, concerning the way and manner of entering into a concord, among all the Churches of our confession: they with one consent did judge: that this was both the only, & the safest, & the reddiest way: that the confessions of faith already received & set forth, by the Churches of every Province should be composed & compacted into one harmony; because they are all of them, one most like another, so far as appertaineth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to the substance of faith, and that their confession was refused of none of the Churches. This their counsel, when they proved it by many reasons, we have written thereof unto you, and to the Reverend brethren N.N. and to other Church's neighbours to us, who all of them greatly like the self same counsel. These things, out of the letters of that great man. To the same opinion almost, we might produce out of other men's letters also, writing of the same matter. But sith it is not necessary, for brevity sake we omit them. Zanchius now, being thus moved by these considerations, to justify all these his former Aphorisms, in these points aforesaid, setteth down among other, these observations following. Upon the 25. Chap. Aphorism. 10. & 11. When I wrote this confession of faith, I wrote all things of a good conscience: and as I believed, so I spoke also freely, as the holy scripture teacheth us to do. The orders not striving with the scripture. But, my faith first of all and simply, doth rely on the word of God; after which, somewhat also on the common consent of the whole ancient Catholic Church: so be, that the same consent, strive not with the holy scriptures. For I believe that those things which were of the holy Fathers, being gathered together in the name of the Lord, determined and received with a common consent of them all, without any contradiction of the holy scriptures: that those things (albeit they be not of the same authority with the holy Scriptures) are also of the holy Ghost. Hereupon it cometh to pass that those things that are of this sort: neither would I, neither dare I with a good conscience disallow them. But what is more certain out of the stories, out of the Counsels, and out of the writings of all the Fathers, than those orders of Ministers, of the which we have spoken, to have been ordained in the Church, and received by the common consent of the Christian common weal? But who am I, that I should disallow, that which the whole Church hath allowed? No, neither all the learned men of our time durst disallow. For why, they knew that both these things were lawful unto the Church, and that all those things proceeded and were ordained, both of godliness, and to good ends, for the edification of the elected. Bucers' opinion. And for the cause of confirming this matter: I thought good here to inserte such things as Martin Bucer of godly memory, a man most famous for singular godliness and learning, hath left written upon the Epistle to the Ephesians. As for the administration of the word when it is done by the reading and reciting of the divine scriptures, finally, Bucer. by the interpretation and explication of the same, and by exhortations taken from thence, and also by repetition, and by the Catechism, which is performed by mutual questions, and answers, of him that is the Catechiser, and of the party that is catechised, and by holy conferences and debatings of the harder Questions of our religion: How the Ecclesiastical functions are to be multied. according to this manifold dispensation of wholesome doctrine, the gifts or offices of this function are also multiplied. For whatsoever belonged to the most perfect manner of teaching, that (in the administration of the doctrine of salvation) is to be applied with most great study: because that, sith thou art a man the knowledge of seeing God, or living according unto God, which (as of all other it is most divine, so also most difficult) ought to be set forth: they, now that teach arts diligently, contained, in some certain books, (as, if a man would purpose out of Euclid, to teach the mathematicals) first of all, they will read and recite the book proposed: and straight ways they will expound the particular words that are not commonly know, (as every Art hath his proper words and names) and then, if any collection or argument be more briefly made, they expound it, by resolving the parts thereof, and make it clear by many examples: out of the general precepts, they teach particulars, and they do inform them how far forth they stretch. This it is (properly) to teach: But he that is indeed a sure or faithful Doctor, is not content to teach these things, although by a faithful deliverance of the Doctrine: but also he repeateth it, The manes of the D. reaching. D. exhortors and applier●. and exacteth the things that he taught, and offereth himself ready to his scholars, that they might demand a plain explication, of those matters whereof they doubt. Moreover he propoundeth the things that he hath taught, to be discussed in public disputations, that there might no doubt at all remain. Besides these things, he maketh oftentimes exhortations, to profit them well in the Doctrine proposed (Here again, the Doctor not only teacheth but also exhorteth.) And he addeth dissuasions from those things whereby they might be hindered, and also admonitions, and reprehentions, and general rebukings. Last of all such a master marketh diligently, what may profit every one of his scholars. And if he shall mark any to be slack in learning, he both correcteth him privily, and admonisheth him of his duty. If he perceive any to go lustily forward in learning, he often times calleth him, commendeth him, and inflameth him, that he might follow his study more and more. Christ the Lord himself did also keep all these seven manners of teaching. In the synagogue at Nazareth, he read the 61. Chapter of Esay, and interpeted it. Luc. 4. in the mount, he expounded the commandments of God. Math. 5. and taught every where, and exhorted, and reprehended, and rebuked out of the word of God. He answered also unto all both good and bad that asked him questions, and on the other side he demanded Questions, as Math 22. He often catechised the Disciples, he himself was also present at the catechising. Luke. 2. Sith therefore the ministry of teaching requireth a work so manifold: there are also many orders of Ministers deputed unto this Ministry. And first of all, Readers whose office was in a pulpit, a place somewhat higher, to recite the divine scriptures. But this recital of the divine scriptures was ordained to this purpose, Readers office. that both the tongue & the manner of speaking of the scripture, and the whole scripture itself might be made more known and familiar to the people. For, within a year, they recited all the holy books unto the people. When as those that opened the scriptures, could not by expounding, finish but some part of the scriptures, and that no great part, neither in one year. While in the mean season, by the only reciting of the divine books unto the people, the knowledge of all the points of our salvation was marvelously confirmed: for they are oftentimes in every one of the holy books repeated, and are by divers and other names expounded: so that always the people out of the lesson following, should learn many things, which they could not as yet plainly perceive by the former lesson: and by that work, was the people's judgement confirmed, concerning all our Religion, as also concerning the expositions of the scriptures, Curates. and concerning all doctrine that was brought forth before them, either by the lawful Curates and Doctors, or else by others. For these causes, this office also of reciting simply the divine scriptures unto the people, was in the ancient Churches, highly esteemed. Neither were any chosen to this ministry, but such as were commended for their singular godliness, the which both we may understand by other monuments of the ancients, and also is perceived chiefly by one Epistle or twain, of Saint Cyprian, as out of the fift Epistle, in the second book, concerning Aurelius, that was ordained a reader: Singers of the psalms & Hymns. And Epistle 22. in the third book, concerning Satyrus': And in the fourth book, concerning Celerinus Celestine. To these readers, were afterward adjoined Psalterists, who had the governing of the Psalms and hymns that were to be sung. Concerning the Scriptures to be read, (the Lord be thanked) it is well ordered in the English Churches, so that there might be fit readers, which should add thereto a gravity and religiousness, worthy of the divine mysteries that were recited in the holy Lessons. Let it therefore be pondered diligently, whose mouth they represent themselves to be, which in the sacred assembles read the divine books unto the people: that is to wit, they represent the mouth of God almighty: then, of what moment, of what dignity, the matters are, that are recited, which are the words and precepts of life eternal: last of all, to what manner of men, and to what purpose, the readers of the holy scriptures ought to serve. For they ought to minister unto the sons of God, for whose salvation, the first begotten son of God shed his own blood: by the which things the same salvation may more and more be made open, and be thoroughly performed unto them. Which things if a man with a true faith consider with himself: what gravity, decency, religion, can be yielded in any action, that such a reader should overslip? The pronunciation of the readers. But they which exercise this function, ought always to have that in the sight of their mind, that those things which are read before them, ought effectually to serve to the edification of faith in the hearers: the which also shall then at the length be brought to pass, when as both those things are well understood, and also are received as the words of God. But unto both of these, a most clear, well spoken, religious pronunciation, is required. Whereupon is gathered, that they are not the Ministers of Christ, which do so recite the divine scriptures, as though that were the only thing which should be required, that the shortest leisure that can be, may be spent in such kind of recital. Now, there is another office, Interpreters the interpretation of the Doctrine that is to be dispensed, that this to wit, a more simple explication of words and sentences. This ministry did the bishops execute, and the priests or Elders. Notwithstanding sometimes they admitted unto this function, out of the order of Deacons, and of subdeacons, yea, and sometime of the laity, such as they found to be by the holy Ghost made fit, profitable to exercise the same. So Origene being also a lay man, was called to this office, in the Church of Caesarea of Palestine, by Alexander bishop of Hilta, and by Thertistus bishop of the same Church of Caesarea. Euelpis also, by Neonus bishop of the Larandians, and Paulinus bishop by Celsus bishop of Iconium: and Theodorus by Atticus bishop of the Sinadians. These things are read in Eusebius in the sixth book, the tenth Chapter of his Ecclesiastical history. And out of the Epistle of those two bishops, Alexander of jerusalem, and Theoctistus of Caesarea, bishops in Palestine, to Demetrius' bishop of Alexandria, who reprehended the fact of these two bishops, concerning Origene, as though it were a thing never heard off, for a layman, while bishops were present, to speak in the Church unto the people. But these B. manifestly affirm, that this was not true, but that the holy Bishops were accustomed to exhort them, whom among the laity they knew to be fit, that they would bring forth some profit unto the people, of interpreting the scripture:, and in teaching: and that they would exercise this ministry, even while they their-selves also were present. And the second, and so the third part of the Ministry, to wit, interpretation and Doctrine, the bishops and the priests did administer it chiefly by themselves. Notwithstanding both out of the inferior orders, and also out of the lay persons, if they had noted any to be fit for this office, they adjoined them to be joint-laborers with them. After the same manner, did the bishops and the priests administer also the fourth part of delivering the doctrine, the which is, out of the divine books (being expounded) to exhort unto the duties of Godliness, to dissuade from sins, and from all things that may, on any part, slacken or hinder the course of a godly and holy life, to reprehend and chide those that sin, to comfort the penitent: although the bishops the priests or elders chiefly did perform this function, because that it required so much the great authority. 1. Tim. 5. The fift part, the Catechisms, they commended now to the priests, now to the Deacons, now to the ministers of the inferior orders, How the B, and the priests also did these things. even as every one appeared more apt unto this kind of teaching. And so, was Origene the Catechiser at Alexandria. The sixth book of the Ecclesiastical history of Eusebius of Caesarea. Chap. 13. and 20. Also the sixth part, the holy disputations, they yielded to every one that was more apt thereto, although for the most part, the bishops their selves governed them. The seventh part, private calling upon admonition, the bishops also studied to do it by themselves. Howbeit, they always exhort edevery one of the priests or elders, and the greater of the inferior orders to do the same. 1. Thes. 5. Therefore, the readers ought to exercise the ministry of the Doctrine, by reciting the divine scriptures, but the bishops by interpreting and by teaching, by exhorting, by disputing, and by private calling upon, and moreover both by reading, and by catechising, if that peculiar readers and catechisers want. Furthermore they committed the catechisms to certain Prieests and Deacons, or else, to those also that were chosen thereunto, out of the inferior orders. As also they admitted out of those, unto the offices of interpreting, and of teaching, and of disputing, whomsoever they found apt for these offices, in what order soever they were of the holy ministry, yet also (as it is said) out of the laity. But in these offices, that thing is diligently to be marked, that the holy ghost did indeed so disperse unto them that were his men, these gifts of teaching: that unto one he would give the gift and singular faculty, of interpreting and making plain the scriptures, unto whom notwithstanding he giveth not with the like dexterity, and with so happy success, to teach and confirm the points of our religion, out of the divine scriptures, or also luckily to defend them in disputing. But to another he giveth a peculiar and notable faculty of exhorting the brethren out of the scriptures, of admonishing, of reprehending, and also of catechising, and of private calling upon; unto whom notwithstanding, he giveth not, to excel in other gifts of teaching. This variety of the gifts of the holy Ghost, we daily find by trial in those, that do publicly teach the people of Christ, which are Christ's true Churches, and suffer themselves to be altogether ruled by the holy Ghost. These Churches do religiously note, what spiritual faculties are given to each one in the Church, and do so much as lieth in them, apply every man to that point, that appertaineth to his function. Wherefore unto the particular parts of teaching, they give particular ministers, if so be, they find among the men that appertain unto them, those that are of the Lord singularly made and furnished to the particular office of teaching. But because it is necessary for the salvation of God's people, that no part of the teaching (which I have reckoned to be 7 parts) be utterly over-passed in any Church: every one of the Ministers, yea, and of the laity also, in what place soever he be placed in the Church, aught to exercise (so far forth as he is able) all these parts of teaching, both of reading, and of interpreting, and of teaching, and of exhorting, and of Catechizing, and of disputing, and of calling upon: See how far our learned Brethren differ from this grave judgement of Bucer and Zanchius for the exercise of these offices) Yea every one ought to take upon him to himself, How every minister according to his gift may do these things. so many of these functions that are to be administered, and so much part of every one of them, as unto how many, and to how much part of every one, he shall perceive himself to be furnished of the holy ghost. Let the example of an house orderly appointed and distributed, be considered: wherein the Father of the household about other businesses, the Mother of the household about other the sons and the Daughters about other, the Man-seruauntes and the Mayde-seruaunts about other. Hear while all are present and in health, every one indeed goeth about his own office: but if any of the Family be absent, or be not in good health, and there happen a necessity of some service: each one so runneth to help that necessity, that often times the men go about the women's offices, and the Women the Offices of the men, the Masters the offices of the servants, and the servants the offices of the Masters. Now as Zanchius allegeth this out of Bucer, concerning the several and mutual use of the Ecclesiastical offices, in so many points different from these our Learned brethren, and that in the allowance of the church of England: so he proceedeth Concerning also the clerical Discipline: The third part of the clerical Discipline, is a peculiar subjection: Wherein the clerk that are of inferior degree and Ministry, do submit themselves to them, which in order and Ministry are superior. The Lord hath taught us this part of discipline, both by his example, who ordained his Disciples, that should become the Doctors or Teachers of Gods elected, throughout all the world, by a peculiar mastership unto this office, and by a certain Domestical Discipline: whom the apostles imitating, every one of them also had his Disciples, the which he would frame to exercise orderly the holy Ministry. For, every more difficult function of life, requireth also a peculiar & perpetual doctrine, Institution and custody: as we may see in the studies of philosophy, and in the military institution. Which Lycurgus thoroughly weighing, did so ordain the common weal of the Lacedæmonians (as Xenophon witnesseth) that no order in the common weal, should be without his proper office of a master. And Plato also in his Laws and common weal requireth, Magisterio. that nothing at all should be among the Citizens, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, unkept. Hereupon also our Lord when as he would have those who are his to be so set together▪ one with another, and to cleave together: he verily putteth every one of those that are his, under others of whom, as it were of members that are of more ample and larger spreading power and efficacy, he should be kept, moved, and ruled. The same thing hath the holy Ghost commanded, Be ye subject one to another in the fear of God, Ephes. 5. The holy Fathers therefore in the old time, considering these things, have described the same in the order of the Clergy, that all the other Clerks should with a singular care be kept and governed of the Presbyter or Eldership: but among the priests or Elders, the bishop, as a Consul among the secretaries of the commonweal: (according to the often alleged example of calvin) So he should bear the cheeefest care and custody both of the whole Church, The authority of a B. among the priests. and also singularly of the universal order of the clergy. But unto every more frequented Church, they ordained bishops: and to every one of such Churches, they commended the Churches nearer adjoining, that were in the lesser Towns or Villages, and to this purpose, they willed the priests and Curates of the same Churches (whom they called Chorepiscopus, Bishop's Choral) each one of them to hearken to the bishop, that was nearer to them, and to the Presbytery or Eldership. Which priests or Elders, those B being the more chief, called oftentimes together with all their Clergy, and furnished them in knowledge and diligence of their functions. But whereas the Lord would, that they which are men appertaining to him, should mutually embrace one another, and sustain care one of another, as far and as largely as they are able (for all Christians are one body) the holy fathers have ordained, that the bishops of every province (for now all the territories subject to the Romans were distributed into Provinces,) should assemble themselves together with the priests or Elders, so often as the need of the churches required the same: but for certainty twice in the year, and should inquire of the doctrine and discipline of Christ, how the same in all the particular Churches was administered, and did flourish. And where they had found, that sin was, they should correct it and such things as they had known to be well they should confirm them and advance them. But, Metrop. B. over the other. Bish. that these Synods should rightly & orderly be administered, they willed, that both for the calling and moderating of them, the Metropolitans should be the rulers of them, that is the bishops of every Metropolitan City: for so the chiefest city in every province was called, where the Pretory or palace of the chiefest precedent was. And thereupon unto these Metropolitan bishops, they enjoined a certain care and heedfulness of all the Churches throughout their province: that if so be they understood of any thing, that were not so well ordained or done, either of the ministers of the Churches, or of the common people, they should in time admonish them thereof: The bishops peculiar jurisdiction and if they could not amend the same by their admonitions, that to correct it, they should call together a synod of the B. for no judgement was granted unto them, which by their own proper authority, they might exercise in the Churches, that had bishops themselves of their own: for all the judgement both over the people and over the Clergy, appertained to their own bishop, and to the priest or Elder of every church, and as for the B. the synods judged them. And thereupon when as the B. were to be ordained unto the churches: it was appointed that they should come together to the same church, with all the B. of their Province (if that with the profit of the churches it might be done,) if not, with some of them, Howbeit, not with fewer than two or three of them. Which bishops should govern the election of the bishop, Elections of bishops. if it were yet to be made: and being made, they should examine it, and most severely make inquiry of him that is elected, and search out all his life, and his ability for the Episcopal office, and then at length initiate him into the episcopal function. All which things were instituted and were in force unto this end, that there might be among the churches and in the Ministers thereof, so great a knowledge as by any means was possible, and a mutual care: and to debar and expel all offences of Doctrine and of manners, and to sustain, advance and make more effectual the edification of faith & life, worthy of Christ the Lord: insomuch, that if so be any had ceased from their duty or office, the other bishops should give assistance, yea, to the excommunicating & casting him out of the Episcopal office. Let those things be considered, that Saint Cyprian wrote to Stephanus bishop of Rome, concerning Martian bish. of Arles, who fell into the novatians sect. The first book, Epist. 13. and also those things that he wrote in the third Epistle, the first book, concerning a certain portion of the Flock distributed to every one of the B. and the things that he hath in his Preface, Quae prefatus enim. and in the counsel of Carthage, as he writeth to Quirinus. Furthermore, when as all the world was replenished with Churches, and that the metropolitans also had need of their own particular cure, for neither (as there began to be very many) were all of them wise or watchful enough, (for always in all orders of men, few are excellent) the care of some of the provinces, was committed to certain Bishops of the chief Churches: as to the Roman, to the Constantinopolitan, to the Antiochian and to the Alexandrine, and afterward to the Caesarien of Cappadocia, and to certain other, even as (the Churches of Christ's faithful people being multiplied) the necessity seemed to requre. primates. Notwithstanding, unto these Primate bishops (whom afterward they called patriarchs) there was no right at all over these other bishops or Churches, then that I have said, was unto every Metropolitan, patriarchs. over the Churches and bishops of his province. Every one unto his own portion of Churches, ought a singular care and heedfulness, and also to admonish the bishops in time, if any had aught offended or slacked in his office. And if by admonishing he had profited nothing, to adhibite the authority of a Council. Among these the first place was yielded to the Roman, both for the reverence of S. Peter, and also for the majesty of the City. By which reason the fathers afterward ensuing, gave the second place to the Constantinopolitan, as to the other Rome, and to the bishop of the seat of the Empire: whereas the Antiochian had before that, obtained the second place among these patriarchs. But as the nature of man defiled with ambition, laboureth always more, that he might rule far & wide, then that he might rule well: these patriarchs on the occasion of this general care of the Churches to them committed, drew unto them, first, the ordaining of the bishops that were nearer to them: And by that ordaining, snatched by little and little, and confirmed some jurisdiction over such bishops and their churches. Which evil when now it glimpsed forth, began to become a grievous contention, concerning a general empire over all the Churches. Which indeed first of all john a certain bishop of Constantinople, under the Emperor Mauritius, attempted to take upon him. Of which contention very many Epistles▪ among the Epistles of S. Gregory, lib. 5.6.7. are extant. At the length under Phocas, the Roman obtained this Title of the universal Bishop. Which title by little and little, Zanchius. the bishops of this sea, began more to abuse: until upon occasion, first by the division of the Empire under Charles the great, afterwards by the discords of Princes and nations: whereby they broke the power of the Emperor of the West, and of other kings: They have lift up themselves, into that Antichristian power, whereof now they vaunt; having first oppressed the power of the Bishops, and then also, of the kings and Emperors. Thus therefore hath Satan overthrown, all the healthful obedience & government of the clerical order. The clerical order of government and obedience broken by Antichr. For the Roman antichrist hath taken an immediate Empire unto himself, over all the Clergy, and also over the Laity: & hath dissolved the custody of the Bishops, when they were good, and their care towards those that were commended to their trust. But because it is altogether necessary, that every of the Clerks, should have their proper keepers and carers for them: the power and authority, as of Bishops, so also of Archdeacon's, and of all other, by what means soever they be esteemed, unto whom any portion of keeping and governing the Clergy is committed, is to be restored: and also their vigilancy, and heedful regard or correction, least any should be at all in this order, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, unkept. Thus far Bucer, not only faithfully reciting, but also praising the custom of the ancient church in divers orders of Ecclesiastical functions to be ordained, of the which we have before spoken. Moreover, I ought also to have had consideration of those churches which although they have embraced the Gospel; notwithwanding both in matter and in name, they have retained their Bishops and Archbish. Besides that in the Churches also of the Protestants, there want not in very deed Bishops and Archbishops: The names of Arch. and bishop better than Superintendentes. whom (having changed their good Greek names, into evil Latin names,) they call Superindentes, and general Superindentes: but where also, they neither obtain these old good Greek names, neither these new evil Latin names: even there notwithstanding some principals or chief are wont to be, unto whom almost all the authority, doth belong. Pointing out, as it should seem to Geneva, etc. The controversy therefore should have been of names: but whenas we agree concerning the matters; what do we brawl concerning the names? In the mean season, even as I have not dissallowed the Fathers, in that matter, whereupon the question is: Prima●ij. so can I not, but love our men's zeal. Who have therefore hated the names, because they fear, least with the names, the old ambition also and the tyranny, with the ruin and desolation of the Churches, might be called again. Thus reverently writeth Zanchius, of these Ecclesiastical orders, & of this superiority of Bishops, and Archbishops: yea and of the patriarchs also, before the pride and tyranny of antichrist came: and that it came not by these orders and dignities, but by the ambitious breaking and violating of them: and he neither disalloweth, but highly commendeth these Fathers, and these orders and dignities, as good and necessary, and nothing prejudicial to the word of God: nor condemneth the zeal of these our brethren, though he show withal, that albeit they shun and hate the name of Bishop and Archbishop: yet they have the matter, and retain still such principal or chief ministers among them, to whom almost all the authority doth belong. Now as he hath thus at large defended and confirmed his 10. & 11. Aphorisms: so coming to the 12. he proceedeth against the ambition & tyranny of the Pope, to show that none of all these orders and dignities, no not of the patriarchs, were any occasion thereunto saying: For neither Christ ordained such an head: neither the ancient Fathers would admit it, because it was not expedient for the Church. But they were contented with 4. patriarchs, The authority of arch. against Antichristes tyranny. the Roman, the Constantinopolitan, the Alexandrine, and the Antiochien: who all of them should be of equal authority and power, and each one should be content with his own bounds, even as it was defined in the Nicene Council, & confirmed in others: and that, not without great & weighty causes. Of the which, this in my judgement is not the last, to wit, least the doors should be opened unto tyranny in the Church: but rather, that if one should dare to attempt any thing, contrary to the sound doctrine of Christ, and contrary to the liberty of the Church. The other Archbish. being of no less authority with their bishops, might oppose themselves and daunt his boldness, & break his tyranny. The Church in respect of Christ, is a kingdom. In respect of men, that are in the same, & either do rule, or be ruled; it is a government of the best persons. This is Zanchius grave judgement, even of these patriarchs, that if they had been kept as they ought to have been, and according to the good purpose of their institution: they were so little occasions to any popish pride or tyranny, The original of Patriarches for general counsels. that they were the most especial suppression of it, and of all errors and factions in the Church, and that it impeacheth nothing Christ's kingdom, And what hath Zanchius said herein, (save for the bare title of Hierarchy) that calvin himself doth not enough? who saith: Institut. Chr. cap. 8. de Fide. Sect. 54. But that all the particular Provinces, had one Archbishop among the Bishops: and that in the Nicene Council, patriarchs were ordained, that in order and dignity should be superior to the Archbishop; that thing appertained to the conservation of discipline. Albeit, in this disputation it can not be overpassed, that these degrees therefore, were chiefly instituted for this cause, that if any thing should happen in any Church, which could not be well dispatched of a few: it should be referred to a provincial Synod. If the greatness and difficulty of the cause, required also a greater discussing, that patriarchs were adhibited together with the Synods: from the which there should be no appeal, but a general Council. The government being thus constituted, some called it an Hierarchy, an holy government, or sacred principality, The name of Hierarchy by a name (as seemeth to me) unproper verily, unused in the Scriptures. For the holy Ghost would take heed, lest any should dream of principaiity or Domination, when as the government of the Church is treated upon. Howbeit, if omitting the name, we shall look into the matter: we shall find that the old Bishops would not faigneanother form of governing the Church, different from that which the Lord by his word prescribed. Thus also doth calvin his self confess, besides that which he before confessed. And what should we then (as Zanchius said) brawl about the name: the matter whereof is thus, of all these so excellent learneed men, both the ancient Fathers, and also the late, or yet lyving most famoust writers, approved, practised, and confirmed? and yet what signifieth this name Hierarchy in effect also, which calvin only here misliketh, but an holy principality or sacred government, not different from this name Ecclesiastical regiment: which title our brethren here allow, & so often in this their Learned discourse of Eccl. government? Let us now therefore return to proceed on their learned Discourse. Finally S. Peter chap. 5.1. the place before alleged, comprehendeth all the three names, of Elders, Pastors, and Bishops. The Elders (saith he) which are amongst you, I beseech. The name of Pastor, The learned discourse, Pag. 27 & 28. is understanded by relation of the names of feeding, and the flock, which he useth also by the name of Archipoimen, which signifieth the chief of Pastors, which is our Saviour Christ. The name of Bishop, or Overseers, is included in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifieth them, which do carefully exercise the office of Bishops or Overseers. His exhortation is this. The Elders which are amongst you, I beseech, which am also a fellow Elder, 1. Pet. 5.1. 1, Pe●. 5.1.2.3.4. and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shallbe revealed: Feed the flock of God which is committed unto you, so much as in you lieth, carefully overseeing, not by constraint, but willingly: Not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind: Not as exercising Lordship over the haeritage, but that you may be examples to the flock. And when the chief Pastor shall appear, you shall receive an uncorruptible crown of glory. S. Peter in this place reproveth three notable vices, which do great hurt among the Minist. of the Church, if they be not taken heed of: slothfulness in teaching: covetousness of lucre: & ambitious desire of exercising Lordship: exhorting them to painful diligence, because they were B. or Overseers: to a ready care because they were Past. & therefore should labour for love of the flock, & not for lucre like hirelings; to humility, because their chief dignity in that they were Elders, excel in godliness, Titles of Archbish. etc. that they might be an example to the flock, which cannot be, except they submit themselves and their lives, to the common rule of other men: which, most excellent virtues if they embrace, they should be sure to be plentifully rewarded by him, who only deserveth to be called the chief of all Elders, Pastors, and Bishops: to whom only, these honourable names of Archipresbyter, Archiepiscopus. & Archipoimen, and such like, do properly agree. For, as the Apostle, calleth our saviour Christ in this place, the chief Pastor; so in the second chap. the 25. verse, 1. Pe●, 2.25. he calleth him both the Pastor and Bishop of our souls. Wherefore, as he only is our chief Pastor, or Archipoimen, so is he also our only Archbishop. And that the name of Archipresbyter, or chief of Elders; pertaineth to no mortal man, may be seen by this place, where S. Pet. that excellent & high Apost. who if any man could, might as well as any have challenged that name, durst not call himself other then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a fellow Elder: no, not when he fought authority to himself, by that name to be bold, to exhort the Elders of the Church. But least any should think we stay only in names & terms, which are not so greatly material, let him consider, that S, Peter expressly forbiddeth the Elders to exercise Lordship over their several congregations, how much more over their fellow Elders. Here are cited two testimonies out of the Apostle S. Peter: The former 1. Pet 5. v. 1.2.3. & 4. Out of which, our Brethren first do gather, that Peter exhorting the Ministers of the Church, Bridges comprehendeth all the three names, S. Peter's testimonies of these titles. Names included. Elders, Pastors, and Bishops, indifferently. Elders, plainly: Pastor, understanded by relation, of the names of feeding, and the flock, & by the name of Archipoimen, which signifieth the chief of Pastors, which is our saviour Christ: and the name of Bishops or Ouerseeers is included in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth them, which do carefully exercise the office of Bishops, or overseers. Now although we may most easily grant all this, as nothing prejudicial to the question: Yet see, what slender arguments these are, that because a name may be included; or by relation of some sense may be understanded: therefore, the name of Bishop in this or that place so included, must always be as ordinary & proper a name, as is the name of Priest or Elder, by the which he is expressly termed. We deny not (as we have often before showed) but that both the terms, and the offices also that the terms purport, were then for a while used indifferently: but whether the usage of them afterward, & that, in the Apost. times, more properly to one among the Pastors or Elders of the Churches, were usedwell, & is to be continually retained; that is here the question. S. Peter calleth (& that expressly) all Christians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a holy sacerdotal Priesthood as also S. john calleth them, 1. Pet. 2. Apocal. 1. Kings & Sacerdotal Priists. in express terms, & not inclusively: And many other terms by relation of understanding, Titles of ● & Elders. may be very aptly applied to many men; and yet we may not these-uppon make proper names of them. Every Overseer is not a Bishop, Proper and improper names. nor every shepherd a Pastor: nor every Elder a Minister of God's word. The name of Elder is used of S. Peter, even immediately a●ter this allegation cited, not for a Minister of the word of God, ver, 5. as Beza noteth. Hear the reason of the Antithesis requireth, that we should take this name concerning age, and not concerning dignity. But if it be to be taken in the first verse, as Beza taketh it, saying, The name of Priest or Elder is general, comprehending all them that are (as I may term them) of the Senate Ecclesiastical; vulgarly, Seniors: how then do our Brethren here say, that S. Peter there comprehendeth all the three names, of Elders, Pastors, and Bishops: and so restrain it only unto those, that are Teachers and Ministers of God's word? How necessary Bish. superiority is, by our brethren's own collection. Concerning the collection that our brethren gather out of S. Peter's words ver. 1.2.3. and 4▪ That he reproveth three notable vices, slothfulness in teaching: covetousness of lucre: and ambitious desire of exercising Lordship: and that if these three be not taken heed unto, they do great hurt among the Ministers of the Church: All this again, we confess is true. And even because these three must be taken heed unto: we therefore, with all the foresaid holy fathers, and godly Learned men, do think it very convenient and needful, that there should be amongst the Elders, Pastors and Bishops, some superiors to call upon them, as Peter did, and to Oversee, that such as are slothful in teaching, Sloth, should be orderly caused to be diligent in teaching, so much as in them lieth. And such as are covetous of lucre, should be taken heed unto: Covetousness. and either removed, or so reform, that both in taking and in spending the goods of the Church, they should so behave themselves, as the laws of God, and the godly ordinances of the Church and realm, hath in that behalf provided. And that those which forgetting their calling, Pride. are puffed up with any ambitious desire of exercising Lordship, should be repressed: and if they have any such title or office, should exercise their Lordship in humility, without ambition or pride. But this simply debarreth not, the exercise of all kind of Lordship in any competent dignity, reverent title of honour, and superior authority, which is the question; but rather confirmeth it so to be exercised, with painful diligence and ready care, without slothfulness: with hospitality, & love of the flock, without covetousness of lucre: with modest humility without ambitious desire of exercising Lordship. We allow here this collection out of Peter, that he eahorteth them to painful diligence, because ●hey were B, or Overseers: to a ready care, because they were Pastors: & ●herefore should labour for love of the flock, & not for lucre, like hirelings: to modest humility, Submissio. because their chief dignity, in that they were Elders, was to excel in godliness, that they might be an example to the flock. All this likewise is true, their excellency in godliness, is above all the excellency in any dignity or Ecclesiastical honour, that they can be exalted unto: but that that followeth; which cannot be except they submit themselves and their lives to the common rule of other men: is somewhat darkly and strangely spoken. For if our brethren mean by this submission of themselves and their lives, to the common rule of other men, that they should have no superior Ecclesiastical authority over other men, but that all other men were equal and alike in all Ecclesiastical government unto them: or rather, that the overseers of other men, should in their rule & oversight, be under & inferior to the rule: and that also, to the common rule of other men▪ this were a manifest absurdity in all reason, and a plain contradiction to itself. Neither did Peter or any of the Apostles so submit themselves: neither were Timothy or Titus bidden by S. Paul so to submit themselves; neither doth Peter here, or any where else, will any Bish. Pastors or Elders, so to do. But, Neither Peter nor Paul require such submission. for all their humulity of mind, and diligence of body, in teaching, etc. nevertheless, to oversee, to command, to rebuke, to rule & govern other men, Ministers and all, according to their place of calling, and authority of God committed unto them. And they that thus do, and embrace withal, these most excellent virtues: they should be sure to be plentifully rewarded by him who only (as here is truly said) deserveth to be called the chief of all Elders, Pastors, & Bishops. Neither is there any, (at least that I know, or I think, that our Brethren can name) except that man of sin the Pope, which claimeth any such title, to be called, the chief of all Elders, Pastors, and Bishops: sure I am, none deserveth so to be called. As for any of our Archbishops, whose dignity, as it containeth no such absolute, either power or title: so it stretcheth nothing near to all, or to half, or to a quarter, and but scarce to a handful, in comparison of all Elders Pastors and Bishops: and is bownded only to this little corner and portion of the Church, in the realm of England: both they and all we still acknowledging this, that our Lord jesus Christ only deserveth to be called, How these ●●tles agree only to ● Christ. and only is indeed, the chief of all Elders, Pastors & B. as here is said. And also, if these words following, be likewise so absolutely & generally understood, To whom only these honourable names of Archipresbyter, Archiepiscopus, Archipoimen, and such like, do properly agree: we agree also, that they agree only (in that proper sense) to him. As Christ (in an absolute understanding of good,) saith: Luc. 18. None is good but only God. And as S Paul saith to the Rom. 16. namely to Timothy. 1. Tim, ●. ●7. To the King eternal, immortal, invisible, & wise only, be honour & glory for ever and ever. And 1. Tim. 6. 15-& 16. speaking of the coming of the coming of our L jesus Christ: whom in his times, he that blessed one, Titles proper to Chr. and only Prince, King of kings, and Lord of lord●, shall show: who only hath immortality, etc. And as the same our saviour Christ willeth us, not to be called father or Master: For we have one Father and Master, which is in heaven: to whom only these honourable titles do (indeed) properly agree: speaking properly, of proper agreement, in the fourth and highest manner of propriety. How diuer● of these titles are from Christ, communicated to man. But if we make all these honorab. titles, so properly to agree unto Christ, that none of them may be understood, included, or communicated, to any of the Eccl. Political, nor economical Ministers of Christ: so that none at all may be called either good, or King, or Prince, or Wise, or Father, or Master, by participation of any portion of the goodness, power, wisdom, fatherhood, mastership, etc. of God, as offices, gifts, or graces imparted to us: while we should hypocritically, or zealously pretend to honour him, and to seek his only glory: we should both unthankfully (indeed) not acknowledge his goodness and gracious gifts, which recommend to us the more glory in him: and disobedientlie dishonour him in his ordinances, and higher powers, that he hath placed over us. But where now doth God, (in this, or any other express, or inclusive place of all the Scripture) challenge to himself all these honourable names to agree only and properly unto him? The honourable name that Saint Peter only. Hear ascribeth to Christ, is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 chief or principal pastor. Which Title I never heard of any other, that it was given unto, or taken upon him. As for Archipresbytor a principal priest or elder (which term it is not in use with us, nor Archpriest, Archipoimen & archpriest as our adversaries call it) because in the office of Priesthood, Eldership, or Pastorship, we acknowledge all to have one office under the high-pastor of our souls, and ancient of days jesus Christ. Only, sith that the name Archbishop, signifying a chief or principal overseer, is no where in the Scrip. properly, nor not properly applied unto him, shall we dare to say, as we may of some other peculiar titles and names of God, jehovah, Omnipotent, etc. (when as God now & then of his goodness vouchsafeth to communicate to some his especial Minist. so honorab. names, belonging to himself, Adonai, Ellohim, & the name of the Lords Christ, or anointed, etc.) that these hon. name's Archipresbyter, & Archiepis. do so only & properly agree unto jesus Christ, that none other, in no other conditional sense, may be called by them? I think this can not well be proved by scripture, nor any reason or argument will infer it. If we think this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is, Prince, by contraction prefixed, and in corporate to the other words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do so advance the sense thereof, that they become not compatible to mortal men: especially being applied to the ordering & governing of the church: are not those names & offices being simply taken without this composition serving to build the Ch. as S. Paul saith Ephes. 4. even on the place, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that our Brethren do allege for pastors and Doctors: that they are all given to the work of the Ministry unto the edifying or building of the body of Christ, etc. So that indeed, all these offices that Christ ordained, are but builders of this mystical temple, until we all come to the unity of faith, and of the knowledge of the son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ: And who is the principal builder of this Temple? but even he that said of the Temple of his own natural body, to the which his mystical body is compared: Thes●name● & offices given to the building of the Church. Destroy this Temple, and in three days, I will build it up again. Io. 6.21. whereupon (saith S. Paul Heb. 9.1. etc.) holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and heade-Priest of our confession jesus. who is faithful to him that hath preferred him, even as Moses also in all his house. For he was counted worthy of greater glory than Moses: how much greater honour than the house, he hath that made it. For every house is builded of some man, but he that created all things is God. And verily, Moses was faithful in all his house. as a servant, in witness of those things, that were to be spoken. But Christ is in his house as a Son, which house are we, if we keep firm and sure the confidence and glory of hope, unto the ending. Here are these honourable names, attributed both unto Christ, & unto Moses: that as Christ was the builder of the spiritual house or temple of God▪ so was Moses. Christ as the son and owner, Moses, but as a servant in God's house. and yet cometh in S. Paul, 1. Cor. 3. v. 9.10. Ye are the building of God, according to the grace of God that is given to me, I as a wise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arch-builder, (or chief builder) which we commonly translatea Master builder, have laid the foundation, & another buildeth upon it? What? durst S. Paul say of himself he was, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which term principally, is proper unto Christ? For the word signifieth, such principality and chief degree: applied by S. Paul unto himself, and that in the chiefest work of God's Church, the building of it: the work that containeth all Ecclesiastical offices, and whereto all do tend: and that without any derogation to jesus Christ. Although Christ absolutely, simply and above all, be the only and proper 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of all this mystical building. And is this honourable name Elder, of such honourable Eldership, and prerogative above builder, or of any such peculiar application to God the Father, or to Christ the son, that it is only and properly applied to him? Indeed, Christ is called, the old or ancient of days, not the elder, except with addition: our Elder Brother: otherwise, this honourable name is not so proper only to Christ, to be called Presbyter, as to be called Sacerdos. And therefore is less injurious, yea▪ no injury at all, to the peculiar, or to any other honourable name, of our saviour jesus Christ▪ to be called Archipresbyter. And yet, if Presbyter had been any name of Christ, seeing that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sacerdos, & Pontifex: & yet admitted a mortal man to be so much: Man being but the figure called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. his figure even of his Sacrifice, that one above all the other sacrificing priests, was called also, fummus sacerdos, or Pontifex Maximus. the highest sacred Minister, or sacrificing priest, and chiefest Bishop, without any derogation to Christ's honour: yea, it rather served, to his honour: how much more than in this title Presbyter and Archipresbyter, being names not so proper to him, may a mortal man without any dishonour to his prerogative, reverently be called Archipresbyter? If it be said, the highe-prieste was so called, because he prefigured Christ: True it is, But, sith our Brethren confess, that those offices & callings, were likewise also for good order of discipline among them; although that priesthood both in him, and in all other of that order of Aaron and Levi, be accomplished in Christ, and so abolished: yet, as the degrees of order and differences of Ministers among them (by our brethren's own confession) was the sign also of the differences among us: So, why not withal, of the differences of degrees and dignities in the same. And sith our brethren allege héereunto, the Synagogues among the jews, and their order théerein and that they had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, chief governors or princes of the Synagogues, which order of dignity, was not abolished by Christ: and some good christians were such among the jews, not disallowed but commended by S. Luke, Th● name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among the Christian jews. even by that name, Act. 18. ver. 8. And Crispus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉▪ the Arch-governor of the Synagogue believed with all his house. And although Paul after ward 1. Cor. 1.14. mentioning this Crispus, term him not there, the Arch-governor of the jews synagogue: yet as it further appeareth Act. 18. ver. 17. by Sosthenes, who was long before a faithful Christian, and as divers allege out of Eusebius lib. 1. cap. 13. he was also one of the 72 Disciples chosen of Christ. So S. Luke calleth him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Arch ruler or principal of the synagogue: continuing well enough the name and office of his dignity, with the sincerity of Christ's religion, any order then to the contrary notwithstanding. But if our brethren ask us, what we say to the other honourable name Archiepiscopus: indeed, we need say the less to this of Archipresbyter, Archdeaco●. Archprieste, or Arch elder, retaining no such name among us, as we have of archdeacon, and Archbishop: but because the name of Deacon is a name much less proper unto Christ: archdeacon may be afforded with our brethren's less suspicion, of touching Christ's glory and prheminence. Deacon signifying but Minister; Arch-deac, Bishop. can signify but a chief or principal Minister: and therefore may be suffered with less envy: and we have heard Zanchius & Bucers' allowance of it. As for the name of Bi. being a name of dignity and (being well used) as S. Paul saith, deserving double honour, Archbish. it is not only a name pertaining to Christ, which is called the bishop of our souls. but also communicated by his Apostles unto mortal men. And though the name of Archb. signify a principal overseer in his dignity; & being simply and absolutely understood of Christ above all other: is in very deed only the true archbishop: yet since the Scripture expresseth no where this name, either peculiarly or at all unto him: & since so many holy fathers, of so great antiquity, both in their several writings, & with so many universal consents, even in the best allowed both general and provincial Counsels, The name & office well used according to the observations of S. Peter. upon so grounded reasons, to so good & necessary purposes, & in such lawful cases: but yet, with such conditions & bounds (as is aforesaid) did ordain, receive, & continue the same: and since that also, such notable Protestants of our own age, in the Churches reform, Luther, Melancthon, Zuinglius, Oecolampadius, Bullinger, Peter, Martyr, Gualther, Hemingius, Zanchius, yea, and calvin himself (as we have heard) alloweth the institution and practise thereof: I see not, how our learned brethren discoursers can rightly find any at all of these vices, that Peter here reproveth, as doing great hurt among the Ministers of the Church, to be directly contained in this honourable name of Archb. but that it may be well used with painful diligence, ready care, and with modest humility, to the great benefit among the Ministers of the Church, & to the suppressing of all these foresaid, three notable, & many other as notable vices, factions and schisines, disorders & consusions, errors & heresies, when any such begin to spring and break out, among the ministers of the Church, to suppress them by the godly industry and necessary authority of the bishop and Archb. jurisdictions. But our brethren here do make these reasons: & first for Archbishop: For, How far we yield to our brethren's argument for these terms how far we deny it. as the Apostle calleth our Saviour Christ in this place, the chief pastor, so in the 2. chap. v. 25. ●e calleth him both the Pastor & Bishop of our souls. Wherefore as he only is our chief Pastor or Archipoimen: so is he also our only Archbishop. This argument were to some purpose if we simply denied Christ to be our Archbishop, or to be our only Archbishop in that sense, that is equivalent there to Archpastor. For as our brethren here theirselues confess, it is to be understood of him, who only deserveth to be called. the chief of all Elders, pastors, and Bishops: In whech sense we not only acknowledge him to be the only Archpastor, but to be the only Arch-elder (if we may so term him, because he is our elder brother) or rather Archpriest betokening the chief dignity of that his office, and also to be the only Archbishop. But sith we, nor any good Protestant, nor any of the ancient Fathers, understand Archbishop in that sense: Therefore, this argument a comparati●, and of the similitude of the one term to the other, is disparatum and much unlike. The one is a plain term expressly ascribed in the Scripture unto Christ, and not the other: and therefore, Archpriest if our brethren's arguments from the express scriptures be good, then have we better liberty, to deny their reason's goodness, for this term. Yea if this reason be of good consequence, as the Apostle calleth our Saviour Christ in this place the chief Pastor: so in the 2. chap. the 25. verse, he calleth him both the Pastor and Bishop of our souls. If these places follow thus, as the one, so the other: why may we not better conclude thus? But these honourable names, the Pastor and Bishop of our souls, are not so absolutely in all senses proper only unto Christ, but that under Christ in some good and true senses, they are also compatible, to other men. Therefore, these terms of Pastor, but more especially of Archbishop, which in no place is ascribed to Christ, are not so absolutely in all senses proper only unto Christ, but that under Christ in some good and true senses, they are also compatible to other men. So that if we consider their own argument better, it maketh not so much with them, as against them. Now as they reason thus on these two terms Archpastor, & Archbishop; so again for the third term, Archipresbyter, they like wise say: And that the name Archipresbyter or chief of Elders, The learned disc Pag. 27 pertaineth to no mortal man, may be seen by this place, where S. Peter that excellent and high Apostle, who if any man could, might aswell as any, have challenged that name, durst not call himself other then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a fellow Elder, no; not when he sought authority to himself, by that name to be bold, to exhort the Elders of the Church. No man (as I said before) among us in England, Bridges hath any such name, as Archipresbyter, Archpriest, or chief of Elders, and therefore it is needless to challenge the discipline of the Church of England for that, which (all England seeth) we have not. But if our brethren think, The name of Archp●. not in use among us. with an awke stroke, through the sides of this title of Archprieste, to wound the title of Archbishop, inferring thus: If the name of Archbishop be allowable, which is the higher title, Our brothers argum. then much more is the name of Arche-presbyter, allowable, which is the lower: But that it is not allowable: therefore, much less the greater of Archbishop. The Mayor of this argument being distinguished, the defect thereof, forthwith appeareth. True it is, that where they use the title of Archprieste, they use it as inferior both to Archbishop, and to Bishop. Our use of the name Archbishop because they take it only as a chief or principal person, among a number of those that are but mere Priests or Elders, without any Episcopal superiority. And so likewise archdeacon, as a chief or principal person, among a number of other Deacons. And thus also use we the honourable name of Archb for a chief or principal person among the Bishops, that is to wit, one, to whom among some other of the same order and Ministry, a certain superior dignity above some the residue of his fellows, is attributed. In which sense also, this name Archpriest, or Arch-elder, though we use it not, might of others (as is aforesaid) be used well enough. But bicaus the name Priest, Why we use not the name Archpriest. or pastoral Elder, hath a nearer reference to the office, which is all one and the same, both in the him, and in Bi. and Archbish. And the name of bishop signifieth not a several office of the Ministry, but a superior degree of dignity and authority, in the selfsame order of the Ministry that the Priest or pastoral Elder is in, as S. Aug. to. 4. in his questions ex utroque mixtim. quaest. 101. saith. Quid est enim Episcopus, nisi primus Presbyter, hoc est, summus sacerdos? For what is a Bishop, but the chief Priest or Elder, that is to say, the highest sacred Minister? & this he speaketh even of that place of S. Paul ●. Tim. 3. where the priest or Elder is called a Bishop. so that the bishop: yea, and the Archbishop, are still but Priests or Elders, in respect of the order and office of the ministery. Although therefore the name of Bishop, being an honourable name, howbeit, but a name of degree in the office of dignity and auth. & thereby may aswell admit the name of a superior among themselves: as also over the residue of the Ministers: yet, sith the name of Pastor, Priest, or Pastoral elder, continueth still both in the Bishop, and in the archbishop, being not so apt to admit such a superior title of dignity among the Pastors, priests or pastoral Elders, which are titles common to them all, & signifting rather the substance of the office, than any quality of degree therein: and substantia non dicitur, secundum magis & minus. Which reason, though it sufficeth us to use the title of the one, & not of the other, because Archpriest, which indeed is lesser in respect of degeee, is the greater, or at least, in both is all one, in respect of the office or order of the Ministry, and therefore we use it not: yet, (for any thing here alleged by our brethren) not only we might use it, but even the Papists might still use the title of Archprieste, as they do, understanding not the name Priest for sacrificer. For, where our brethren say, that the name of Archipresbyter or chief of Elders, pertaineth to no mortal man: neither they, nor any other (except the Pope himself, who said also, he was the B. of Bishops,) did so use the ●earme Archipresbyter, How the name of Arch Priest and Archbishop are allowable. in this sense, thus indefinitely and in general spoken, as chief of Elders: but as a chief person in some subalternal respects, among a certain number and appointed company of his brethren, Priests or Elders. And so it may well appertain to a mortal man, yea, to a man framed after our brethren's own devising: to be a chief man among his brethren Elders for a time, or for an action in the assembly of them. Yea, in this restraint, they admit the name of Archbishop also. And if (as they say) Episcopus and Presbyter be all one: then in that sense, admitting Archbishop, Peter prince of the Apost. how far will they differ from admitting also the title of Archipresbyter? but now let us see their argument against this title, that is here alleged out of Peter. The argument is this. If any man could; Our brothers argument from S. Peter. S. Peter that excellent and high Apostle, might as well as any, have challenged that name, Arch-elder. But, S. Peter durst not call himself other than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a fellow Elder, no not when he sought authority to himself, by that name to be bold to exhort the Elders of the Church: Ergo: No mortal man) that is an Elder, can or aught to dare, to challenge that name Archipresbyter, or to call himself, other than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Concerning here our brethren's Mayor in this argument, we gladly allow it, both that S. Peter was so excellent and high an Apostle: and also that if any (mere) mortal man could, he might as well as any, How S. Pete● excelled among the Apost. and whether in dignity. have challenged that name. But, by the way, (because of these words more than I looked for) had S. Peter (in any respect) any superiority above his fellow Apostles? Did he then excel the residue in any dignity? or were not the residue as high as he, but that he by an excellency, is here said to be high, more than all they? Were not our brethren afraid, least by these speeches, they might seem to confirm the Papists opinion, that S. Peter was the head of the Apostles? yea, diverse of the Fathers call S. Peter the Prince of the Apostles, as doth Origen in his 17. homily upon Luke: and Cyprian lib. 1. Epist. 3. lib. 4. Epist. 9 that Peter was the foundation of the church: and yet doth neither Origene allow any primacy of the B. of Rome, or of the church of Rome from Peter. And Cyprian De simplicitate Praelatorum saith: The Lord speaketh unto Peter, I (saith he) say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock, I will build my Church, and the gates of Hell shall not overcome it. I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and the things that thou shalt bind upon the earth, shallbe bound also in heaven: Pare●●. And to the same party after his resurrection, he saith; Feed my sheep. And although (after his resurrection) he gave his power alike even or equal to all the Apostles, and say, As the Father sent me, so send I you also: receive ye the holy Ghost, If ye shall remit sins unto any, they shallbe remitted unto him: if you shall hold them, they shallbe holden: Notwithstanding, that he might make unity manifest, he by his authority did dispose the original of the same unity, beginning from one. certainly, this were the other Apostles also that Peter was, endued with like consort both of honour and power, but the beginning cometh from unity, that the Church might be declared to be one. So then, though the honour and power, in respect of their office of Apostleship, were equal in them all, and of like consort: yet in this respect, that in all numbers and orders, there must ever be a beginning from one; therein was Peter in the Apostles company, the first and chiefest: And so is he called of the Evangelist Mat. 10.1, by the name of first. Neither is he set down first, for order only: but also for some other pre-eminence dependent thereon. And therefore, we may safely gather that Christ made a special choice of these 3. Apostles, Peter, james, & john, more than of all the residue. Whereupon it should seem that these 3. were as S. Paul noteth Gal. 2. esteemed as pillars, & seemed great among them. And though james had the prerogative of being made the B. of jerusalem, & not Peter: yet (as it is very well said here by our brethren) in respect of the fellowship of the Ap. Peter & not james was that excellent and high Apostle, that excelled and surmounted all his fellows, as ringleader, and though not as head; yet oftentimes as mouth of all the residue. And could there be these differences & degrees of excellency, height, and greatness, in this one fellowship of the Apostles (the honour and power of like consort in the office of the Apostleship still remaining) & may there not be so, And even in like manner may a Arch. excel a bish. among the Elders, & yet, one to be B. and among the Bishops, & yet, one be Archb. without the impeachement of the honour and of the power of like consort, in the office of Eldership, & Bishopric. If one among them (notwithstanding the equality of their Apostleship) was, and might be rightly called: that excellent & high Apostle: why may not one likewise among the Elders) not withstanding the equality of their Eldership) be indeed, & so be called, that excellent and high Elder; & one B. among the B. that excellent & high Bishop. But, let this go, as a escape by the way: yea, let S. Peter be never so excellent and high an Apostle: yet (say our brethren) he durst not call himself other than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, fellow Elder. No? durst h● not so? how then durst he, even at the first dash, and the very first words of his Epistle, call himself, Peter the Apostle of jesus Christ. lo, here he called himself other then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a fellow Elder. Yea, but (say they) he durst not, when he sought authority to himself, by that name to be bold, to exhort the Elders of the Church: even than durst he not call himself other than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. What? & did S. Peter then seek authority to himself? or, if he did it, did he seek it by that name? was not the name of the Apostle, of more antiquity than Praesbyter was? or, than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was? yea or then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had been, if he had used it? or, did he not rather then, set aside his authority, and set aside the name of apostle, and descend down to their own name & order, unto whom he wrote? being but in respect of their Ministers, Priests or Elders, and abasing himself, to insinuate and persuade them the rather, as though that excellent and high apost. had been but their fellow, in that office of Priesthood or Eldership, though in his apostleship far above them. And therefore (be it spoken under correction) this seemeth not to be so well avouched of our brethren: Peter forbiddeth Lordship. that S. Peter durst not call himself other than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a fellow Elder: no, not when he sought authority to himself by that name, to be bold to exhort the Elders of the Church, Peter both durst and did call himself other then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. For, S. Peter, could, & durst, if he would have done it And he did it, when he would use his authority, But here it should seem, he used or sought it not, but set it aside, and used this lower term, in his modest humility to the which he exhorted them. And yet, this no white hindered his superior dignity & office of apostleship far above them. But wherefore is this word fellow Elder, here so urged, that S. Peter where he sought authority to himself, durst use no other name? doth this word fellow Elder infer, that all that are fellows even in the very Eldership, must be in all respects fellow & fellow like, and all of such equality, that no superior dignity may be admitted in this fellowship? S. Paul also calleth diverse persons his fellow labourers in the Gospel, & his fellow servants: yea, he mentioneth his yoake-fellowe, which is, of diverse, expounded for his wife: yea, he calleth all the sons of God, fellow heirs with Christ: and is there no difference of dignities in these fellowships? In the Court, the best noble man in England, will many times call those that are of far inferior offices, & yet her majesties sworn men in her most honourable household, their fellows: shall we say they durst not call themselves other than their fellows? or that they are all alike & equal. But if this fellowship that Peter speaketh of be in the Eldership: then by the way, we have here to note, that S. Peter was both an apostle: & an elder. But our brothers say, an elder is all one with a B. therefore the name & office of a B. was not so separated, but that even the Apostles also both might be and were their selves Bishops. The learned Dis. Pag. 27. & 28. But least (say our Brethren) any man should think, we stay only in names and terms, which are not so greatly material: let him consider that Saint Peter expressly forbiddeth the Elders, to exercise Lordship over theirseveral congregations, how much more over their fellow Elders. If our brethren would not, that any man should think they stay only in names and terms: Bridges. and if names and terms are not so greatly material: I marvel they make so much ado about them, or rather, as it seemeth (for any thing here alleged) stay (if not only) yet most upon them? the thing indeed that S. Peter here expressly forbiddeth, Our brothers' st●y on names. is to exer-Lordship. So that Saint Peter's forbidding, is not for any name or term, but for exercise of Lordship. Neither do we deny, but that which the Apostle Saint peter forbibdeth th● Elders, should be still forbidden them. And with our brethren, allowing Caluines & Bezaes' interpretation, (sith from calvin, they seem to have taken all these their observations, on the foresaid place of Peter, though somewhat altering both Caluines words & sense herein) that the word Clergy signifieth not the whole order of the Ministers, but the particular Churches, and the universal body of the Ch. (that is, all the congregation, being the L. inheritance & allotment), as well as the Ministers: Doth S. Peter then forbidden, that any one Elder should have & exercise any superior government over the clergy, understanding the clergy in this sense? If he doth not, but alloweth it, & his self practised it; then, howsoever the name both of governing, & of clergy may be abused; the matter is clear, that one Priest or Elder, among the residue, may have a lawful superior auth. & government over the clergy; (that is) over all the universal body of the Church, in every particular or several cogregation: & so not only over the people, but also over the whole order of Minist. For the matter that is here forbidden the Elders, is not to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which simply is governing and exercising a lawful authority: but rather manifestly he doth infer it, saying: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, neither as misruling of the clergy. On which word saith calvin: Because with the Grecians, the proposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the most part is taken in evil part: Peter here reproveth a preposterous Lordship: calvin, such as theirs, who not considering with themselves, that they are the Minist. of Christ & of the church do covet somewhat more. What Lordship Peter reproveth. Erasmus noteth on it: Non dominantes more Regum: Not ruling after the manner of Kings: or Non Dominio prementes, Not pressing them with Dominion (or Lordship:) so that here is nothing at all spoken against any unlawful superiority, that any elders may exercise over the clergy. For otherwise he should permit no government at all unto them over the congregation, or of one at any time in a synod. And therefore these words of Saint Peter must needs be understood either of too excelling, or of too tyrannical government, and so calvin concludes thus: For God delivereth not a kingdom to the Pastors, but only enjoyenth them a care, so that theright in the mean time remains entire to himself, and so saith Beza: he showeth that not a kingdom, but a care is committed to them. So that this Lordship that Saint Peter expressly forbiddeth, is only against their exercise of a kinglike, or of a tyrannical Lordship, and not against any moderate Lordship and superior authority over the clergy. But to prove this further and better (as they think) our brethren ascend from Saint Peter unto Christ, saying. Which thing also our Saviour Christ precisely forbiddeth, when there was a contention among his apo. about the primacy. The Kings of the nations have dominion over them, and they that bear rule over them are called gracious Lords or beneficial, but you shall not be so. Also Mat. 20.25. and Mar. 10.41, Upon the ambitious request of the sons of Zebedy, & the disdain of the other against them. The princes of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them and they that be great, exercise authority over them, but it shall not be so amongst you, but who so will be great amongst you, let him be your Minister, and he that will be first among you, let him be your servant. the same thing he taught by his example, How Christ forbiddeth greater. when he washed his Disciples feet, and commanded them to show the like humility one towards another, which were all brethren, which he their Lord and Master showed towards them. Also Math, 23.8. etc. He forbiddeth all ambitious titles of Rabbi, Master, Father. etc., The reason he addeth, john. 13.13. for you are all brethren. For these names agree properly to God and Christ. Math. 23.8. For the greatest dignity of an Ecclesiastical person is a Ministry, and not a Lordship. These places having been before by other so often alleged, and so fully answered, need the less discussing. The words indeed of our saviour Christ cited by S. Luke. 22.25. might seem at the first show to forbid all government, because he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they rule or govern them: But being larger and more plainly expounded, both not only, by S. Mat. 20.25, but also by S. Mark 10.41, who both of them expressly use the same word that S. Peter doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they do plainly show, that it should be understood in the same sense. And therefore this is here of our Brethren rightlyer said than they were aware of: Which thing also our saviour Christ precisely forbiddeth, when &c. So that, as S. Peter simply forbiddeth not in the Ministry, all Superiority of government and reverend Title of honour: but only such as either is proper unto Kings, or abused by tyrants & ambitious men: so the same thing being forbidden precisely by our saviour Christ also: if we will be rightly precise herein, we ought not to stretch these words further, than Saviour Christ & S. Peter do. And as indeed, it is good to note, what here our saviour Christ precisely forbiddeth: so let us precisely note withal, what here precisely he alloweth. For whereas both in Mat. and Mark he saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but he that willbe among you made greote, which the old tranflation calleth greater, And again, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, be & be made first or chief: Luke saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: and again, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, But he that is greatest among you, and he that is Prince or governor. Here all these titles are both precisely expressed. The first among them, that is to say among the ministers of the word, and sacraments, and not only the first in order of number, but in the quality and degree of dignity: first, that is, great, greater, & greatest amog them. Yea in precise words, the prince or governor of them. And all this, with this condition, is expressly & precisely allowed of our saviour Christ, that is to say, so that the same person be the Minister or the servant of them al. If our brethren say: how can the same person be both greatest & least, How Christ expounds his own wo●des. governor and servant all at once? although these may agree well together, in diverse respects: yet, to urge even the precise words of our Saviour Christ, Christ expressly doth expound himself. For that which is said before ●e should be, Luk. 22. saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as though he were one that served: that is to say, he should in his greater dignity or government of them, behave himself in lowliness and humility, Titles of Masters & fathers as if he were the servant & the least among them, And this well accordeth to S. Peter's former sentence, exhorting the Elders, among other virtues, to modest humility. But our brethren perhaps, Our Br. example flat against them. would not have these express words thus precisely urged, & yet, see how they make it more plain, even by the very example that they bring (as they think) against it. The same thing (say they) he taught by his example, when he washed his apostles feet, & commanded them to show the like humility one to another, which were all brethren, which he their Lord & master showed to them. And was this example indeed, the teaching of the same thing? What then, if he for all this great humility, yea, & that, commanding them to show the like humility, did notwithstanding, retain still a superiority of lordship & mastership over them, that both our brethren confess, saying, which he their Lord & M. showed towards them. & when Christ had showed them this example, Humility debarreth not superiority of office. he himself said: Understand ye ●hat I have done unto you? ye call me master & Lord, & ye say well, for so I am. If now, he taught them by his doctrine the same thing, in the foresaid places, Mat. 20. Mar. 10. & Luc. 22. that he taught them here by his example: then do not those places precisely forbid, every Mastership & Lordship, or superiorship of authority & title of dignity & honour, among the ministers of the word & sacraments. Neither doth Mastersh. or Lordsh. or superior authority & title thereof among them (being so far as we acknowledge them, inferior to our Saviour Christ's) any whit impugn the disciples, or any godly Prelate's humility, or their humility impugn their Mastership, Lordship, or superior authority & title, as it did not in this example of Christ▪ nor in other humble both Princes & Prelates, as Constantine, Theodosius, etc. Ambrose, Augustine, etc. that with the Apostles followed this example. And to the same effect writeth both Ierom, Augustine, and divers others: Superiority therefore, in the godly governors, civil or ec-clesiastical, may join with the true humility well enough. As for that place. Mat. 23.8. etc. where (they say) Christ forbiddeth all ambitious titles of Rabbi, Master, Father, etc. Shall we condemn all these titles for ambitious? Rabbi, among us is not in use, but among the jews, and a reverend name, signifying all one with Master, great, or excellent, or one instead of many: and given also to Christ, and accepted of him: and since, ascribed without offence, to many notable, christian and godly jews, besides the wicked & erroneous Rabbins. As for the titles of Maist. & father, as they are usual among us: so they are not ambitious: & if any ambitiously desire them, the ambition is in the man, not in the title. Neither doth Chr. simply forbidden these titles, but the ambition to obtain them. For although in precise words he say, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: But be ye not called Rabbi: Nevertheless, the meaning thereof is so plain, that not only the old vulgar translation doth well expound it, Vos aute nolite vocari Rabbi: but will not ye to be called Rabbi. as who should say, Have ye no inordinate will or desire so to be called: But that also even Beza himself saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est, ne amb●atis hunc honorem: neque enim vetat Christus, etc. Be ye not called, that is to say do not ye ambitiously desire (or sue for) this honour. Beza annot. in Mat. 1. For Christ forbiddeth not, that we should give to the Magist. and to Masters their honour but he condemneth ambition, as August, declareth in the Sermon of the Lords words, out of Mat. 11. as Erasinus hath noted. Or else, by these titles Master or Father in this place, he meaneth them not in such senses, as we commonly use to call them: but for such as are Doctors or Masters in teaching and giving praeceptes, and so are the very words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Be ye not called Doctors: as who say Be ye not called Doctors of any doctrine of yourselves, and precepts of your devising, nor be ye called fathers, as authors & originals of doctrine & religion, for that only appertaineth to God. Both which expositions as the text yields them apparently, so the most and best of all the interpreters old and new, agree upon them. Neither doth the reason that he addeth, For you are all Br. (meaning, both by creation and regeneration, under God our chief Master & father) take away the lawful use of this title Mast. & Father among men: or the being, either of Mast. in their subalternal degrees, either of Father in nature▪ in years or in dignity, either ecclesiastical or political. Yea, our brethren theirselues (if they have children) can be content they call them Father, and they call one another Master, for all these words. Ephes. 5 5. 1. Tim 5.21. And therefore this is not so truly inferred: For these names agree properly to God & Christ: except they mean this properly not very properly, neither in this speech of God and Christ, (for though S paul in a few places, speak thus distinctly, God and Christ: yet might we more properly use S. Paul's plainer speeches: and sith Christ also is God and man, to have said, God the father and Christ) Neither: do these titles Father & master, agree so properly to God the Father and to Christ. For both Christ is called more properly of the twain, the son than the father, And God the father of whom is all fatherhood in heaven & earth, though he be properly called God the father, and our heavenly father: The name of Father not proper to Ch●iste. yet he is not properly called father, in the proper sense. For when we say a thing is prop●r to one, we commonly exclude the propriety of the same from all but him. But God that vouchsafeth (as I have said already) to communicate higher & more proper names of his than Master or Father, alloweth so generally the use of these names, Master and Father, both to good and bad, nor debarreth them from any his ministers: that I see not how▪ in any sense that we do use them, they can be aptly said to agree properly to ●od & Christ, which if it were true, than our use of these name's Master or Father, were not only improper, but plain blasphemy. As for that that is added here, as a reason hereof: for, the greatest dignity of an Eccl. person, B. temporalties. is a ministery and not a Lordship: is a very improper illation on the premises. Howbeit, it may be well granted without prejudice. And may as well be said, of any civil, as of any Ecclesiastical person, that his greatest dignity is a ministery and not a Lordship. For in that he is God's Minister, it surmounteth the greatest worldly dignity he can attain unto, The dignity of being God's minister. all were he King or Keyser never so great. And this also is in very deed, the greatest dignity in every Eccl. person, (above any degree of external dignity, which for order sake he is promoted unto) that he is God's Minister: as S. Paul said, let a man so esteem us as the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God, 1. Co. 4.1. And in this respect, not the greatest prince in the world, if he fear God, but (be ●he Priest never so poor, or low of degree) he humbly acknowledgeth this poor Minister of God's word and Sacraments, in his Ministration, to be of far greater dignity, than is all his Civil power and external Majesty. But the question is not here so properly, which is the greatest dignity of an Ecclesiastical person: whether a Ministry, or a Lordship? meaning by Ministry, the Ecclesiastical function, by Lordship, either a Title or an estate of some external superior government: as whether these twain may be compatible. Which point though calvin on the foresaid sentence of our Saviour Christ, Math. 20. resolve it, for a Civil Princes or temporal lords part, that in cases of urgent necessity he that hath the Lordship of a Village or a city, Brentus resolution for Ministers that they may be magistrates. may exercise the office of teaching: and the same he showed in his foresaid Epistle to the king of Polonia: and on the other part, Brentius, on the foresaid example likewise resolveth this point, for him that is a Minister of the Word, that he in diverse respects also, may withal hold, as the possession of external goods, so an external Lordship or principality: Yet, sith that the most famous Zanchius, hath even as it were the other day, besides his former confession, on this though not directly on neither of these points, yet added in his appendix. Cap. 25. Aphoris. 21. His observations also hereupon: I will only here set down that which he saith, whereby we may see how much more any Lordships, that any of our bishops or archb. have, are allowable and our Brethren should gladlier yield unto them. There are two far different questions, (saith Zanchius) whether it be lawful for bishops to be princes also, and for Princes to be bishops, retaying their principalities: And whether they which already are both B. & princes, besides their authority Ecclesiastical, may also have rights or laws politic over Citizens being subjects unto them: and thereupon whether the subjects ought to obey them as princes, yea, or no. In my Aphorism, I spoke nothing at all of the former question, because it was not necessary: but only of the later. But who doth not plainly see, that it is made manifest by the testimonies of me brought forth, that, by what right and by what wrong they were created princes, Diotrepher. they must wholly obey them. For why should not they that are subjects to the B. of Mentz, Coleine, and Triers, being princes of the Empire and withal Archb. obey them in things that fight nothing at all with Christian godliness? certes, it were the part of seditious men, not to obey them. But if they must obey these: why must not they also that live under his government, obey the bishop of Rome, in the same things, and for the same cause? For of all these, the reason is the same or all one. Of the former question (as I said before) I disputed nothing, nor yet now also, in this my brief confession, The former question diputable on both parts. have I determined to dispute. When as I know, that all are not of one opinion, and many things may be spoken on both parts. That place Math. 20. (Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles or of the nations do rule over them, & the great men exercise power over them but ye shall not so:) Some interpreting it one way, & of the only apostles and Ministers of the word: others, another way, of all the Disciples of Christ and Christians. Thus saith the renomned Zanchius of these matters. And if so worthy and great learned man, and most earnest protestant, even where he forbeareth the disputing of this former question, (which would God he had discussed (but as I say) on the second question, he writ thus, of so Great estates and principalities, being joined with the ecclesiastical ministry, yea, by what right or wrong soever they be joined, yet that they must be obeyed, and that they play the parts of fedicious men that obey them not, in things not repugnant unto Godliness: May not we, (that by many degrees cometh nothing near to such principalities, as Zanchias speaketh of,) justify the superiority and Lordship of bishops and Archb. among us, which they hold under our most gracious sovereign, but as Degrees of dignity for order sake, and using the same with ready care, painful diligence, and modest humility, and acknowledging also their greatest dignity, to be their Ecclesiastical Ministry, and not their external Lordship? But for the further conferming thereof: our Brethren have yet one argument more, from the apostle S. john, saying. Saint john also in his third Epistle sharply reproveth Diot●ephes, The L. D Pag. 29. because he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, one that desired the primacy, in the Church. 1. I●hn. 9 This example also of reproving this ambitious Diotrephes, Our brethren's example nothing t● the question. is well alleged against the inordinate desire of primacy in the Church, such as Diotrephes had: but is nothing to the question in hand, whether any Primacy in any particular Churches among the Ministers of the word, may be lawfully exercised: yea, or no: if it be not desired, but imposed on them or desired, in a more lawful manner then this Diotrephes did. Our Brethren here translate it not very precisely but to their advantage, one that desired the primacy of the Church: where as the Apostles words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, one loving the primacy of them. Expressly noting his ambition, that his love was all set, not on them, but on the primacy of them. If our brethren then conclude that the primacy, if it might not be loved, must needs be unlawful: may we not as well conclude thus, Diotrephes examples maketh more to prove that there was then a superiority, then that there was none. There is nothing more wicked then to love money. Eccl. 10. And therefore Money must needs be unlawful? Or rather, doth not this prove the more, that there is a lawfulness of the thing, yea, and a lawful love of it also, because the fault was neither in the thing itself, nor simply in the love, but in the inordinate or immoderate love thereof. Whether this Diotrephes were a Minister of the word of God, or no: that is not apparent. If he were not, it is the further from the Question. But if he were, as it is not unlikely, than it argueth, that even in the apostles times there were Degrees of dignity in the Ministry, whereby some were Superior to the residue of their fellow-brethrens in the Church, and some were chief also among them. For, Ignoti nulla cupido. If there had been no such Primacy, there had been etc. But to be in Love with these dignities, and so to desire them ambitiously, or to usurp them tyrannously, as saint john saith, that this Diotrephes did (, who would not receive, no, not S. john himself that was far in dignity his Superior, nor would entertain the Brethren, and forbade other that would receive them, and cast them out of the Church: this insolency, tyranny, and ambition, condemned in him, or in any other like him, is nothing at all against this lawful superiority or primacy that is allowed among us, yea, rather, it confirmeth the same. Howbeit, it is a good example (we confess) for all Prelates of the Church, to take heed of the like vices, in their Ecclesiastical government. Now, when with all these testimonies and examples, our Brethren have made this Learned Discourse, against this Superiority of Bishops over their Brethren Pastors: lest it might be thought, they had too much abased the bishop's authority: they make exception and say. Howbeit, in this case we must take heed, that we spoil not the Ministers of the Church of all their lawful authority. The learned Dis. Pag. 29. This is a good caveat, if it had come in time. But although we commonly say, When the steed is stolen shut the stable door: yet better late than never. For if all these things that our brethren have avouched, were admitted: Bridges. a great part of it, though not all their lawful authority should be spoiled But, if we must take heed heeeunto, it is good yet taking heed in time. For, these reasons have so forestalled, a number of our brethren, that it is more than high time, it were taken heed unto. And yet, if we would take good heed indeed, and not be carried away with shows and glorious pretences of Zeal and Reformation, so far, that we take no heed to discern between the matter of Religion, & the form of Discipline: between things commanded and commended: between Ius & factum, the fact done, and the right of the thing to be done: Lawful authority. between Rules and examples: between things expressed & things inferred: between the use of things and the abuse of them: if we would take heed to the ancient records of unsuspected Chronicles, to the grave testimonies of the ancient holy fathers, to the continual (even from the apostles times) and universal practice of all the whole and all the parts of the Church of Christ, until our own age: and if now (after the general corruptions of the papists,) we would take heed to the sound and mature, judgement and consent of the best Learned godliest and most reverend, renounned Protestants: & most of all, if we would take heed to the testimonies and examples cited out of Gods most holy word, & not shuffle them over, & loosely apply them: if we would (I say) take more diligent heed to all these things: we should neither spoil the Ministers of the Church of all, or of any their lawful authority, nor entangle ourselves with these unnecessary troubles and divisions that we make But our brethren though thus late, howbeit now at length, willing us in this case, to take heed, that we spoil not the Ministers of the Church, of all their lawful authority, as though they were content we should take no great heed though they were spoiled of some of their lawful authority: do add this reason. For although these testimonies of scripture, directly condemn the authority of one pastor above another: The L. Disc. Pag. 29 & 30. yet neither do they set every pastor at liberty by himself, to do what they list without controlment: nor yet do take away the lawful authority he hath over his flock: but that imperious and pompous dominion, which is meet for civil magistrates, and great potentates to exercise in worldly affayes: otherwise (in respect of their lawful authority) they are called by the apostle in his epistle to the Hebr. Guides, such as are appointed to oversee the flock, & unto them submission & obedience is commanded, in the same chap. verse. 11. Whether these testimonies of scripture, that have been alleged, directly condemn the authority one pastor above another, yea, or no: Bridges. I refer it to the better taking heed of all these testimonies, & on that which hath on either side been said thereon. Direct condemnation should have been uttered in some express words. But as yet, there hath passed no such direct sentence, nor direct implication of any condemnation thereof at all, but rathen the clean contrary. But our brethren presupposing this condemnation, Our brethren presuppose of direct condemnation. & yet again doubting the objection of another no less inconvenience than the spoil of all the lawful authority, thinking to prevent this also, do say. Yet neither do they set every pastor at liberty by himself to do what they list, without controlment. How far off (must we imagine) would they be set, from such a liberty, every pastor by himself to do what they list without controlment? when as no one among them hath any authority over another, but every one of them is equal, & in all respects fellow & fellow like unto another, hail fellow well met, Beza. without any one among them any whit superior over them? are they not then the nearer, What liberty this equality would breed to do even what they list? at least, may they not do so, for any one among them that can let them? who although he do control them, hath he any authority to control them? And, except they have the greater grace of God, so to stay themselves, that (as it is said, 1. Tim. 1. There is no law given to the righteous:) they need no law nor governor over them. But if the apostles (as we have heard Caluines confession) were not with out one of their company to be a superior among them: may we not well think, that other pastors have as much and far more need, to have one pastor also among them to be their superior? Yea, and it were but as Beza saith in his confession, cap, 5. De eccl. upon this article, 29. That there ought to be some order appointed in the college of the Pastors. Although (saith he) the authority of the pastors among themselves be equal, as it is one function, Notwithstanding it is necessary, that all companies should be governed in some certain order. Therefore we see, that at Jerusalem in the college of the Apostles, Peter went before the residue. Howbeit, it comes not to pass hereupon, which some strive for, to wit, that the apostleship of P●ter, is to be distinguished from the office of his colleagues, as though he had been a prince over the apostles, or as the head of the church. For he went before his colleagues, only, for because of order, and that in the common assembly, so often as need required. And that it was so, it is manifest of that, that being before the Church reprehended, by those that were of the circumcision: he yields a reason of his legacy that he had traveled in: and is at Antioch openly by Paul reproved Neither shall any, no, not the lightest testimony in all that whole history be found, out of which this primacy may be gathered. But on the contrary, the whole order of the history convinceth, that the vocation of the Apostles was even, and the function equal. Here B●Za maketh among the Apostles, & all Pastors, both an equality & an inequality. In respect of the function & apostleship or pastorship, all are even & equal. Peter's apostleship is not distinguished or different from the apostleship of the residue, as though he were their prince or head: this Primacy or any the lightest testimony thereof is not to be found. Yea, in this respect, he suffers himself to be reproved, both of his equals and inferiors. But in respect of order they are again unequal, & the same Peter so much superior, that he goeth before them al. And hereupon he setteth down for all pastors a general rule: that although in respect of the function or office of the pastorship, all pastors beeven & equal: yet in respect of their company, & of some certain order, it is necessary that they should all of them be governed, and so some one or few among them, must of very necessity be their superiors. But let Bez● proceed. Therefore we acknowledge that it is necessary, that there should be some one among the Breath. which should assemble together the college: which should show them of the businesses, which should send his colleges to gather the voices, to conclude, which should when need shallbe, writ & speak in the colleges name. Such an one was he in the ancient church, Priests in the primitive church. whom justine calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, the bishop: they call him now in some places the dean of the company, which hath a yearly office, to wit, where the Chuches are distributed into companies: otherwhere, they call him a Superintendent, to avoid I suppose, the envy of the Episcopal tyranny. But we are not ignorant, how many things were ordained by the ancients, concerning the seats of Bishops, of metropolitans, and of patriarchs, and that of the best zeal, and that with the limits of each one determined, and having a certain authority attributed to them. Yet nevertheless, superintendant. because that horrible tyranny which springing from these beginnings (as Jerome rightly judged, and is manifest by all the whole history of those times) did undo or lose the universal Church, and almost that alone hindereth at this day the renewing thereof: we rest ourselves in the order and custom of the Apostles, whom it appeareth sufficiently to have chosen by their common consent, in the procuring of their businesses, Metropolitan. them that they judged to be most fit, according as necessity did require, and even in such sort, that the power of those men should be temporary, (or continuing but for a time) and should be defined or bounded, and that the Churches among themselves should yield reverence one to another of duty, but not of a certain royal Empire, to wit, when as they sought this only thing, that they might mutually one help an other, in the increasing of the glory of God. So far is it off, that it should be lawful for any man, to attempt aught of his own will, or that any should say, that he ought to be judged of no man although he drew all men headlong into hell, as that Roman Antichrist not only said, but also left it written, that a perpetual monument of the Roman Apostasy might remain. And that these things were thus practised of the Apostles, may to every man be manifest out of the history of Mathias, and the Deacons election, & also out of that, that Simon & john are sent of the residue of the Apostles unto Samaria, and Barnabas, judas, and Silas unto Antioch: yea, and that out of all the Synod holden at Jerusalem, and out of those things which in many places are written of Paul. If there were no more granted, but this that here Beza yieldeth unto: it were enough sufficiently and directly, to condemn the assertion of our Brethren, denying the authority of one Pastor above another. For here is some authority plainly granted, yea, and thought necessary, of one above another; both among the Apostles and among the Pastors. Howbeit, (by the way, and once again) I marvel no less than before I did, Bezaeswrong ascribing that to the occasion of the Pope's tyranny, that was the chiefest stop thereof. at this so reverend & godly learned Father M. Beza, that he would not only (as before) affirm, that from these beginnings of the order among the ancients as well for Bishops as metropolitans & patriarchs, that horrible tyranny, which he after speaketh of, did spring: but that he appealeth also to the whole history of those times. Whereas, he is not ignorant, (as he saith he is not) or if he be, he and all the world may most easily know, by marking better the histories of those times, that those orders (as he also confesseth them to have been ordained even of the best zeal, and that also they were bounden with limits, and with a certain authority attributed unto them, and so were not universal, nor of any absolute and indefinite authority) were the very stop and abbridging of that horrible tyranny. Which tyranny could never take place, so long as those ancient orders continued inviolate. And therefore, this is a manifest injury to those orders, were they good, or were they bad: to say, that that horrible tyranny sprang of those beginnings, by which it was repressed & kept back: as may appear both in Cyprians times, and by that council of afric, wherein S. Augustine himself was present. And as for that which Beza citeth hereunto of Jerome on Titus: is the thing that here I most do wonder at, that such an excellent man, so constantly avoucheth this ancient Father, even to the clean contrary, both of that he evidently meaneth, & most plainly speaketh. Doth Jerome say or mean, that that horrible tyranny sprang of the ancient Father's constitutions of Bishops, metropolitans, and patriarchs? Saith he not rather that the ancient Father's constitutions of Bishops (of whom only he there speaketh) were made to stop schisms & divisions in the Church? And if they stopped factions & schisms then: are they become almost the only stop or hindrance of renewing the Church now? Surely, than som● other thing doth stop the right course of them: which stop being taken away, & they restored to their first institution, ordained by the best zeal of the ancients, with their old certain authority attributed unto them, and their bounds limited as they were before that stop came: what letteth, but that as they were ordained of the best zeal, As Beza confesseth the old orders were made of the best (that is, according to knowledge) so they may be renewed with best effect. so they may be renewed and continue with the best effect? And what is the greatest stop of them, but even that horrible tyranny of that Roman Antichrist here mentioned? That broke these bounds, and usurped a clean contrary authority, that is to say, unbounded, absolute & universal. And thinking it was lawful for him, to do what he list without controlment, vaunted the he must be judged of none, although he drew all to hell headlong. Remove this stop, & expel this horrible tyranny of that Roman Antichrist, or if there be any other tyranny or abuses proved that remain, remove them: and then may these ordinances of the ancients remain well enough. Neither will they become any stop or hindrance to the renewing of the Church, but be one of the greatest furderances thereunto. Geneva. Church of Geneva will not admit all those orders of the ancients, for Bishops, metropolitans and patriarchs: The orders that we acknowledge are no hindrance, but furtherance to the church's reformation. we also admit not that Patriarch of the West, because he is become that Antichrist, and devourer of all his fellows by that horrible tyranny, but allow only Bishops and metropolitans or Archishops, as of more ancient time, before that horrible tyranny did begin. As for the name of Bishops, we find it expressly in the Scriptures, and therefore we avoid it not, for any Episcopal tyranny, or rather tyranny not Episcopal, wherewith the name hath been abused. No more than we should avoid the names of Doctors, Elders, Governors, Deacons, which our brethren use: though, none of them all, but have been abused; or of Kings, Princes, Lords, Masters, Fathers; or of Gospel, Church, Sacraments, Praying, Preaching, Fasting, Excommunicating, etc. All which names, and a number more, have been no less Hypocritically, at least, shamefully abused: yea, the name of jesus, of Christ, and of God: that for the abuses of a name, otherwise good and lawful, we should clean leave all use thereof, Old offices renewed to have their old names. and devise for Bishop, a new or an unusual name of Superattendent. Let new laws and offices have new names a God's name, but let old names being renewed to their old state, stand as before they stood. And since both the matter of the name Metropolitan, and also the name itself is found (as we have already seen) to have been extant without any tyranny or abuse: yea, the matter and name of Bishops from the very Apostles times: we need never change the names, nor be ashamed of them, nor fear by reason of them, the stoppage of renewing the Church's state. Nay, we have felt, if we would, as we should, dutifully acknowledge it, that the renewing of the Church hath been with us (God be praised) mightily furthered by them. And although that worthy City & Church of Geneva, have found that the Bishop there being a Papist, & an open enemy of the Gospel, devoted to Antichrist, hath been a stop & hindrance to the renewing of the Church among them, insomuch that God hath there renewed his Church without him (to God also be praises for it): yet what hindereth this, but that, if their B. had reform himself to the rule of the Gospel, he might have kept his Bishopric well-enough? And the Church of Geneva and all the Ministers and Pastors therein, not only might, but aught to have acknowledged him, to be their Bishop and Superior, even by Calnines own prescription to other Churches, where the Bishops would receive the Gospel, as is already declared. And so should calvin himself and Beza also, (and I believe would, if they would have been Pastors there) have acknowledged the Bishop of Geneva their Superior. But God disposing it otherwise, by the default and tyranny of the Bishop: We envy not the state of Geneva nor they ought to prescribe unto us. if they now acknowledge themselves, to rest in any order and custom of the Apostles, and can so do; it is well done (and again God be praised for it) we envy not them, nor disturb their rest in the same order and custom of the Apostles whosoever: neither can they, nor do therein prescribe to us. And yet, if it were the order and custom of the Apostles, that they rest in, The Apostles orders. we have plainly and at large seem, that the order and custom of the Apostles, both among themselves and in other Churches, permitted Bishops and the Superiority of the same: and that not so temporary, as, standing for an only present assemble, which perhaps might not hold out an hour or two: nor, for a day, a week, a month, or a year: but as standards and continuers in the same. Yea, Zuinglius, that saith a Bishop and a Priest or Elder were once all one: yet, in his book de Ratione & Officio Concionandi, Zuinglius de officio concionandi. or Ecclesiastes, The Preacher, he saith: Again Act. 21. Luke writeth thus: The next day we that were with Paul came to Caesarea, and entering into the house of Philip the Evangelist, which was one of the seven, we abode with him. This man had four daughters, Virgins prophesying. In which place, first we have to note that thing, that this Philip of the Church of Caesarea the Evangelist, was a Bishop or a Pastor. Neither is he of Luke called an Apostle, Howbeit, he was one of the seven, which were ordained Deacons, as the same party showed before cap. 6. That thing also withal ought to be noted, that they laid down the name of the Apostles, The Apostles when they settled themselves became Bishops. so soon as being fixed to any one Church, they had the continual cure thereof, that is to wit, when as either being hindered by age, or else afflicted with diseases, with the troubles of peregrinations, and with dangers, they were not able to suffice any longer. For than were they not any longer named Apostles, but Bishops. But we may bring forth S. james (whom for his age, we call james the less) an example, or rather a witness of this thing. For Jerome, and withal all the ancient Fathers, do name this man Bishop of jerusalem, for no other cause, than that he had placed his seat, fixed in that City. For when as before (as also the other Apostles, being given to peregrinations) he had taught the faith each where all over the countries: he was at the length by the Apostles themseles, ordained to be the party, that as a certain diligent watchman, should take upon him the cure of the Church of jerusalem. The same thing we may say of john the Evangelist and Disciple of Christ. S. john B. of Ephesus after Tim. For when as he (having been cast forth to diverse dangers) had long time administered the function Apostolical: at length being made the Bishop of the Ephesians, he departed out of this life in that ●itie, in the 68 year after the ascension of the Lord. Now then, some of the Apostles being on this wise Bishops in such places, and so, as our Brethren call them Pastors: shall we think, Primate. that the other Pastors in those Cities did not still acknowledge a Superior dignity unto them, and that for a longer time, ● take it the Pastors be not all of like auth. in Geneva. than for the occasion of some present action or assembly? Yea, have all the Pastors alike even, and as full authority equal in Geneva itself, as that most excellent instrument of God Master calvin, or the most worthy Master Beza, yet living? Indeed I can not precisely tell; but I think not so, nor it seemeth so, and in my simple opinion (be it spoken with due honour reserved to every godly and Learned minister there, be they never so equal and all one, in respect of the same function and ministery) it were not meet it should so be. Or if it be so, yet, were it not so good, no not for them: as if that (I speak of Beza in Geneva) or some other excellent man were appointed, to have a continuing and standing moderate office, over all the residue of his fellow brethren there in the ministery, to oversee and govern them, assigned unto him, and to exercise the same with painful care, ready diligence, and modest humility, so long as he is able to discharge the same. And so indeed, it should draw nearer to the order and custom of the Apostles. And yet, if their order and custom had admitted such a temporary superior among them, as had served only the turns but of temporary occasions: yet, thereby also for that time and occasion, one Pastor had had the authority over another: yea, over all the other in the company. And how then do our Brethren here affirm, that these testimonies of scripture directly condemn the authority of one Pastor above another? As for the testimonies that Beza allegeth, even of the very first of them concerning the election of Mathias, Act. 1. calvin upon these words, ver. 16. The scripture must have been fulfilled, saith: Because Peter maketh the speech; the Papists make him the head of the whole Church. As though none may speak in the assembly of the godly, but forthwith he must be made a Pope. We grant indeed, that as it is necessary some one in every assembly, must hold the Primacy or be the chief: so the Apostles yielded this honour unto Peter. But what is this to a Popedom? So that here, though that horrible tyranny of the Pope be not inferred, which the Papists on every inkling greedily gather: yet, Caluine not only confesseth plainly, both in Peter a certain honour of Primacy yielded unto him: but also confesseth it necessary for every assembly of the faithful to have such a Primate. The like he saith of the other example. Act. 6. Of the sending of Simon and john unto Samaria. How Peter excelled any one, & was inferior to the whole. Concerning that Luke (saith he) declareth, that Peter was sent of the residue: hereupon it may be gatherad, that he exercised not an Empire over his Colleagues, but did so excel among them, that notwithstanding, he was under the body and obeyed it. So that, his autho●itie excelled any and every one of his fellows in particular: but in respect of the whole body and corporation of them, he was not so much as fellow but inferior. As for the last testimony cited here by Beza Act. 15. what calvin hath said already thereon, even for the standing Bishopric of james at jerusalem, and how therein he excelled the residue of the Apostles: we have at large heard before. Now where our Brethren add, that yet they take not away the lawful authority he hath over his flock: but that Imperious and Pompous dominion, which is meet for civil Magistrates, and great Potentates to exercise in worldly affairs: even as Beza said, it was not of any kingly Empire or royal commandment, and yet, was it a reverence given of duty: and as calvin said, it was not a Papacy nor Empire over his Colleagues, and yet, he did excel among them, and he●d a Primacy over them, and the other yielded an honour to him: so, these our brethren's sayings may be well allowed. Our Arch. and Bishop's state far from Imperious and Pompous dominion. And I think, no Bishop or Archbishop in England doth desire any other, than such limited authority of their office, as may well agree with these moderations, and rather stand with humility, modesty, and diligent oversight of good order: than to aspire to any such royal Empire, or to exercise any Imperious and Pompous Dominion. And save for the name sake of Lord, that for a little more reverence (God wot) they are honoured with all: (if I should not rather say, for some others, a great deal more envied for that they have not;) our Bishops have been meetly well shriven for such matters. The learned disc. Pag. 29. & 30. Bridges. This Pompous & Imperious dominion being thus exempted: otherwise (say our Brethren) in respect of their lawful authority, they are called by the Apostle in his Epistle to the Hebrews, Guides, such as are appointed to oversee the flock with authority, and unto them submission and obedience is commanded in the same chapter, ver. 17. If this name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (used in that Chap. by S. Paul) which not only signifieth a guide, but a Captain going before all the residue with government & principality, may include a lawful authority & commandment of submission and obedience, without Imperious and Pompous dominion: our Prelates (I hope) will desire no more, nor so much neither, in all lawful respects, as may in this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, be well contained. But if here in the word flock, whereof the B. is guide, they include not the whole congregation, and so with all, the inferior Ministers and Pastors in the same, as well as the other people: then is not this alleged to the purpose, whether any one Pastor may have Superior authority over another, and be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the residue, and then it is but a flock here to allege it. But, i● it be understood of the whole particular Church: then indeed it is alleged to the present purpose: but it proveth, that (the Imperious & Pompous dominion excepted) one may have authority over another. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Other names are applied to them in the Scripture, but they be for the most part more general, The learned disc. Pag. 30. pertaining to all kind of teachers in the Church of God, both in the time of the law & of the Gospel, as Seers, Prophets, watchmen, Angels, labourers, Builders, Stewards, & such like: all which with many other, serve to express some part of their office, as their knowledge, their diligence, their authority, their faithfulness, their discretion: also the necessity of them, the commodity that cometh by them. Concerning these Titles, as not in controversy, I pass them over. Bridges. The argument of the 6. Book. THE 6. Book is of the Pastors or Bishop's office. For the limiting of him to one only congregation. Whether the Pastor may have Curates or Substitutes under him to supply his absence. Whether all ministers are to be utterly expelled, be they never so Learned or diligent, if they have not the gift of preaching, and cannot confute the gainsayers. Of ministers that are altogether unskilful, and of their removing. Whether all be eternally condemned, that do not by hearing ●f preaching become faithful. Of the lack● of preaching, & of the impossibility to furnish every congregation with preachers. Of t●● hindrances hereof, & the endeavours to help it, & of our Bre●●rens preposterous means. Of the state of the French Churches ●or abundance of Preachers. Of pluralities & non residencies. Of reading a prescribed form of prayers, Psalms, and chapters. Of the student's discouragement for the ill bestowing of livings. Of the want of livings able to maintain Learned Preachers. Of spoiling the ministers maintenance, under pretence of better providing for than, & of these spoilers & mockers of God & man. Of their maintenance in the french churches without such helps as we have. Of the Prophet's sentences applied to our unskilful Pastors & reading ministers. Of the use of godly learned homilies, & whether they may be effectual in the hearers. Of the Pastor's duty. What Ministers our Br●impugne & we defend. Of our Ministers exercises. Of three remedies that our brethren set down, to help the necessities for lack of livings: of restoring the Sacrilege of Abbeys, of dividing superfluities of some places, and of a 3. nameless and general remedy. Of the remedies to supply the want of Learned men: by eneoragers, by overseers in the universities, by turning out drones and unprofitable heads of colleges, by placing new governors, by erecting new Doctors in as many places as may be, by compulsion, and by prayer. Of the corruption of our state. Of our brethren's dispensation, till all these things can be brought to pass. Of our brethren's hope to effect all these things, and in how short time, and of their encouragement hereunto. Of their commending her majesties most honourable & glorious reign. And of their promise to jeopard their lives for the success, and of their mourning, threatening, and protestation, if all these things (according to these their devised means) be not speedily 〈◊〉 practise. The learned Dis. Pag. 30. & 31. BUT concerning the names of Pastors, as they are a special office in the Church, this may suffice. But for as much as we have undertaken so to describe a Pastor and his office, as all other offices of the Church, may be described therewith: we must not stay only in the name, bu● set forth also the whole substance of the person. For which intent it shal● be necessary for us to consider a Pastor or Bishop two ways, in the proper function of his ministery, and in government with his Elders: by which we shall understand how this ministery ought to be reform and restored among us. As touching his office, something hath been said before generally, under the description of his several names. But now more particularly we must examine what belongeth to his charge. Bridges. OUr Brethren presupposing they have in this thei● Learned Disc. sufficiently proved, that the name● of Pastor & Bishop must always be taken synonymically, as diverse words signifying but one thing: and that there may be no such dignity accessory to the office, as whereby one Pastor or Bishop may have authority over another: do now proceed to their platform of prescribing laws, Prescribing law. concerning these Pastors and Bishop's office, and the reformation that they would propose unto them. Whereof I marvel not a little, at our brethren's over boldness in these things, (and craving pardon of my term, lest I also be thought overbold with them, and I would gladly use a milder term for their sakes, if the matter could permit it) that they dare take upon them to set down laws and orders, Our Breath. prescription of laws with out auth. of reforming and restoring these offices of the ministery (imagining they stand now deformed, yea, lost) they being as I take them to be (for they are nameless) but private persons: except they allege that they be ministers: but, whether authorised or exauthorated, yea, or no, I know not. If they be, exauthorate, then are they still as mere private, being deprived of the public parsonage & action that they had, if they be not, then do they contrary to the state of their own calling, exercising the office of that ministery, which their selves profess to be deformed and lost. And how soever the title of their Learned Discourse pretends in the froont, only a brief and plain declaration, concerning the desires of all those faithful Ministers, which do seek for the Discipline and reformation of the Church of England: where is pretended nothing but a declaring of the desires that they seek: yet, in the seeking, they desire it in such a peremptory fashion, that we find their desires to be a plain charge and prescription, which is both above any authority that they have so to do: and, were the matters that they would have reform and restored better than they be, yet, this manner that they use is nught, and a dangerous precedent. If they pretend the example of the Prophets and Apostles: did they cast forth their writings in this manner? And yet should our Brethren offer a manifest injury, to those holy extraordinary examples. Except they could either prove themselves to be such Prophets and Apostles, as they were: or to urge no other things, than they commanded to be perpetually kept, and so being deformed or lost, to be reform or restored. Otherwise, me thinks this dealing (considering their persons, and the matters and their manner of them) is plus satis pro imperio, even while they speak against imperious dealing, and may better be called a prescript commandment of their discipline & reformation, than a Learned discourse upon it. But to come to these rules. The Pastor must be limited to one only congregation of such competent number, as he (if he be but one) or if they be two, The learned disc. Pag. 31.32. & 33. may be sufficient to the instruction of all and every member of the same Church. And first he may no more lawfully have charge of two or 3. Churches, than he can be possibly in diverse places. No more than a shepherd of whom he taketh his name, may have the leading of sundry flocks in diverse places; neither may he be absent from his charge, with better reason than a shepherd from his flock. One Pastor one congregation. As for substitutes or hirelings, will not be allowed in this case: for Pastors are substitutes of God, and have an office of credit committed unto them, therefore by no good reason may they make any substitutes in their place, or commit their charge unto another. The law of man grounded upon good reason, alloweth not substitutes of substitutes: nor committing over of an office of credit in temporal matters. How shall God almighty then take it in good part, when the flock of Christ which he hath purchased with his own blood, shallbe so greatly neglected, to the endangering of their everlasting salvation? 1. P●●. 5. Therefore the ordinance of God is, that the Pastor should attend unto his peculiar flock. That Elders should be ordained in every City Town or other places. Tit. 1.5. Titus. 1.5. and Acts 14.23. Act. 14.23. The Apostles ordained Elders in every church, of Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Tichia, and all the congregations about. Bridges. Our Brethren here setting down their principles, for the Bishops and the Pastor's office, which they make all one; (underhand thereby to overthrow the most of all the livings and jurisdictions of the Bishops) first set down this rule, Our Breath rule and the drift thereof. The Pastor must be limited to one only congregation. I would feign know (especially, understanding the name of Pastors, as all one with Bishops) where this rule is made such a necessary and perpetual principle, in all the scripture? We find the manifest contrary, both in Timothy and in Titus, who were Bishops, as we have proved: The contrary examples in Tim and Titus whom they confess to b● pastors and so, by Caluines and others plain confessions, and by our brethren's own consequence, they were Pastors. But more congregations than one only were committed to their charges: how therefore is this a true principle, that a Pastor must be limited to one only congregation? If our Brethren, to avoid the force of this argument, think to escape, in saying, that here they mean not such Proëstotes, and higher Pastors which had superior authority over other Pastors, as Timothy and Titus had: do they not here then confess withal the principal point in question, and that which is with might and main stood most upon, that no pastor hath superior authority over an other, but all are equal? Grant this, that they being Pastors, had a superior authority & charge, over more congregations at once than one only: and then this rule of our Brethren, here (being understood of Pastors having less charge and authority, being not Bishops, Proëstotes or other Prelates of higher calling) may more easily be granted, to have but one only congregation limited to them. If our Brethren say, that charge over more congregations was not committed to Timothy and Titus, in respect of their pastorship: although that shift be already sufficiently prevented: yet, what helps it here to uphold this rule? Sith Titus was Bishop of all Creta, where many congregations were, that had several Pastors. Absence of Pastors. And Bishop (they say) & pastor are all one: or, were they not all one, were he as a B. or as they say an Evangelist or what they will; yet still withal he was a pastor (as calvin confesseth) of all those several congregations. And this being granted, at least proved, for these pastors that have any other superior authority annexed to their pastorship, that they be not subject to this rule: As our Brethren would have 2. Pastors over one greater congregation, so may one Pastor be over two lesser. then followeth it not of any necessity on this broken rule, that all other pastors are simply so tied thereto, that they must always be limited to one only congregation. For, as it is here of our Breath. said, that two may be admitted to one congregation, according to the competency of the number: so, if the number be less, why may not 2. small congregations, being nearer together, be limited likewise to one pastor, in want of such sufficient & learned pastors, as our Brethren afterward cry upon, & complain of the rareness of them? Or▪ if 2. Pastors be limited to one, or to more congregations, as occasion and necessity may require: why may they not be one over & under another, according to the more or less worthiness of the pastors? So that between them both, or more, or fewer, sufficient instruction & oversight of all & every number of the same Church be provided for. Our Breath. uniting of more congregations into one, is all one in effect ●ith having more several, if that more several be not better. And if our Brethren may have authority (without authority) to unite 2. or 3. lesser and nearer congregations into one, which they also appoint to be done, for the greater confluence of the people, & the better maintenance of the Pastors: comes it not in effect all to one reckoning? and hath not one still more congregations than one? although all are made but one congregation, being thus united: but that now his congregations are more distant a sunder, which he had rather (if he could conveniently, both ●or his people's profit, and his own ease) were nearer combinded or united. Albeit, as we see some conveniences, that might make such unions in the smaller congregations to be wished; so, as many and as great inconveniences on the other side, both in the country Villages, that might more often and with more danger be left all desolate; and even in the nearer & more frequent congregations in Towns and Cities) make these unions again to be so feared, especially in contagious times, that it were better one learned pastor had 2. or 3. congregations, with his ministers to oversee them under him severally, than two or three congregations to be united into one; and have one, or two, or three pastors jointly & equally, (but in one place and assembly) for to guide them. But to leave the scanning of these things, to those that have better experience and more skill, than I profess, or our Brethren seem to have, for all their Learned discourse hereon, and to those that have more authority than we both: from this let us comr to an other principle, that our Brethren as a correlative set down hereupon, who to confirm that they have said, do further say. And first, he may no more lawfully have charge of 2. or 3. Churches than he can possibly be in diverse places. Our Breath. second rule. The Pastors being in diverse places. And is not this possible for him well enough, to be in diverse places? Therefore, for any thing here alleged to the contrary, he might have 2. or 3. Churches, possibly and lawfully well enough. If they say, it is not possible, to be in diverse places always, and together at once, that is another matter. And sooth indeed it is plain impossible. A Pastor's absence's on divers occasions being supplied by another. But is this required, with such absolute necessity, in every Pastor? may not sickness, prisonment, banishment, suit of law, attendance on the Prince's commandment, repair to provincial, national, or oecuimenicall Synods, and a number of such like occasions, make a Pastor be in other places, other while, than where he is Pastor? And yet, be Pastor there still in virtue of his office, though not in action of his person, while he is thus absent. If our Brethren say, this absence is not ordinary, but rather his spirit and heart is present with them, for all the involuntary detention of his body: what doth that help the matter? None permitted to be absent but on special consideration and provision. Since we plainly see hereby, that he may on so manifold occasions (remaining notwithstanding a true and faithful Pastor) be both possibly and lawfully in other places? Neither are any permitted to be at any time absent ordinarile, except upon lawful and expedient considerations, and necessary provisions of supply. If our Brethren reply, that even because there may fall out such extraordinary occasions of the Pastor's absence, they would therefore rather of the twain, that there should be more Pastors in one place, than to have but one Pastor in more places, because the one in such cases may supply the others absence: although we must not so much always attend what we would have, as what we may have, and what every congregation may sustain: yet, is not this again in effect all one, as when the Pastor findeth at his charges, and is so bound by law to do, (if upon any consideration he himself be licenced to be absent) his lawful and sufficient Substitute, to the instruction of all and every member of the same Church, in the time of his absence? And is not this the nearer way, to bring two Pastors also to one congregation, yea, even in those that are the lesser congregations? And yet, were there two or more Pastor in every congregation: if each Pastor's continual presence, Our B●eth. urging their rule so strictly, fall from one impossibility to another. must be still, with all & every member of the same Church: what one Pastor can there be, that shall always be still present with every one, but be absent from some, while he is present with other? Yea if as S. Paul calleth divers families, divers churches, Rom. 16.5.1. Cor. 16.19. Colloss. 4.15. and Philem. ver. 21. If he go but as S. Paul said he did at Ephesus Act. 20. ver. 20. from one house to another: how might not this be spoken against any that should do the like: that he may no more lawfully have charge of two or three Churches, that is, Substitutes two or three families, than he can be possible in diverse places? But if he may be possibly well enough in diverse places, though not at once but at diverse times: then as the diverse places be nearer or easier to be looked unto: so the charge of two or three Churches, as to the state (having authority to provide therefore) shall be thought convenient, may lawfully enough be of him sustained. But to enforce this unlawfulness and impossibility further, they add this similitude. No more than a shepherd of whom he taketh his name, Our brothers similitude of a shepherd. Gen. ●0. may have the leading of sundry flocks in diverse places: neither may he be absent from his charge, with better reason that a shepherd from his flock. Although this similitude be too precisely here by our brethren urged in this pount: yet to join with them therein, why may not also the very shepherds of the brute beasts, have the leading of sundry flocks in diverse places? Had not jacob, so, both of Laban's flocks of sheep, and of his own? which flocks went not always together. And how much easier may he be a ringleader or chief maister-shepheard, having other inferior shepherds under him, to lead the diverse flocks, whereof he hath taken charge upon him, and though all have charge also and be shepherds of the same function that he is: yet, as he may have a greater skill, so he may have a greater dignity, both over diverse flocks of sheep, & over the diverse & particular shepherds of them. Yea, & for the absence of the shepherd, was not David appointed by his father to keep his sheep? A shepherd's absence supplied. And yet he was both called from them to be anointed of Samuel: & he remained shepherd still, even after he was made saul's Esquire: as it is said, 1. Sam. 17. 1. Sam. 17.15. David went and returned from Saul, that he might feed his Father's flock in Bethlehem. And when he was there, his father sent him with victuals, & gifts to his Brethren, & to their Captain in the army. And saith the text. verse 20. So David rose up early in the morning, and left the sheep with a keeper. Montanus translates it, Et reliquit pecus super custodientem. Saith Vatablus, juxta custodem. 1. commendavit gregem custodi. As is the vulgar, he commended the sheep to a keeper. The 72. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Tremelius saith, deserto grege penes custodem. So that, David here being his Father's shepherd, did appoint a substitute shepherd in his absence. And though his Brethren upbraided him (as our Brethren here do us) and said, verse, 28. Why camest thou down hither? David defends his absence against his brethren's accusations. With whom hast thou left those few sheep in the wilderness? etc. Yet David justly defends himself, and said: What have I now done? Is there not a cause? So that having a cause, he justifies his absence, and achieved thereby a work no less necessary, and far more beneficial to God's Church, while his substitute attended in his sheep. But (say our Brethren) As for substitutes or hirelings, will not be allowed in this case: for Pastors are substitutes of God, and have an office of credit committed unto them. Therefore by no good reason may they make any substitutes in their place, or commit their charge unto another. This reason not only toucheth Eccl. Pastors, but civil Princes, that are called Substitutes of God, Princes called Pastors. and Pastors also of their people, not only of Homer, but in the scripture. 3. Reg. 22. Micheas prophesying of Achabs' death though a wicked king: saith, I saw all Israel scattered on the mountains as sheep that had no Pastor. And Esa. 44.28. the Lord himself saith to Cyrus, Thou art my Pastor and he shall perform all my desire. And the Prophet in the Psalm. 78. ver. 70. etc. He chose David also his servant and took him from the sheep folds, even from behind the ewes with young brought he him to feed his people in jacob, and his inheritance in Israel. So he fed them according to the simplicity of his heart, and guided them by the discretion of his hands. How our brethren's rules reach unto and overthrow Princes estates. Prince's then being Pastors, our Brethren say; Pastors are Substitutes of God, and have an office of credit committed unto them. Shall we therefore thus conclude here, with our brethren's consequence? Therefore, by no good reason may they make any substitutes in their place, or commit their charge unto another? Mought not David substitute his deputies both in the territories he conquered from other Princes out of the bounds of Israel, and make Substitutes & Lieutenants of his own Cities & Castles? Prince's being political Pastors may have substitutes. Mought not josaphat make Zebadiah a ruler of the house of judah for all the king's affairs? 2. Chron. 19 v. 11. mought not Pharaoh make joseph his substitute over all Egypt? mought not Ahasuerus make Mardocheus his Substitute? And Darius, Daniel? And Artaxerxes, Nehemias'? doth the holy Ghost improve this order of substitution under the Emperor. Luke 3. v. 1. Now in the fift year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being Governor of judea, and Herode tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip, tetrarch of Iturea, and of the country of Trachonitis, and Lysanias the Tetrarch of Abilene? Did Christ deny pilate's authority to be lawful, because he was the debity or substitute of Tiberius? or S. Paul not acknowledge Faelix and Festus substitutes of Nero, and governors of those parties in his absence? And is not this also the doctrine of S. Peter, 1. Pet. 2. ver. 13. & 14. Submit yourselves unto all manner ordinance of man for the lords sake, whether it be unto the king, as unto the superior: or unto Governors as unto them tha● are sent of him? And are not all these again both the king's substitutes, and the kings themselves the substitutes of God, as josaphat said unto his judges, that he set through out the land in every City, 2. Chron. 19.6. Take heed what ye do, for ye execute not the judgements of man, but of the Lord? And S. Paul speaking of the Magistrate, Rom. 13. ver. 1.4. & 5. saith: There is no power but of God, etc. He is the minister of God, etc. they are Gods ministers etc. and how his ministers, but as substitutes? may they therefore make no substitutes under them, nor commit their charge unto another? This doctrine of our Breath. is very dangerous, & toucheth not only Eccl. Pastors, & Bish. & all appropriations to the Prince, or to whom soever: but also toucheth so near, or rather cutteth clean off, all Princes holding of diverse realms, dominions, & signiories, by what right of conquest, gift, inheritance, or any other never so good title, they enjoy the same. Yea, and all nobles, or any other private persons, offices and livings; that as they are all of them, what soever they have, and whosoever they be, but substitutes of God, and have offices of credit committed unto them: So if they have any more offices or livings than one, and in one place: they must clean forsake them & give them all up. And why? forsooth, because they are but substitutes of God, and can not make any substitute in their place. Now although this doctrine be so dangerous & absurd; notwithstanding, our Brethren to confirm it do proceed. The law of man grounded upon good reason, The learned disc. Pag. 32. alloweth not substitutes of substitutes, nor committing over of an office of credit in temporal matters. How shall God almighty then take it in good part, when the flock of Christ, which he hath purchased with his own blood, shallbe so greatly neglected, to the endangering of their everlasting salvation. Sith I profess not the study of the law of man, Bridges. I refer the discussing of the same, to the learned professors of it. But it being grounded (as our Breath. say) upon good reason, and but the law of man, The law both of god and man alloweth sufficient substitutes. & speaking but of the substitutes of man, it seems no good reason, it should overrule those, that by the law of God, are the substitutes of God, of whom our Breath before spoke. And although I gladly yield unto this rule of the law of man, being grounded upon good reason: yet in my simple reason, it should seem not to be so absolute a law, & so general a rule, but that it may, both by the law of man itself, grounded upon as good reason as it, & by the law of God, whereunto all the grounds of good reason give place, admit many exceptions that control it. For, although in the Court of Delegates it might have some place, How substitutes may substitute substitutes. & yet in some cases delegates (the are but substitutes of the Prince) do substitute delegates and other substitutes as commissioners under them, to search out matters and circumstances, and to call before them and examine such persons & facts, as they their selves being absent, can not inquire upon. But what toucheth this the Prince himself that maketh these delegates, and yet himself is but a delegate under God? This rule of the law of man, Nemo potest glady putestatem sibi datam, vel cuiuslibet alterius coertionis, ad alium transfer: C. L. c. de eius cu●mand●est Iu●isd. No man can pass over to another the power of the sword, that is, the authority of putting to death, or of any other punishment: was an ancient rule among the Romans, tendering the liberty & life of man: and yet all kings, & Princes, to whom God hath given the power of the sword, though their selves be but the substitutes of God, they make other their substitutes in this power: and thereby the judges even as substitutes of substitutes, do punish offenders, and (if justice so require) even by death. Yea, and their substitutes also under them, do execute the sentence of those substitutes. And hath not also the law of man such an express exception: C. de in. a iudice●st extra deal. super quorum. Vicarius Vicarium constituere non potest, sicut nec delegatus delegatum, nisi datus esset à principe? He that is a Vicar or a Deputy of another, cannot appoint another Vicar or Deputy, as neither can a Delegate appoint another Delegate, except he be given of the Prince. Pa. in. d. C. Bariold. So that, by the Prince he may. And therefore, it is also said in the Law of man, quando committitur, aliquid alicui subdelegato, cum authoritate subdelegandi, tune potest subdelegare, alias non. When an other thing is committed to any under Deligate or substitute, with an authority of substituting an other under him: than may he substitute such a substitute, or else not. And this again, is a common rule of the law of man, & grounded also upon good reason: Potest quis per alium, qd potest facere per seipsum. That which a man can do by himself, the same he can do by an other in his name. True it is, in some cases, & good reason to, he that is a substitute, without the will of him that did substitute him, B.l. 1. § usus de procucat. c. § per qui● pe●sonis agere poss. especially where the Substituter or giver of an office of credit, doth so restrain the substitute or receiver of the office, that he only must do it by himself there this our brethren's rule doth hold. Yea, so saith the Canon Law of the Pope: Quando Tapa delegat causam: Dicendo, praecipimus vel mandamus per vos, etc. Tunc non potest subdelegare. C.s. pro debilitate eod. tit. C. quantum § is avi. de offileg. Similiter quando alicui magnum ministerium committitur, in quo industria personae eligitur, vel ut negotium personaliter exequatur, nis● de consensu partium. And yet, in offices of credit committed to any, in temporal matters, his own personal execution is in certain cases forborn also, and (except in rigour of law,) is in good reason, dispensed with: as in sickness, imprisonment, or the Prince's service, or such necessary and lawful detentions of his person, a lawull substitute may by good law and reason, or by the Lords accepting, and by the consents of the parties, be allowed and serve as well and better now and then the turn, than if the principal substitute were himself present. And withal if his absence, (by reason of his presence in some other place) may do more good: then the law helps him with another gentle rule, of that famous Lawyer Ulpian: Absentiam eius qui Reip. causa abest, neque ei, neque alij damnosa esse debet. The absence of him that is absent for the cause of the commonweal, ought neither to be prejudicial to himself, nor to another. Now, if these favourable mitigations will not serve (as I being no lawyer will not gladly contend for them): Let us then come to the inference of our brethren's argument, that they gather upon this law of man. How shall God then take it in good part (say our Brethren) when the flock of Christ▪ which he hath purchased with his own blood, shall be so greatly neglected, to the endangering of their everlasting salvation. We grant it were a dreadful thing, neither would God take it in good part, that any such negligent substitutes should be allowed. But if this allowance of sufficient substitutes in the foresaid cases, be not done to the neglecting of the flock of Christ, but to the avoiding thereof and of this danger: then (we hope) God taketh it not in ill part. So that, this must first be better proved, that all the ordaining of substitutes, specially of such sufficient subisttutes, as are in all respects, as foroth Pastors, as the other pastors are that substitute them, is to neglect the flock: or else, both for the antecedent and for the consequent, this is (God wots) a very slender argument. Their resolution hereon, and their proofs annexed are these. Therefore the ordinance of God is, that the Pastor should attend unto his peculiar flock. The learned disc. Pag. 32.33. That Elders should be ordained in every city Town or other places. Titus. 1.5. and Acts 14.23. The Apostles ordained Elders in every church, of Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Tichia, and all the congregations about. Although this citing of the text, Act. 14.23. be a very gross error, yet passing that over: this conclusion is more tolerable than the premises, Bridges. & I yield thereto. But that this attendance should be with such a personal continuance, that it may admit no supply of substitute: is not as yet proved nor (I think) will be, by these places, but rather the clean contrary. For although in either of them, mention is made of ordeininge priests or pastoral elders in every church, Town or City: yet whether there were more than one in every place, or that one might substitute another in his absence, there is made no express mention: only, if we may measure the one place by the other, (as I see not why we may not, and our brethren join them both alike) then in none of those churches the Pastor was so tied tied to his continual abode, but that on good occasion he might be absent, having another sufficient substitute to supply the place. For, as calvin saith, upon the Preface of the epistle to Titus, That because (no doubt) he was of some contemned, as though he had been, but as Any one of the common sort of pastors: and it may be also, that complaints flew about on him, took upon him more than was meet, that he received not pastors except allowed his judgement etc. Paul putteth upon him his own person as well in creating Ministers, as in the whole administratition of the Church. And in the Epistle to Titus 1.5. the place here quoted: For Paul testifieth that he assigned his own turns unto him, wherefore it is meet that he should be of all ackowledged, as the Vicar (which is all one with substitute) of the Apostle, and reverently received. so that besides the proof of his superiority, being chief pastor there, were he Evangelist, (as calvin saith) or whatsoever he were beside: as he called also Paul himself, not only the pastor of that Isle, but the Apostle of the Gentiles: so it appeareth also hereby, that substitutes were allowable even of the Apostles, for all they were themselves Gods immediate substitutes, in which respect soever we consider them, either as pastors, evangelists or Apostles. And calvin draweth this to a general rule, saying: Moreover it is a notable point, to note the modesty of Paul, which gladly doth suffer that to be made up of another, which he himself begun. And that when as indeed, Titus was far inferior unto him, he refuseth not to have him, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the corrector, that should lay the last hand to his work. Thus ought the godly Doctors to be affected, that every man draw not all ambitiously to himself, but earnestly help the one the other: and that with how much greater success each one shall have laboured, the residue should rather rejoice with him then envy him. Neither only doth calvin thus apply to all pastors, this example of Paul's substitution of Titus: but likewise Bullinger, upon saint Paul's words, in the end of his Epistle to Titus, Chapter 3. vers. 12. When I shall send Arteams or Tichicus unto thee, do thy diligence to come unto me to Nicopolis, for I have dtermined to winter there. He calleth (saith Bullinger) Titus unto him to Epirus. Bullinger in Tit. Howbeit there is also another Nicopolis in Thracia, another in Cilitia and pontus. But he would not have him go from Creta, before that he had substituted either Tichicus or Artemas, to wit, that the people of Creta, which of late believed, should not be destitute of the care of a faithful Bishop. For it is a great wickedness to spoil the Churches of their pastors, except ye shall substitute other more faithful. Not meaning that Titus was less faithful than Tichicus or Artemas, but that they being his substitutes, did faithfully supply Titus' absence. Thus do we see in this one example, not only the absence of the Bishop or Pastor upon convenient occasion to be allowed of the apostle: but also the allowance of a faithful substitute, in the absence of the Bishop and pastor. Secondly, the office of pastors is, not only to teach the same truth in their several Flocks, The L. Disc. Pag. 33. & 30. but also to apply it to the time and persons, of whom they have charge, with exhortation and reprehension: with consolation of the afflicted, and threatening of the obstinate. etc. This in few words is set forth by saint Paul speaking of the diverse gifts of God in his Church, he saith: whether it be he that teacheth in his doctrine, Ro. 12.7.8. or he that exhorteth, in his exhortation. The Doctor therefore teacheth without exhortation. The pastor teacheth and exhorteth withal. More at large, he setteth forth the same office in his exhortation unto the pastors of Ephesus, Acts. 20. willing th●m to follow his example, who supplied that office, until they were able to succeed in his place. Also very briefly, and yet fully, he describeth the same unto Timothy, 2. Tim. 3.16.17. showing first that all his foundation must be out of the scriptures, which were sufficient for all parts of his charge, and then most earnestly commandeth him to practise the same withal diligence, his words are these. All scripture is inspired of God, 2. Tim. 3.16. and profitable for Doctrine, for exhortation, for reformation, and for instruction, which is in righteousness, that the man of GOD may be prepared to all good works: therefore I charge thee before God, and before the Lord jesus Christ, which shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing, and in his kingdom, preach the word, be instant in season and out of season, improve, rebuke, exhort withal long suffering and doctrine. Nothing of all this is in controversy, understanding teaching according to the measure of every pastors gift: save this sentence, Bridges. that the Doctor teacheth without exhortation: which we have before at large confuted. The first part therefore, and the chiefest of a pastors office or duty is to feed with wholesome Doctrine the flock that is committed to his charge and therefore saint Paul describing what manner of men are meet for that charge unto Timothy requireth that a Bishop or Pastor be apt or able able to teach: The learned disc. Pag. 34.35. For if a man have never so much knowledge, and be not apt or able to teach, he ought by no means to be admitted unto this vocation. And unto Titus' writing, Chapter 1. the first verse 9 he requireth that he be such a one, as holdeth fast the faithful word according to doctrine, that he also may be able to exhort with wholesome doctrine, and improve them that say against it. Weereupon it followeth necessarily, that whosoever is him self ignorant in the knowledge of God's word, & therefore unable either to exhort with wholesome doctrine, or to confute them that gainsay it, is altogether unmeet for the office of a pastor or Bishop. Albeit, we might here inquire, how it was said before, First, he may no more lawfully have charge of 2. or three Churches, etc. and then: Bridges secondly, the office of pastors is not only to teach, etc. And now to conclude upon this second saying: The first part therefore, and the chiefest of a pastors office, is to feed with wholesome doctrine: Notwithstanding not to stand on such reckonings (though we with they had reckoned more orderly, for our brethren's sake, professing over the head of every page▪ A Learned Disc. as also for the unlearneds better perceiving their lear. discourse thereon) to come to the material point here required: Pastor's ability. that the Bishop or the Pastor should be apt and able to teach, to exhort, and to confute, Diversity in the gifts of God, & measure of them. etc. This we yield unto, considering withal the diversities of men's gifts, even in the ministery, how some have ten talents committed unto them, some five, some two, and some but one: so that all employ them after their ability to the Lords advantage, we hope the Lord will not condemn, but commend the poor travail of that servant, so that he have not hid his one talon in the napkin. And admitting also that which Saint Paul saith 1. Cor. 12. ver. 7. etc. so often by our brethren otherwise remembered, The manifestation of the spirit is given to every one to profit, to this man is given by the spirit the word of wisedomme, to another is given the word of knowledge according to the same spirit, to another faith in the same spirit, to another the gift of healing in the same spirit, to another faculties of powers, to another prophecies, to another discerning of spirits, to another the kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues: and all these things worketh even the self same spirit, distributing to every man severally even as he will. and ver. 28. etc. And God hath ordained some in the Church, as first Apostles, secondly Prophets, thirdly teachers, then them that do miracles, after that the gifts of healing, helpers, governors, diversities of tongues. Are all Apostles, are all Prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? Neither also forgetting that place, Rom, 12. that our brethren themselves (entering into this matter on the other side of the leaf, put us in mind of) Seeing then we have gifts that are diverse, according to the grace that is given unto us, whether we have prophesy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith: or an office, on the office: or he that teacheth in teaching: or he that exhorteth, in exhortation: he that distributeth, with simplicity: he that ruleth, with diligence: he that showeth mercy, with cheerfulness. All which places duly considered and conferred, that though these offices be not so distinguished, but that one may have more of them, as we have already proved against our brethren's too precise severing of them before, which now in the Pastor they would join together, for many of them, and that of necessity: yet hereby we may plainly see, there is no such necessity of the conjunction of these several gifts in all Pastors, but although some have them all, some are not so furnished, but that notwithstanding they want some of these gifts, by our brethren here so necessarily required: All Ministers are not utterly to be rejected that want some gifts though requisite. yet are they not to be clean excluded out of the ministery. And how do our brethren here then say? If a man have never so much knowledge, & be not apt or able to teach (meaning by teaching, not only such teaching as they ascribe only to Doctors, but also public preaching, which containeth both teaching and exhortation, as they said even in their last Section, the Pastor teacheth and exhorteth with all, Ministers not preachers. except he can teach thus) he ought by no means to be admitted into this vocation. And yet, if he could do this, and were not able to confute them that gainsay the wholesome doctrine, he is altogether unmeet for the office of a pastor or Bishop. This were very hard to be urged, with such a peremptory necessity. Which if it were: perchance many of these our Learned brethren Discoursers theirselues might fail, especially in this last point, being not able what soever they persuade themselves) to defend these their own desires, and to confute us iheir Brethren, (whom they take in hand to confute: not of any unwholesome Doctrine, which they confess that we profess so well as they, and as for those whom they should rather confute indeed, as the papists, the Anabaptistes, the Arians, the libertines, the brethren of Love, and such like maintaining not wholesome doctrine, it would not only appose them, but many other (yea, otherwise good preachers) to confute them in such order, as the Apostle there requireth. In the famous Nicene Counsel were assembled many notable learned Bishops and Elders, A simple man confuting a Philosopher. and yet when it came to disputation: one simple ancient father, who was no preacher neither, did more good in confuting a sophistical and wrangling Philosopher, even by the plain recital of the only Creed: than all the the eloquent and Learned bishops were able to do. For, as the Arian philosopher said: while they strived with words he had words enough for them all. But when virtue came, words, gave place to virtue. If it be said, this fact was not of a Pastor, but of a lay Confessor, as Socrates mentioneth Hist. Tripart. lib. 2. cap. 3. Which notwithstanding in Sozomenus, seemeth another like fact, to be done by a Priest or Elder, being also a Confessor, to defend the other priests his fellows, whom another philosopher insulted upon: yet, even in the next Chapter, Sozomenus mentioneth a Confutation also not much unlike, between a pagan phisosopher, and Alexander Bishop of Constantinople. For when di●tra of the philosophers desired to dispute before the Emperor, with the bishop: and he being unexpert in such exercise of words etc. Notwithstanding took upon him the conflict by the commandment of the Emperor, When all the philosophers would speak, he required them to appoint out one, whom they would choose, and commanded the other to hold their peace, and mark what should be spoken of them twain. Whereupon one of them undertaking the dealing of the whole disputation: the blessed Alexander saith unto the philosopher: in the name of jesus Christ, I command thee that thou speak not: and as soon as he had said the word, the deed was performed: For suddenly so soon as he heard the speech: his mouth being closed up he became speechelesse. This bishop was of great virtue of life, and had the gift (as it appeared) of miracles. He could not dispute and confute the gainsayer of wholesome doctrine, yet could he stop their mouths prettily well. But if our brethren had been there, if they durst not speak, for fear their mouths had been stopped likewise, yet, they would after have said of him that being unable to confute, he was altogether unmeet for the office of a Pastor or a bishop. But those that would say so of such a man, were meet enough to have their mouths also if not by miracle, yet by authority to be stopped, rather than to open them thus at random, against many good, plain, and simple pastors, who though they have not the gift of GOD with any audacity and grace, of utterance in the pulpit make a plausible sermon to the people: yet in private admonition, in sound knowledge, in sincere & constant profession of the truth, can teach and persuade with their example, and confute more effectually by their life, (though otherwise, in public action they can do little without their book: and yet shall some of these perhaps, do more good among the people) than some other eloquent and famous Preacher or Disputer, or Confuter shall be able to do. I grant these high and most excellent gifts are to be honoured with double honour, but the other are not so far to be despised, as to be called altogether unmeet, for the office of a pastor or bishop. Howbeit, (I confess) if any be altogether ignorant of the knowledge of God's word, the same is also altogether unmeet for the office of a pastor or bishop. The learned discourse, Pag. 35 & 36. Hereupon our brethren set down their resolution, saying: Wherefore if we ever mind such a reformation, as God shall thereby be glorified, & his Church edified, we must utterly remove all the unlearned pastors, as men by no means to be tolerated to have any charge over the lords flock: and also provide that hereafter none be received into that office, but such as are sufficient for their knowledge & ability in teaching, to take so weighty a charge in hand. What a great unthankfulness is this, to say, If ever we mind sucha reformation, Bridges. as God shall thereby be glorified and his church edified? As who should say, it was never yet hitherto, in all this Reformation of the Church, either endeavoured, or so much as minded. And is all this that hath been done, nothing to the glorifying of God, nor to the edifying of his Church? or hath it so fallen out, that both God hath been glorified thereby, and his Church edified, and yet was never minded? with charity to our brethren beit spoken this their censure is too too uncharitable, both of her Mayest. &, her Mayest. Brothers, and Father's minds, and reformation: with all their godly Counsels endeavours, and all their learned bishops and preachers travels, to these especial purposes, that God might be glorified and his Church edified: and too injurious even to the Glory that God hath already gotten, and the edification that the Church, (namely of England) hath enjoyed, and other Chuhches that have in part felt, no small comfort and edification thereby: Gods name be more and more glorified and praised for it. But now, imagining (if we may so harden our hearts, and benumb our senses, as not to feel nor acknowledge these good blessings of God) that God's glory and his Church's edification was never yet set forth among us, nor so much as minded: what is the thing they would have us do? If ever we mind such a reformation as God shall thereby be glorified and his Church edified: we must utterly (forsooth) remove all the unlearned pastors, as men by no means to be tolerated to have any charge over the Lords flock, and also provide that hereafter none be received into that office, but such as are sufficient for their knowledge and ability in teaching, to take so weighty a charge in hand. Concerning the provision for hereafter, it is very good counsel. But for those that are in office already (only for that they cannot publicly preach and exhort and confute, though otherwise they have never so much knowledge) there is no remedy, but that they must every one be removed, and that utterly removed, and that by no means to be tolerated, no not to have any charge, though it be not, the pastoral charge, no not to be a Deacon, nor a Reader, nor yet a Doorkeeper over the lords flock: this is a hard censure. Indeed, nothing so hard, as one of them (with more eager zeal than the most of the residue) wrote of late in his answer against M. C. for joining with the English Churches, saying: Wherefore I would say, there were holiness in the dumb Ministry, Harrison against Ca●twright. pag. 23. (for that is their usual and mildest term they afford the Ministers that are not public preachers) if all the dumb Ministers were hanged up in the Churches, and public assemblies, An uncharitable speech and bloody sentence. for a warning and terror to the rest, that are ready to enter such a function: then indeed, there were a holy sign and remembrance of judgement against such wretches: but other holiness have they none in them. This judgement is far more rigorous and extreme, than this of our Learned brethren Discoursers. Yea, by this bloody sentence, some of our brethren perhaps their-selves, that are more Zealous than learned, or more Learned than able with any gift of persuasion to make any public exhortation and confutation, might be called into danger, How quickly this might reverse on our brethren. not now of their livings, but of thei● lives, and although they would tell a fair tale, to save their lives, and would rather preach such slender stuff God wot as they had: yet, if they were unlearned, they must be counted dumb dogs, they must truss also, the cord would not suffer them to utter it. So soon might this judgement be reversed on some of their own well-willers, who spare not to cast forth such uncharitable and bitter speeches, saying, of the poor Ministers of Christ: we say not but that that our dumb Ministers may be heard, for if standing on the gallows to be executed, they say would come down, I know we may hear them. Do these speeches savour of Christian charity? If not, rather of the spirit of those cried Crucifige, Crucifige, and having crucified Christ, so these speak of hanging up his poor Ministers. And as they in scorn bade him come down from the cross: so these speaking of hearing his Ministers, do say, they may indeed be heard, when they say they would come down from the Gallows. Yet, well far these our Brethren the Learned Discoursers, that are somewhat more pitiful to the poor unlearned pastors, Our brethren the Learned Discoursers mildensse. not to hang them up by the neck, as thieves and Robbers, Traitors and Rebels, (for so they commonly call them) for a warning and terror: but to turn them out to shake their ears, and beg their Bread, with their wives and children like wretches, Rogues, and vagabonds. Yea, they are fair dealt with that they have their lives. And this is the milder sort of these our Brethren. And until the poor Ministers that be not Learned preachers, be at least thus gently handled: we shall never mind such a reformation, as God shall thereby be glorified, and his Church edified. Alas poor souls, which heretofore, even for their zeal of God's word, (though not all, yet many of them) in time of so great necessity, when the tyranny of antichrist had wasted and taken away so many Learned pastors, The state of the Minist. that are not preachers. and when the popish massing sacrifices were also removed: then these good Zealous men, being of some readier skill and ability, than were the most part of the residue in those days, did forsake their former trades, whereby before they honestly lived, which if they had continued might yet thereby have maintained themselves: and with hatred and hazard of their lives, (the most part being then adversaies of the truth in many places) have wholly dedicated themselves to the Ministry of God's word and Sacraments: being also lawfully, both by the best pastors then of the church of England, yea, & many of them assent, desire, and election of by their brethren Protestants, with testification of their good conversation: albeit not so Learned nor trained in schools, as godly zealous: nor able to preach, to expound, to exhort, to confute learnedly in public auditory though otherwise sufficient to give godly counsel, admonition, and instruction in all private: though in the open Congregation not daring (knowing their own simplicity) to hazard themselves further than the distinct reading of the scriptures, with such fruitful Interpretations and Homilies, as by authority are approved and assigned, with the public form of common prayer prescribed, and the reverent administration of Christ's sacraments: and have now in the continual exercise of these things, besides their private studies above this twenty, yea, some above thirty years, spent all their time: and now in their old age, should be utterly removed, and by no means tolerated to have any charge over the lords flock, nor any other provision so much as spoken of for their mainnance: though not called in question, whether they would be hanged, or no: Methinketh, these things if they were a little better considered and digested, should it least more move the bowels of mercy, yea the remorse of conscience and thankfulness, in our learned brethren, than to deal so extremely with them. It may be, that a number of such withal, are crept into the Ministry, altogether so ignorant, and perhaps so criminous and offensive, who might worthily sustain so sharp a judgement, Not all to be condemned alike. that it were better they were utterly removed, than by any means to be tolerated, to have any charge of the Lords flock. For such I plead not. But no reason, that their causes of entering into, and continuing in the Ministry, being so different, they should pass all alike so hard a censure. But what reason induceth our brethren héereunto. What man, having but one hundredth sheep, would make such a man a shepherd or Overseer over them, as were a natural Idiot, The learned Dis. Pag. 36. or otherwise altogether unskilful or unable too perform the things that belong to a shepherd? if no man have so little care of bruit beasts: what brutish negligence is it, to commit the people of God, redeemed with the precious blood of jesus Christ, to such unskilful and unsufficient Pastors, as neither themselves know the way of salvation, neither are able to lead other unto it, whereof they are so clean ignorant themselves. If our brethren meant only of such persons as they now speak of, Bridges it were more than a brutish negligence in very deed, to commit the people of god, to such unskilful and unsufficient Pastor's.. But before, they spoke of such, as had never so much knowledge: and now they come in with natural idiots, with altogether unskilful, unable and unsufficient Pastors: and such, as neither themselves know the way of salvation, neither are able to lead other unto it, whereof they are ignorant themselves. Is there no difference between these & those that are both wise, godly, and learned; and diligent to lead the people of God, both by counsel, instruction and example: though they have not the gift of open preaching, public exhorting of the people, and effectual confuting of the gainesayer. These are those, that we would have more favourably dealt withal. As for the other natural idiots, and altogether unskilful, unable, and unsufficient Pastors: we plead not for any toleration of them. And we hope there be not many such hope-losts, that these words should thus in general, be lavashly cast forth, to the blemish, suspicion and slander of the Ministers. But our brethren yet think harder of the matter, & (as it were) even in pronouncing the sentence of eternal condemnation on many whole Churches in the realm, they say. The learned disc Pag. 36. If there be no way of salvation, but by faith; and none can believe but such as hear the word of God preached: O Lord, how miserable is the state of many flocks in this land, Salvation dependeth not on faith. who either seldom or never hear the word of God truly preached, and therefore know not how to believe, that they might be saved. I marvel now less, if our learned Brethren be so hard hearted against all those learned or unlearned, if they be not preaching pastors, as to thrust them clean out of all the ministery: Bridges. since that in this their too earnest zeal, they thrust withal so many flocks in this land, and in many other lands, clean out both of the state of salvation, & also of the means to be saved. For first, lo hear what a number at a clap, by this thunderclap of theirs, are flatly pronounced to be perpetually damned, whom we charitably hope, Our breath. inconsiderate condemning of all that have not faith. and verily believe, to be as safely saved as ourselves. If there be no way of salvation but by faith, how well might we then cry out indeed, O Lord how miserable is the state of all our infants, dying not only before, but also after Baptism in their infancy. The Papists as they pronounce that none are saved, but only such as are baptised: so, for Faith likewise, they hold this opinion, that there is no way of salvation but by faith, albeit, adding other things thereto, and seeing their infants not capable of Faith, they affirm that they are saved, not by their own faith, but by the Church's faith, and by the faith of their Godfathers or Godmothers, How the infants of the faithful are saved. (as we call them) that in baptizing undertake and answer for them. Luther and diverse other following him, perceiving the grossness of this error, (upon which sundry inconveniences depend) to be saved by the faith, not of himself, but of other: affirm that our infants have theirselves the substance of faith, although it be not able in act to show itself: and that (as Saint Paul saith out of Abakuk, ca 2. The just liveth by his own faith, they are likewise saved and justified by their own faith. But calvin seeing further into this matter, and that this properly and in very deed is not faith, which requireth both an intellectual knowledge, and an actual assured persuasion and confidence on the truth of God's promises, and covenant in the mercies and merits of Christ jesus, which act of the mind infants have not; and considering that salvation properly dependeth not on the act or on the habit of our faith, but on God's eternal election, and the performance of his promise: and that faith being the gift of God, is indeed the only means, and way of salvation, to those that are capable to understand, & by believing the same, apply the promise of Christ his merits, & salvation to themselves, but unto those that are not yet grown to this capacity their natural defect or rather unripeness, maketh not the promise of God frustrate, nor defeateth the election, that was before the children were borne, yea, ere the foundations of the world were laid, purposed in God's eternal decree, & this foundation is sure, God knows who are his: calvin therefore willeth us, Infant's salvation. not to apply these sentences of Christ (that recommend faith unto us) unto the infants: but unto those that are grown to capacity by the gift of God in them, to understand and apprehend the same. And for the infants of us which are faithful, and so included in the covenant betwixt GOD and his people, admitting our infants to receive the Sacrament of regeneration, because though they be not capable of knowledge and faith, yet are they capable of the thing signified, and of the favour of God the Father, & of the grace of Christ the son, The infants of the faithful that die before baptism.. & of the inspiration of the holy Ghost; yea, although they die before they receive the outward sign, yet, not to presume to judge them clean debarred and bereft of these inward graces, but to rely upon the promise of the covenant, that he will not only be our God and so our saviour, that have faith in him: but the God and saviour of our seed also, although yet they have not faith in him, and that we and our seed shall be his people. Neither only in an outward sanctification, whereby as the root, so the branches are holy: but by the inward sanctification, and by salvation, so far as accordeth with his eternal election in Christ jesu. So then, except this which our Brethren here say, If there be no way of salvation but by faith, be restrained to such only as are both of years, and of discretion also to understand (at the least in some measure) & by faith, to apply the word of God unto them: we should find a manifest error, and too hard a judgement contained in this sentence, that there is no way of salvation but by faith. Secondly, here followeth upon this, an assumption far more hard and peremptory, concerning the word of God, than this former proposition, concerning faith in him. And none (say our Bre.) can believe but such as hear the word of God preached. Indeed the ordinary means to faith, is the word of God, which in the mean while debarreth not any extraordinary means, for God freely to instill his spirit, and to give his gift of faith by inspiration, as calvin saith on the 14. verse, Rom. 10. upon these words: How shall they believe in him on whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? He placed here no other word than that which is preached; because this is the ordinary means, that the Lord hath ordained, of dispensing the same. If any do further contend thereon, that God cannot instill into men, the knowledge of him by other means, than by the instrument of preaching: we deny that is was the Apostles mind, who only looked on the otdinarie dispensation of GOD, but would not prescribe a law unto his grace. So that, again we see, that this saying of our Brethren here, is prejudicial, not only unto men's faith, but unto God's grace, thus flatly to affirm, that none can believe but such a● hear the word of God preached. But all this for faith and preaching, our brethren think to warrant out of Beza in his Confession cap. 4. Artic. 35. The means to faith. where he saith: thirdly sigh that without faith, entrance to Christ & life aeternal is open to none: and the preaching of the word, is the ordinary instrument of the holy Ghost, to engender faith in us: it followeth, that the preaching of the word, and the same effectual, is to be required in all of ripe years, to this purpose, that they may be saved: except, when it hath pleased God extraordinarily to work in their hearts. If our brethren had kept themselves within the modest compass of these bounds, as Beza doth, for faith in them of ripe years, and with preaching as an ordinary instrument of God, and gone no further: this had been allowable. But now, what mean our brethren here by preaching? can no private, nor public reading of the word of God; with never so diligent marking and conferring of the same; and with reading also and conferring the sound, learned, plain, and godly expositions, interpretations, Sermons and commentaries of the word of God: nor no reading of sincere common places, gathered out of God's word: nor no private conference with godly and learned men, upon doubts and scruples; nor in catechizing, or exercise of Doctors, which our brethren say pag. 17. must teach only true doctrine, and confute all heresies, and false opinions by the word of God, concerning all articles and principles of Christian religion, without applying their teaching to any particular state of time, of persons, or of places: and must not exhort, as preachers must: who still intermix exhortation, reprehension, consolation, and application with their doctrine: and can none come to believe by none of all these means, nor by them altogether, except preaching be continually adjoined to them? or do our brethren understand preaching also in all these means? for they are both ordinary means in their kinds, so well as preaching, and very effectual means, whereby oftentimes, and namely in want of preaching, God worketh mightily in the instilling, and the increasing of knowledge and Faith in his elected. Now upon these two erroneous (by their leave be it spoken, for a brother may err, but not persist therein) and too austere premises, our brethren make their sharp conclusion, with a shrill and miserable exclamation, crying out: O Lord how miserable is the state of many flocks in this land, who either seldom or never hear the word of God truly preached. More seldom perhaps, then were to be wished: but never to hear the word of God preached, or to hear it falsely preached, and not truly when it is preached, I hope there are not many flocks in this land, or rather, but very few, if any at all: yea, I believe, no not one, but that hath heard the word of God, although the seeldomer, yet truly and plainly preached among them. But what is meant here by these words truly preached? Preaching they spoke before of the word of God preached: and now they come in with truly preached. Belike, if it be not preached in such manner & form, or with the avouching of such points as these, that our brethren desire and contend for, and use most to preach upon; it is not truly preached. Preaching truly. And in that sense, they may peradventure say some what more truly, that in many flocks of this land, it is seldom or never heard. Although (I am afraid) it be in too many flocks in this land, on that fashion, by some of our brethren, both too often, and also too untruly preached. Which maketh indeed a miserable state in many flocks of this land, & hath bred and still breedeth a most miserable, lamentable, and horrible schism in many flocks of this land, and more miserable is like to breed, if such preaching should not be restrained. But what a foul slander is this (& that for such to make, as in the preaching of the Gospel, The church and realm of England● foully slandered. profess to be our brethren) not only for the ministry of this land, but also for the flocks and people of the same: that they seldom or never have the word of God truly preached, and therefore know not how to believe, that they might be saved. As though they were all infidels, Turks, Saracens, or some wild savage people: or at the least, worse than the Papists, of all whom. I dare not hazard so far as to say, that they, neither believe in God, nor know how to believe, & not only stand as damned creatures, but as those that are destitute of all means, whereby they might be saved. This is too heavy censure of our brethren. But now that they have thus passed their sentence, least we should appeal from it as unjust, unmerciful & untrue, or but answer any thing against it: they prevent that which they imagine, we will answer thereunto, and reply before hand to our imagined answer saying. But here it will be answered, The learned Dis. Pag. 37. Bridges. that as it is a thing greatly to be desired; so is it altogether impossible, to provide the church of so many learned Pastors, as should take charge of every several congregation. And have we no other answer to make unto our brethren but this? what a strange foading of themselves is this, and condemning of others, to imagine also, that we must answer this and that, even as they conceive in their fancies, The answer of impossibility of providing learned preachers for every Church. and would have us frame our answers to their objections and surmises? Hath any of us, or have I answered thus (except by way of debating) to any of their like accusations aforesaid? And yet, I hope, I have answered truly and sufficiently, for any thing yet alleged by our Learned Brethren, what show soever it carry of learning, when it is not answered. Albeit our brethren have been by other (if answer would serve) thoroughly answered. Neither should they now by me have been at all answered, save upon urgent provocation thereunto. But let us now see, this our presupposed answer, wherewith theirselues in ●ur names, Impossibility of learned Pastors do answer themselves. As it is a thing greatly to be desired: so is it altogether impossible, to provide the Church of so many learned Pastors, as should take charge of every several congregation. In what sense impossible is understood. Sith they will needs have this to be our answer: let it stand in god's name for our answer, so it be mollified in these words, altogether impossible: which is as much to say, as absolutely impossible. And who can say so, sith, nothing is impossible unto God? who can make the stones to cry, and of them make children unto Abraham: and sith that which is impossible to man, is possible to God, etc. But according to the state of things either as they are, or as they may conveniently be helped, one thing considered with an other: might we not well avow, this answer, that unto man it is unpossible, specially understanding impossibility, (as it is oftentimes understood, for such a difficulty, to bring to pass, as we could not well, see how it should be done, without as great, or greater dangers to ensue. The learned discourse. Pag. 37. Bridges But hereto we reply, (say our brethren) that it is a thing necessarily required at our hands, by God almighty, and therefore we must object no impossibility, especially when our own negligence is the cause of all the difficulty, or if you will so call it, impossibility. Albeit, we might not amiss inquire of our brethren, what they means by these Learned Pastors: and with what necessity God requireth that all Pastors should be such learned Pastors,: notwithstanding, for any thing here replied on our supposed answer, are there not some things that are necessarily required at our hands by God Almighty, that we must needs confess, are even altogether and absolutely on our parts impossible? as the perfect obedience of God's law. And yet, especially our negligence, in our first parents fall, and our own sins in us, are the cause of our not difficulty, but mere impossibility to do those things, that Almighty God necessarily requireth at our hands. Except we should say with the Papists, that we can fulfil God's law, or else with them, accuse God of injustice, if he should require at our hands an impossibility. And that therefore, we must object no impossibility, for we reply, it is a thing necessarily required at our hands by God almighty. If our brethren say that therein God helpeth us another way: so may he do here also, though the Minister be not all thing so learned a Pastor, as God necessarily requireth at his hands that he should be The learned discourse, Pag. 37. Bridges. We confess (say our brethren) it willbe hard at first, but we must do our endeavour, and commit the success unto God, and there is no doubt, but in time it will grow to an happy end. This confession is very true, it will be hard at the first. And we assent, that we must do our endeavour, so far forth as we conveniently may but not to the injury, & much less to the undoing, Endeavour to help it▪ of any never so simple & poor a Minister, if he be virtuous & diligent to his power in his function; and so commit the success unto God. To whom, if our brethren would indeed commit it, they would omit these unnecessary contentions, nor so urge their desires of reforming discipline,, nor publish these devises & platforms of Ecclesiastical government, entituling them solemnly, Learned discourses, prescribing more than is lawful for private men to do; at leastwise, they would never so far proceed in them, with such-unbrotherlike iwectives against the public Magistrates and Ministers learned and unlearned: but desire those things that they think are amiss, and would wish reform, in a more Christian, charitable, and good subiectlike manner, than they do: & then there is no doubt, but that whatsoever were indeed to be reform, though it be hard at the first, yet by this softness, in time it would at last grow to an happy end. For, as the Proverb is, A good beginning maketh a good ending, But such a preposterous and violent beginning, continuing and increasing, as hitherto our brethren have used for these matters, and do use, not only breedeth a present disturbance and continual schism: but also boadeth a doubtful suspicion (without gods merciful help) of a tragical and unhappy ending. But when (say they) we shallbe altogether careless, The learned discourse. pag. 37. & 38. as we have been long time: and that is worse, not acknowledging any default in this behalf, (as there be that do not;) and that is most of all, maintaining such lets and hindrances, as be continual nurseries of ignorance and ignorant Pastors: we may be ashamed to allege that difficulty, for which none are to be blamed, but we ourselves. To be careless in so careful matters, is a great default. But we must take heed on the other side, of too much curiosity and of rashness, Bridges both in thrusting ourselves (béeyond our calling) into actions of pretenced reformation: and also take heed, whom thus at random and in these general speeches, we accuse to have been so long time careless. For, as this carefulness principally pertaineth to those, that by authority are called to the charge and care thereof: so her Majesty, with her honourable counsel, and the godly learned-Praelates, have not only had great care in this behalf: but with careful travails, have much endeavoured, Our brothers stirs have hindered these cares. that these troubles might be happily ended. But evermore hitherto unhappily, these our brethren's intempestive stirs, have bred such lets and hinderances héereunto: that they are now further off, and call more and higher points in question: than they did about Caps and surplice at the beginning. And these contentions, being more earnestly traversed between the learned, have given advantage to embolden the common adversary of us both: and withal have occasioned the more unlearned in the Ministry, to be less taken heed unto, Carefulness than otherwise more easily they mought have been. Which nevertheless we complain not upon, as Adam did on Eve, to post all the fault unto our brethren, & not acknowledge any default herein among ourselves: but noting the same, (with dutiful submission to their authority) we wish that some even of our Bishops, had been so careful in this long time, that they had not admitted some, though prettily learned, yet too headstrong and new-fangled Ministers, that since they have entered into the Ministry, forgetting the calling of them, by whom they were called, (if they have any calling in the Ministry) forgetting the oath of their Canonical obedience to their Bishops, and of their loyal obedience to their prince, have, and do make, all, or the most part of all these stirs. But their carelessness in admitting such, hath been since meetly well punished, by these their disobedient and unthankful children And some also they have admitted into this function, too unlearned, (we confess,) and unworthy Ministers and so are not altogether clear of maintaining the continual nurseries of ignorance and ignorant Pastors: Yet neither have they been maintained, How their carelessness hath been punished. but greatly rebuked, for their so careless doings: and thereupon laws and provisions have been made, and stand in force, to repress such unlearned Ministers, and the makers of them. And though we acknowledge, that we may be well ashamed (and sorry, in respect of the defaults of some) to allege that difficulty for the which we ourselves are to be blamed: yet, sith our brethren also do here confess with us the difficulty, that it will be hard at the first, and are themselves also in no small part a cause thereof, and of greater lets and hinderances to a happy end, of these untimely brawls and troubles: Let them take part of this blame and shame with us, and either of us, so soon, & as much as we may, carefully endeavour to amend it. We may (say they) be ashamed, now that our Church hath had rest & peace, The learned discourse. Pag. 38. with free preaching of the Gospel these 25. or 26. years, under the protection of our most gracious Queen, to be so unfurnished with learned Pastors▪ as we are: whereas, if that diligence had been used of all parts, as might and should have been employed of all them that unfeignedly seek the kingdom of God and his righteousness, almost in half the time, this necessity might have been well supplied, If our Church have had rest and peace, with free preaching of the Gospel, Bridges these 25. or 26, years, and now since also, this 27. this 28. and upward, under the protection of our most gracious Queen: how much are we bound with all thankfulness, first to Almighty God, and after, unto our most gracious Queen, to reacknowledge the same. And how may they be ashamed then, that (where we have had such rest and peace with free preaching of the Gospel, by this protection, all this while, from the disturbance of our foreign enemies, have at home continually not ceased to disturb this rest and peace, with these contentions and divisions: and defaming the chiefest preachers, in this realm, have thereby not a little hindered the free preaching of the Gospel? and how again, may they yet be more ashamed, that being not content to live in this rest and peace of our Church, nor with the free preaching of the gospel, although they themselves acknowledge it, yet they exclaim (contrary to that their selves do here acknowledge) that they have no rest, nor peace, nor the free preaching of the gospel, but call the state of our church, a deformed state and deface it with far worse contumelies: & so both disturb the preaching, of the gospel, (which otherwise, their selves confess, is preached freely,) and grieve her Majesty: Yea, some of them in their Pamphlets also, break forth into very disloyal speeches, which I now forbear to name, but all of them, disobey her Mayest. laws, and yet here confess her to be a most gracious Queen, & that they enjoy all these excellent benefits under her majesties protection. Surely, if we were so unfurnished of learned Pastors, as they exclaim, which notwithstanding is nothing so much, (God be praised for it) as they to make it seem more odious, The gospel freely preached. pretend it is: for (if we be so unfurnished of learned Pastors, how is the gospel freely preached?) and yet we wish, we were still better & better furnished than we be, and our Prelates put to their helping hands, as they may thereto: yet, if we were worse furnished than we are, (considering these benefits,) it might be some what better borne withal: than that the lack of the greater learning in some of our Pastors, should be thus upbraided to the whole state. But now, if there be any thing to be helped herein: is this a reason, to alter the Ecclesiastical government, and to punish the Learned pastors, and all the Bishops, because of some unlearned Pastors among them And admit, that diligence hath not been used of all parts, that might and should have been employed of all them that unfeignedly seek the kingdom of God, and his righteousness. Must all these parts that seek unfeignedly the kingdom of God, and his righteousness, though not with employing that diligence therein, that they should have done, be therefore deposed of all their authority? yea, and that there must be no such authority at all, but all Pastors in authority must be equal? Is this the readiest way to make more Learned Pastors, or not rather to make fewer than there be: if not, to make them all the more unlearned? and is this our learned brethren's unfeigned seeking the kingdom of God & his righteousness? And we have yet, to thank God for this, that although that diligence had not been used of all parts, that might and should have been employed of all them that seek the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; yet sith it is granted and cannot be denied, Preposterous means. that they seek the kingdom of God and his righteousness: though not with that diligence, that they might and should have done: This lack of diligence is far better, at least wise, less evil in all those parts, than is the double diligence of these our brethren, that employ themselves and seek by all means, to deface the learned Pastors (which God be praised are not a few) by the remainder of the unlearneder sort; and would clean overthrow, not only them that be diligent or negligent in authority, but the authority itself, under complaint of lack of diligence in all parts that have the authority. And this diligence indeed of our brethren hath been such an hindrance to a great many, that might and would have proved learned Pastors, that they have clean diverted their studies, & professions from the Ministry, on this offence; or else, in half, yea in a quarter of all this time, this necessity might have been well supplied. But our Brethren, to turn us from the consideration of these hinderaunces, do draw us another way, and say: If we seek experience, what diligent and careful provision is able to do with the blessing of God: The learned disc. Pag. 38. look to our neihhbours and brethren in Christ, of France, who although they never enjoyed one day of such peace, as we have done so many years,: yet how plentifully are they furnished with all kinds of Ecclesiastical Ministers, and namely with godly and learned Pastors, it would rejoice any Christian hart to behold in them, and lament to see the lack in us. Yet once again, we must seek experience from our neighbours and brethren in Christ of France: when as these our brethren their selves confess, Bridges. that at home, for the free preaching of the Gospel, we are and have been all the reign of our most gracious Queen, in far happier case than they: Comparison of our neighbour's churches in France and our. and contesse withal, that herein they never enjoined, no, not one day of such peace, as we have done so many years, And yet cannot our brethren be thankful, for all this; except we also, be as plentifully furnished with all kind of Ecclesiastical Ministers, and namely, with godly and Learned Pastors, as they be. What they mean by their plentiful furniture of all kind of Ecclesiastical Ministers, they do not tell us, and therefore it maketh the less matter. As for these specified, namely godly & learned Pastors: albeit we were not so well furnished as they for our parts: though our hearts rejoice to behold this plentiful furniture in them; yet is there no cause, that either they, or we should lament this want in us. Notwithstanding, what wanteth, we both acknowledge and lament; and wish and endeavour to supply: that our and their joy might be full both in them and us. It is much hindered in France, by the open hostility of the public adversaries of the Gospel; and with us, by our brethren's unnecessary molestations, which are both lamentable to any true Christian heart to think on, The french Churches. and do much hinder the plentiful furniture of godly and learned Pastors among us▪ And although (to make the comparison more odious against the state of our Ecclesiastical Ministers) our Brethren set a better face upon the matter, for our neighbours and brethren in Christ of France: how plentifully they are furnished with all kind of Ministers: and namely, with godly & Learned Pastors, that it would rejoice any Christian hart, to behold it in them: though the hearing of it, is a joyful hearing, to every Christian hart: yet I doubt me, we may rather wish it were so, than that in very deed, there is such great furniture of learned Pastors, as is here pretended. And that also we should quickly behold in them, if they might have (were it the good will of God) as God be praised for it, we have and enjoy, such peace and rest with free preaching of the Gospel, under the protection also of their Kings and Magistrates: It would then manifestly appear, that they are not so plentifully furnished, and that they never had in all their Civil wars, any such great numbers of Learned Pastors: and so much the fewer, for that many of their small many, have been either so slain and martyred at home, or dispersed abroad, & fled into other nations: that (I suppose) if all the remnants of them were assembled and viewed, they should be found not half a quarter able, except God (as he is able, who spoke the word, and great was the multitude of the preachers) raise up a great multitude of more learned Pastors, to furnish that great & populous realm, & all the several congregations in the same. And yet, now as they are, in these troublesome times of persecution, it may be, that in some few places of safest refuge, there may well be, in respect of their assemblies, some congregations among them, in France, in England, in Germany, and in other places, whether they are fled for refuge, as to a Sanctuary which God in exile hath provided for them, as (God be praised) England is for many nations, in which they may easily have plentiful furniture of godly and learned Pastors. Which, as it proceedeth from the gracious providence of God, to confirm his afflicted people, in such times of greater trial and necessity: so, though it lament our hearts to see their dangers, & we pray for them with all our hearts, that they might enjoy also such rest of body, & peace of conscience, with the free preaching of the Gospel, as we enjoy: in the mean time it not a little rejoiceth our hearts to behold such surniture of learned Pastors, as god of his great goodness hath given unto them for their strengthening. And yet should both they & we, & all Christian hearts redouble our rejoicing, if they might enjoy these blessings of peace & rest, with the free preaching of the gospel, as we do: though as many several congregations in France, were no better furnished with learned though otherwise godly Pastors, than are among us: and (I think) they would not repent them of such a bargain. Acknowledging defect. But as for those (say our brethren) that acknowledge no defect in our Church, through the great multitude of ignorant Pastors: we had rather at this time pray to God to lighten their blindness, The learned discourse. pag. 39 Bridges then by any long discourse, to discover their palpable darkness. For such great multitude of ignorant pastors (understanding them as is before described) I hope there be not. That there is no defect in the Church, through those ignorant pastors that be: I know of none, but do acknowledge it with great grief, and many godly prelates and other in authority, employ their great diligence, to the help and redress thereof: so far, as by any lawful meenes they may: And if any do otherwise: we pray God also with our brethren, to lighten their blindness, and to change their hearts, and a God's name, even by as long discourse, as our Brethren will, & do, (though they say they will not,) discover their palpable darkness, Discovering the same or any other defect in them, not as Cham did, when he saw his Father's nakedness, but so far forth, as they always remember, that Charitas operit multitudinem peccatorum. Charity covereth a multitude of sins. Which if they would indeed perform, they would not make the matter worse than it is, and amplify it by so great multitudes, and aggravate it by calling such multitudes, not only ignorant persons, but idiots, Idols, and a great many fouler and unfitter terms; and not only bestow such terms on them, but as many, if not worse, on the best learned and chiefest in authority, under her Majesty, the Fathers, Bishops, and Archbishops. in the Clergy. and must all these be condemned of blindesse, and papable darkness? And when thus they have poured forth all that they can imagine, and a great deal more than they can prove, or though they could prove, were convenient (and it were but for their own modestitie) to have discovered: and to discover it in such a gibing and scornful manner, and in such eager moods and unreverent terms, and to defile with such speeches, not only that that might be wished better, but withal, that that is not only tolerable but also commendable in them: & then to come in with their frump and say, they will rather pray for them: than discover them: me thinks their prayer would be more effectual, if their long or short discoursing, though it were less learned, were more temperate. But now that our Brethren rather list to pray to God: they make their petition, saying: Would to God there were not more difficulty in reforming them that maintain such inconveniences, The learned disc. Pag. 39 & 40. as except they be taken away: we shall never be disburdened of the cankers of the Church, those unlearned ministers. For while Non-residentes, and pluralities be retained we shall never want unlearned Curates, that for small stipends, will supply the absence of Pluralities, and Non-residentes: which gross corruptions of pastoral office, as they may have some honest pretence, Pluralities so can they have no better pretence, neither are they retained with a better conscience, than the Priests in our saviour Christ's time, suffered the exchaungers of money, Graziers, and Pulterers to make a burse or shambles, and a poultry: yea, a den of thieves of the temple of God, which was appointed to be a house of prayer to all nations. Mat. 21.12. Mark. 11.15 joan. 2.14. This prayer expresseth more fervour, than knowledge, or at least, Bridges. their acknowledging of that dutiful obedience and charity, that were rather to be wished, our brethren had allayed the intemperance of their zeal withal. As not only in wishing them reform: but that there were not more difficulty in reforming them, that maintain such or any other inconveniences in the Church. It is an old saying and of great consideration, Better to suffer a mischief than an inconvenience. and worse is it, Our brothers dangerous & slanderous speeches ynder colour of prayer. to maintain it, than to suffer it. And how much the more, so much the worse. If then, such things as here be noted, are such inconveniences: how is not this too unadvisedly cast forth, in form of a prayer to God, that they must be reform, and yet cannot but with more difficulty be reform, that maintain them? Doth not this too near touch principally her Majesty, whom in the page before (more dutifully) they acknowledged to be our most gracious Queen: and many civil Magistrates, besides those Ecclesiastical prelates, that have to do in these matters: yea, the statute, and whole state that do maintain them? Besides that, every poor Curate which liveth under any Pastor, if he be not himself so learned as the Pastor is; he is here called by this mild term, a canker of the Church. If a cankered Papist, or a cankered haeritike (for the Apostle saith so, of haerisie & false doctrine, that it eateth like a canker,) had so called our protestant Ministers, I would have said, he had spoken like himself. But it is a far unlike and unseemly speech, for Protestant Minist. to bestow upon their brethren Minist. in the Gospel. True it is, that by the Non residence of some Pastors, and the pluralities granted unto them, some Curates and Ministers of lesser gifts are maintained: and (as I take it) reason too. For, as we have showed out of calvin) the gifts of the Pastors being not alike, there may well be difference in them, both of superiority, & of maintenance. Which may accord also well enough with the saying of the Apost. The Elders that govern well, especially in the work of the word, are worthy of double honour. And therefore, if some more Learned pastors having also a greater gift of the spirit of government, have more parcels of the Church of god to govern, than other have, and thereupon are permitted (in consideration of their greater labours in the word) to do good in more places: and for their better provision, to have other besides them, and in their absences to attend continually to those congregations, Reading. while their more fruitful travails are other where employed: if these also by order of law, and by authority of Magistracy be provided for: What is aimed at under pretence of inveighing against pluralities and non residents. and yet, cannot be permitted but by the law and magistrate, so that it is not free to every one that list, but to choice and more able men, and only to so good purposes, and always with sufficient provisions for every place and person so permitted: Is it lawful for every or any private subject on this public fashion to exclaim against it, and also to inveigh against the Magistrates for maintaining of it? But there is a mystery in this thing, more than every body wéeneth, Pluralities and non residents are pretended, which if they be abused, are not so maintained, but that upon proof thereof, they are punishable, or to be restrained or revoked: but other matters are shot at, to wit, the livings of the Bishops, of the Colleges, or of any that have any portions of the Church, impropriated and allotted unto them. Howbeit our Brethren fail herein of their chief purpose, for, if all these were taken away; yet may the power and superior authority remain, though weakened, when the living is gone, and so all Pastors, notwithstanding all these byouse devices are not equal. As for that our Brethren add, of the pretence of these things, which they call gross corruptions of Pastoral office; to omit the reconciliation of these sayings, Our breath. contradiction and slanderous accusation. that as they may have some honest pretence, so they can have no better pretence, than had the exchangers of money, the graziers and poulterers, to make a burse or shambles, or a poultry, yea, a den of thieves of the Temple of God, which were indeed no honest pretences at all: This is also too rough a censure of our Brethren, so flatly to condemn all the Magistrates and Ministers in the Church of GOD, which (in manner aforesaid) permit these things, to have no better pretence nor conscience, than these deadly enemies of Christ had. The Texts alleged out of Matthew, Mark, and john, stand only on a rank for a bare show, and prove nothing at all, that these matters have no better pretence and conscience, than those gross corruptions of those wicked jews had. And is this now, that which our Brethren meant, when they said even the last sentence before, they would rather pray to GOD to lighten their hearts, than by any long discourse, to discover their palpable darkness? Indeed Brevis oratio penetrat coelum? But this short Prayer pierceth beyond all God's forboad, and this short discourse, Si brevis gravis, it were better be longer and be levis Howbeit, the burden of it, is but a faburthen of a foul mouth, and of an heavy irksome slander, unfit for our learned Brethren to have uttered. And yet not content therewith, our brethren proceed and say. But especially while the whole office of a Pastor, Prescribed form. shall be thought to consist in reading only a prescript number of Psalms and Chapters of the Scriptures, with other appointed forms of prayer: The learned disc pag. 36. and that he may be allowed as a sufficient Pastor which doth the things, which a child of ten years old may do as well as he, so long shall we never lack unlearned pastors, ignorant and ungodly people, simonical and sacrilegious patrons: so long the building of God's Church shall go but slowly forward. Besides other superstitious fantasies, maintained in the people's hearts, which for shortness we omit to speak of. Of what estimation reading hath been accounted in the ancient and primitive Church, Bridges. and the office of readers both of the Psalms and Chapters of the Scriptures: we have already declared out of Zanchius, Readers. citing Bucer at large for the same. And how ancient and allowable, appointed forms of Prayer have been in the Church of God, among all the holy Fathers, & are yet even in those reformed Churches, that are most now commended unto us of our Breath? yea, their selves also have in print set down unto us appointed forms of Prayer: though with what warrant and authority they may prescribe and appoint forms of prayer to their Prince, and to the whole Church of England, and reject that which is by lawful authority of the Prince, With what authority our breath. can set out a prescribed form of their own making, & reject that that is done by authority. and of all the states of the Realm and Church of England already appointed: I do not yet know, and feign would I learn, how they are able to justify these doings: and how their own prescribing unto others, their appointed forms of prayer and ministration of the Sacraments, (they having no sufficient authority thereunto) doth not much more confute themselves, that control other for prescribing appointed forms of Prayer unto them. As for that they say, the whole office of a pastor shall be thought to consist in reading these things: I know none that saith or thinketh so: or that he may be allowed as a sufficient pastor, A Pastor's office consists not all in reading. which doth the things which a child of ten years old may do as well as he. Who alloweth such a one for a sufficient Pastor? And what are those things which a child of ten years old may do as well as he? May a child of ten years old minister the Sacrament of Baptism and the lords supper, or pronounce the public absolution to the people? But they mean perhaps that such a child may read the appointed forms of prayers, Psalms, and Chapters of the Scriptures, as well as he? May he so, in the public Congregation, and have no lawful calling thereunto? And yet, may he do it as well as he that is lawfully called? If they mean only, in the respect of his reading: I easily grant it them, that any private man, woman, or child, although younger than ten years old, Reading. if his sight be quick and his voice clear, & he be well enured to reading, may both read as well, & far better, than many an old Doctor, yea, than the most zealous and best learned Pastor in the world, when his tongue foltreth, or his eyes wax dim, or age or other debility doth so weaken him, that he cannot so loud, so clean & reddily read, as a child or a woman may do. But the holy ancient Fathers, did not therefore contemn the office of Readers. No, they considered the person, whom for their calling and office, they represented, and permitted neither child, woman, nor any man never so prompt a Reader, Readers. in such public and authentic manner to read these things, but only those men that were lawfully called and authorized thereunto: and did greatly reverence and esteem this office of Readers, although they were not yet made Pastors, but were Readers only. And shall we now contemn them, & condemn them, when these Readers are Pastors also? and say that such a Pastor reading, doth the things which a child of ten years old may do as well as he? And yet, it follows not, if there were some such Pastors whom a child did excel, & that if any such upon some especial consideration were born withal, we shall never lack unlearned Pastors; ignorant and ungodly people, simonical and sacrilegious patrons, The sequel of our brethren's devices. etc. Whereas, me thinks, (and I speak it bonafide, and I hope, bona cum venia,) that rather of the twain, if these our brethren's devices should take place; we should have more contempt of learning, and greater number of unlearned Pastors: and so more ignorant and ungodly, and contentious people; more simonical and sacrilegious patrons, (if any patrons at all should be allowed) more slow forwardness of the building of God's church, beside other many more new superstitious fantasies, which for shortness we omit to speak of: than either now there is, or ever was, or ever would be, by any direct occasion of reading, a prescript number of psalms and chapters of the Scriptures, with other appointed forms of prayer, as now we have. But our brethren supposing, they have here so full confuted this public reading, of prescribed forms of prayer, psalms and chapters, that we ourselves would seek to have it, yet for a while, at least to be tolerated: they would cut of this also, and say: What though some say: formal reading might be borne withal for ● time, The learned disc pag. 40. & 41. until the Church might be provided of sufficient pastors, which yet is not granted; shall it therefore continue always to the perpetual decay of knowledge, and hurt of the Church of God? Who are those some that so say, that formal reading might be borne withal for a time, until, &c: And what is here meant, by formal reading? If it be a comely and reverent form of reading a prescript number of Psalms & Chapters of the Scriptures, Bridges. with other appointed forms of prayer before mentioned: Why should any say it might be borne withal for a time, A prescribed form. until the Church might be provided of sufficient pastors? as though the reading of these things, should no longer be suffered, but that afterward, those that should be thought to be sufficient pastors, should have no appointed forms of Prayer at all, nor any number at all of Psalms, or chapters of the scriptures prescribed unto them, but that every sufficient pastor, might be free, to vary in his forms of prayer, and number of Psalms, and chapters of the scripture at his pleasure. What sufficiency shall be appointed for such Pastors, is not here set down. For my part, I think there is no sufficiency in a Pastor to be counted a sufficient privilege, so clearly to acquit him, but that, although he may now and then leave out, or add, or alter some part of the prescribed and appointed form, upon occasion at his discretion, yet were it not convenient, (were he never so sufficient learned) that there should be no form at all appointed. For we must not only consider the sufficiency of the Pastor, The danger of having no prescript form. but withal the sufficiency or insufficiency of the people, and the order and comeliness of the Church. Which is best observed, especially in these licentious and perilous times, full of errors and corruptions, not when we are most at liberty, but when Orders appointed do restraive us. But these our Brethren, the Learned discoursers, reject all such forms of prayer, and say: What though some say, formal reading might be borne withal for a time, until the Church might be provided of sufficient Pastors? which is not yet granted. No is? who are they, that have of late set forth this Pamphlet, entitled, A book of the form of common prayer, and ministration of the sacraments, The form that our brethren their-selves do prescribe etc. agreeable to God's word, and the use of the reformed Churches? Is not formal reading, and numbers of Psalms, and chapters of the scripture, here prescribed? And if this book of the form of common prayer, be agreeable to God's word and the use of the reformed Churches: how is this our brethren's Learned Discourse, which they call a brief and plain declaration, concerning the desires of all those faithful ministers, that have and do seek for the reformation of the Church of England, agreeable to God's word, and to the use of the reformed Churches? and how do these our Brethren here affirm, that if this formal reading should continue always, it should redound to the perpetual decay of knowledge, and hurt of the Church of God? which (as Bucer saith) is to the great increase of knowledge and manifold benefit of the Church of God. God. What greater discouragement is there unto Students, then to see the rewards of learning, The learned Dis. Pag. 41. bestowed as commonly upon the ignorant as upon the Learned? What encouragement is it to idleness and slothfulness, in them that be already in that vocation, to be●old them that take no pain, Students discouraged. to live in wealth and ease, without punishment of their negligence? And with what necessary consequence doth this hang, upon the continuance of an appointed form of prayer, Bridges. Psalms, and Chapters? May not the rewards of learning be bestowed upon Students, and yet formal reading of these things still continue? yea, may not Students employ their time more continually in their studies, and have the more leisure to study better about the exposition of the Scriptures, when the public form of prayer is already appointed and prescribed unto them? True it is, that this is a great discouragement unto Students, to see the rewards of Learning, as commonly bestowed upon the ignorant as upon the learned: But would not evil patrons do so more than they do, except the superior authority of the Bishops did not restrain them? and if it were so that all were equal, and the bestowing of the rewards of Learning, livings ill bestowed would be worse bestowed if B. were not. lay in the election of the unlearned and vulgar people: would not the same discouragement as commonly, or more commonly fall out then? And is this the way to encourage Students, under pretence that the rewards of learning are not so well bestowed, to spoil and pull down bishoprics, Colleages, Cathedral Churches, Glebes and Tithes, etc. And to take all this clean away, both from the unlearned and learned too? And are these men now so careful, of the great discouragement of Students, to see the rewards of Learning as commonly bestowed upon the ignorant as upon the learned? It is a good hearing, that they are so careful for the matter: but it is a shrewd suspicion, that if they be not so well bestowed now, if it came to some of their bestowing, they should (forsooth) be fair and well bestowed. If any that take no pain, live in wealth and ease, which I think be very few, among the Ministers in these our days, and therefore may be of Students beholden with less discouragement, or any envious eyes and that such escape without punishment of their negligence, The vocations undermined by the persons default. to the encouragement unto Idleness & slothfulness, in them that be already in that vocation, what are these personal defaults of them which be in that vocation, to the vocation itself? yea rather, do not these quarrels picked at their negligence, Idleness and slothfulness, (while there are other that are not negligent, Idle nor slothful, and yet no learned preachers, but travel in their vocation, bestowing that one small talon that God hath lent them, to the uttermost extent thereof and to the lords advantage) confirm and the more approve that vocation? And may not those that are, negligent, idle, and slothful, be punished well enough, and that more orderly punished, and made to take pains: the state of the Ecclesiastical government standing as it doth? is there no punishment with our brethren, but either hanging up, or turning out: yea, Maintenance of living. and clean overturning too, of all that vocation, and of all the Ecclesiastical government? But here again (say our brethren,) it will be objected, because there are not livings able to maintain all learned Pastors, The learned discourse, Pag. 41. we must be enforced to admit many ignorant Ministers. But again we answer, it is our part, no only to provide learned pastors: but also livings sufficient to maintain them, upon the necessity of God's commandment. Let him that is instructed in the word (saith S. Paul) minister to him that doth instruct him in all good things. Be not deceived for God is not mocked. By which saying the Apostle confuteth all vain excuses, Gal. 6.6. 1. Cor. 9.6. Gal. 6.6.7. which many are wont to allege, why they would contribute nothing to the maintenance of their pastors: All which he affirmeth to be vain, because they have to do with God and not with men only. For here is not regarded the living of a man, but how much they esteem Christ and the gospel of God. Therefore except we will mock God to his face, let us object nothing to testify such shameful ingratitude, that we would doubt, how they should be provided of bodily food, of whom we receive the food of our souls. As though we could not afford them an earthly recompense, of whom we receive heavenly benefits. If nothing had been before time allotted, towards the living of the pastors: yet were we bound in pain of damnation, to provide sufficient for them: and now there is somewhat towards a living, where there is least, and in all places sufficient, if it were well disposed, why should we object necessity through lack of livings, to retain Idols in stead of true Pastors? How true this objection is, Bridges. (considering not only the employing unto other profane uses, Lack of sufficient maintenance in every congregation. the living that hath been dedicated thereunto but also the very poverty of many Parishes themselves, to find such maintenance in every Church or several Congregation throughout the Realm, as might encourage students & learned Pastors:) may plainly to any that indifferently would weigh these considerations, be soon apparent. Neither yet followeth it hereupon, that we must be enforced to admit many or any ignorant Ministers, though some not so learned Ministers, as might deserve the greater rewards of learning. Our brethren answer hereunto, It is our part not only to provide learned Pastors: but also livings to maintain them, upon the necessity of God's commandment. This is true, where sufficient livings are not already provided for them, there it is our part, so far forth to provide for them, as we conveniently are able. Saint Paul wrote to them that had Pastors, and were of good ability to maintain them. And it is likely (as calvin noteth thereon, from whence our brethren seem to take this observation) that the Doctors and Ministers of the word were even then neglected, when there was yet no certain portions allotted unto them, but the Pastors lived on the people's benevolence and contributions. If this devotion waxed so cold then, that S. Paul was fain to call upon them and command them, in the primitive age and prime of the Church, the Apostles yet living: how much more had we need in this last and corrupt age, (when so many are given to the spoil of all things allotted to the Ministry, by these newe fangled devices, and by overthrowing the authority, and taking a way the livings of the bishops, and other the best learned preachers in the Ministry,) to take heed, least while we would seem to plead for the maintenance of the Ministers living, we give no occasion to the quite overthrow and spoiling of them. And if any (as indeed many) testify such shameful ingratitude, by their vain excuses such as Jerome, (on this precept of th'apostle) reckoneth up: as our brethren rightly say thereon: they do but mock God to his face. Even such are many of those (although there be also many other better disposed) that cry out so fast of unlearned Ministers, Many that are most earnest in these things have gotten a good portion of these livings already. and have already licked up a good portion of the livings, that were dedicated to the maintenance of the best learned and chiefest in the Ministry. And by these our brethren's devices and exclamations, do even gape for the swallowing of the residue. But sith (as it is confessed here) such provision hath been allotted for the living of the pastors, and yet, after all that is already gone, there is somewhat remaining towards a living, where there is least, and in all places sufficient, if it were well disposed: Why should we not rather seek godly and lawful means, that such a sufficiency might be well disposed, than to overthrow all that is already well disposed, under pretence that we retain certain Idols in steed of true pastors? as though none could be true pastors, but learned men: and all pastors that are not learned, (nay though never so well learned, if not learned preachers, exxhorters and Confuters of the gayn-sayers,) are but Idols and untrue pastors. This Discourse of our Brethren, may perhaps (because they would so seem to favour learned men) be called learned in their own opinions: but we have not so learned Christ, thus to condemn our poor brethren Ministers, only for lack of learning: if otherwise, being not ignorant of their office, they be diligent and faithful to their ability. O that our learned brethren would remember well this saying, Scientia inflat, charitas aedificat. And that while they speak against these Mockers of God, they would bethink themselves, what God and man may think of this their strange dealing: to pretend, men are bound upon necessity of God's commandment, Mockery of God & man & in pain of damnation, to provide sufficient living to maintain learned pastors, even where nothing hath been before time allotted, and yet, to take from them that which is allotted, and to bereave them of their authority, and to do this to that best learned, under a shadow of doing it only to the unlearned: what a mockery is this, Spoilers & Mockers. both of God and man unto their faces? If our brethren's complaint be here true, that many are wont to allege vain excuses why they would contribute nothing to the maintenance of their Pastors, & that is more shameful ingratitude, which we see find by proof that many would take away that which is already allotted, & make a mock of this, which our Brethren here, as it seemeth in good sadness tell them, that they have to do with God, etc. and that they mock God, although in the end they shall find, that though the latin be false, the sense is true, Qui mockat mockabitur, or as David saith, Psalm 2. He that dwelleth in the Heavens shall laugh them to scorn, the Lord shall have them in derision, and shall charge them with it, when full heavily they shall abye, and bewail their mocking and their spoiling: and will now our Brethren (that complain of these mockers and these spoilers) be mocked also of them, and give occasion to their spoiling. Is it not yet better to stand as it doth in the mean season, though all have not share and share alike in the rewards of learning, (as their gifts and charges are not alike) than (attempting thus with our Brethren, to alter and turquish all, upon hope of equal division,) to open a gap to these Mockers and cormorants, clapping our Brethren on the back, and encouraging them to enueigh against the Bishops, and to make odious the chiefest and best Learned Pastors: to complain and cry out upon the uneven and ill bestowing and disposing of the ecclesiastical livings: and to pretend more equal distribution of them: and when all is first dissolved, and taken away from those that have them: then in come these hovering puttocks, to seize in their claws, and carry clean away all the remainder from both the parties striving. And when all is gone: then after come our Brethren, and burden their consciences for these mocks and spoils, and exhort and charge them on pain of damnation to allot some sufficient stipends to their Ministers, Is not this another plain mockery? God help the poor pastors and students, be they unlearned, The great spoils that learned men complain on, that are made under pretence of reformation. or never so learned, if it should ever come to these new allotments and disposinges, what should be thought sufficient for them Other Realms have felt the lamentable experience, and (what face soever our Brethren here set on the matter,) we read of their best best learned pastors complaints in their works, of this shameful ungratefulness, of them, that under pretence of avoiding popish pride and tyranny, have spoiled them, both of their sufficient maintenance of living▪ and of the lawful authority of their ecclesiastiasticall government. But our brethren turn us from the consideration of the Learned Pastor's complaints of this ungratefulness, in divers parts of Germany, Denmark, Scotland, etc. and would have us look again on the persecuted Churches in France, saying. The french Churches. Look once again into France (for examples move much) and behold the Churches there impoverished, and spoiled with long wars, persecution and unquietness. The learned disc. Pag. 43. They have neither bishoprics, Deaneries, prebends nor benefices to bestow on their pastors, and yet Minister unto them all things necessary for an honest sober life, and shall we that have all this while lived in peace, and prosperity, under a godly and religious Princess, having all these helps, think it is impossible, by disposition of Godly and wise governors, to appoint a sufficient portion, for so many learned pastors as are necessary for our Churches? We must once again look into France, and behold the Churches there impoverished, Bridges and spoiled with long wars, persecution and unquietness. And who have thus spoiled them? have not the adversaries of the gospel? and they again have met with them, and meetly well spoiled the other. But they have neither bishoprics, Deaneries, Prebends, nor benefices to bestow on their pastors. Have they not? the more pity, if it pleased God: it were better for them, and they had them, so they bestowed them better than they be bestowed. But (say they) these Churches have none of all these helps to bestow, and yet Minister unto them all things necessary for an honest sober life. But I ask, if they had that they have not, bishoprics, Deaneries, Prebends and benefices, to bestow on their pastors: should they not bestow them? and if they did bestow them on their pastors, were it not better both for their pastors and for them too? And shall we then, who. (God be praised for it, and continue it) living in peace and prosperity, under a godly and religious Princess, and having all these helps, to bestow on our pastors, not bestow them on them, but go about to take them from them? yea, to pull them all clean down? If examples move: let them move us, rather to be thankful in this point unto God, and not to move such unquietness among ourselves, being with out wars, as shall impoverish & spoil as much, as can the open adversary of the gospel with his persecution. And if we will not mock her Majesty to her face also, but mean sooth as we say, that we that have all this while lived in peace & prosperity, Who mock her Majesty if they obey not. under a godly and religious princess, having all these helps: why obey we not this godly and religious princes laws of ecclesiastical government, but exclaim on them as ungodly and unreligious? is that a godly & religious prince, that setteth forth & maintaineth ungodly and unreligious laws, and that in the Ecclesiastical government of the Church, which is no less matter than the civil government of the realm? How do these things hang together? yea, how do not our brethren (in these words) so entangle themselves, that either they show plainly, they mock her Majesty to her face: or else bewray them, selves that these their doings are the parts neither of godly nor religious subjects. Which when they shall consider better: I hope, this confession of her Majesty, being truly spoken, & truly meant, will somewhat better move them to their duties. Bish. Deaneries. etc. helps. And sith that they confess withal, we live in peace & prosperity under a godly and religious princess: why should our brethren show this shameful ingratitude, both to her Majesty, & to God the chéesest author whence this peace and prosperity, springeth, to disturb this peace, and hinder this prosperity, more than all the adversaries of the Gospel, either do, or can do? & seeing they theirselues do here acknowledge, that Bishoprics, Deaneries, prebend's and benefices, be all of them helps: why do they impugn them, as hindrances unto God's church, and to the pastors of it? as for the appointing of a sufficient portion, by the disposition of Godly & wise governors, for so many learned pastors as are necessary for our Churches. If they want any provision, not provided for by the Laws of the Church and realm now in force: no man (that I know) thinketh it either impossible, or not needful to be provided for. But this may be sufficiently provided for well enough, without the overthrow of the Bishops or Archb. superiority over his brethren pastors, or without the spoil of theirs, or any others livings, and especially, without the setting up of these old pretended▪ but indeed, new devised forms of Ecclesiastical government. There is none excuse therefore to be admitted, but that we must endeavour to the uttermost of our power, that every several congregation, church or parish be provided of a learned pastor. The L. Disc. Pag. 43 44, 45, 46. For unskilful shepherds have been too long thrust upon us, to the great dishonour of God, and defacing of the Gospel of Christ. We have hitherto taken upon us without warrant of God's word, to allow such for pastors of men's souls, whom no careful owner of cattle, would make overseer of his sheeps bodies. Which thing almighty God hath always detested, and signified his misliking by divers testimonies, both of the old and new testament. Therefore he saith by the prophet Esay, complaining of the unlearned pastors of Israel, which was the only cause of their affliction and miseries. Their watchmen are all blind, they have no knowledge, they cannot bark, they lie and sleep and delight in sleeping, and these greedy Dogs can never have enough, and these shepherds cannot understand, isaiah. 56.10.11.12. for they all look to their own way, every one for his advantage, and for his own purpose. Come, I will bring Wine, and we will fill ourselves with strong drink, and to morrow shall be as this day, and much more abundant. If the prophet had lived in these our days might he not have spoken the same more truly of many Shires in ENGLAND? We see therefore that blind Watch men, and ignorant dumb dogs, and idle greedy curs, and unlearned shepherds, that serve for nothing, but to fill their own purses, or their paunches, by the testimony of God his spirit, are denied to be meet Pastors of the people of God. The Prophet Ezechiel also enueigheth at large, against the unfeeding shepherds of Israel: K●sk●lfull Pastors. saying, (Woe be unto the shepherds of Israel which feed themselves: should not the shepherd feed the flock: Ye eat the fat, Ezech. 34.2.3.4. and you cloth you with the wuolle: ye kill them that are fed, but ye●e de not the Sheep. The weak have ye not strengthened, the sick have ye not healed, neither have ye bound up the broken, nor brought again that which was driven aw●y, neither have ye sought that which was lost. etc. throughout the whole chapter. When feeding of God's sheep is a matter of so great importance, and consisteth of so many parts, which the prophet hath here described, how should we admit them whom God rejecteth? Which being ignorant and unlearned know nothing at all, and therefore nothing can do that appertaineth to this charge, or any part thereof: undoubtedly the retaining of such, is a manifest token of the vengeance of God against us, for so he threateneth by the prophet Zach. his words are these. And the Lord said unto me: take to thee ye● the Instruments of a foolish Sephear●e. For lo, I will raise up a shepherd in the Land, which shall not look for the thing that is lost, nor seek the tender lambs, nor heal that is hurt: Zach. 11.16.17. nor feed that which standeth up, but he shall eat the flesh of the fat and tear their Hooves in pieces. O Idol shepherd that leaveth the Flock, the Sword shall be upon his arm, and upon his right eye: his arm shall be clean dried up, and his right eye shall be utterly darkened. Here first where our Brethren conclude on their former premises, that there is none excuse, Bridges. etc. We grant as before, that all vain excuses are insufficient, and that we must do our endeavour to the uttermost of our power, so it be done without violence or injury to any man. But that every several congregation, Church or Parish must be provided of a learned pastor, Providing of learned men. meaning such a learned pastor, as should need no appointed form of prayer: etc. is not so necessary. Howbeit, as learned a man were to be wished and provided for, as may conveniently be gotten. And if Unskilful shepherds have been too long thrust upon us, is there no remedy, but we must thrust out the most skilful, for the unskilfuls sake? But what do our Brethren mean by this saying, that we have hitherto taken upon us, without warrant of God's word, to allow such for Pastors of men's souls, whom no careful owner of Cattle would make overseer of his sheeps bodies? And can they warrant this out of God's word, that we should only allow such for Pastors of men's souls, whom a careful owner of Cattle would make overseer of his sheeps bodies? verily by this accusation they might thrust out a great many not only unlearned, but also the most Learned and skilfullest Pastors of men's souls, that for any skill at all, and perhaps also for any ability of their bodies, no careful owner of Cattle would make overseer of his sheeps bodies. The Prophets wrested. But if our brethren say, they mean not so, though they say so, but only that we allow such for Pastors of men's souls, as are more unskilful of the food of men's souls, than are such, as for their unskilfulness to oversee the bodies of his sheep, no owner of cattle would allow for bodily shepherds: as (I hope) there be none, or not many, so unskilful: so, if there be any, they are not allowed, much less thrust upon us, but rather instructed, or punished, or removed, at least wise on proof they are removable. As for these sentences, which our brethren here cite against unskilful pastors, were not only spoken against the wicked and Idolatrous Priests in those Prophet's days: but also against their wicked Kings, Princes, and Magistrates, as calvin observeth, saying on the same 10. verse, Esay. 56. Our brethren's too lavish application of the prophesy of isaiah. Moreover, by the name of watchmen, he not only understandeth the Prophets, unto whom the function of teaching was enjoined, but also the judges, the Governors, and Kings, who ought to have administered all things orderly, etc. The applying therefore of this sentence unto our state now, may infer a very dangerous and not subiectlike conclusion, and if our brethren will needs understand it of the only Ecclesiastical pastors, as that of Ezechiel and of Zacharie: yet why should they not rather apply it (as calvin doth that of Zacharie) unto the Popish pastors, that resemble these against whom the Prophets inveigh? Albeit Tremelius and other refer these sayings of Zacharie to the Magistrate also But take it for the Ecclesiastical pastors. If any of the pastors in these or any other Prophet's days, had diligently (at their due times assigned unto them) read in their public Congregations, the only law and the Prophets, and administered the Sacraments and rites then appointed, though they had not with any interpretations at large expounded the same, nor given any persuasible exhortation to the people: yea, though they were not of sufficient learning so to do, but were able only to show the brief and simple meaning of those mysteries: yet, would not, nor could these Prophets have applied these invectives, to any such true and diligent, though not learned nor preaching pastors. And much less can our brethren or any other, direct them against our Christian & godly protestant Ministers of the Gospel, though they be no learned preachers, interpreters, nor exhorters: if they diligently read the only word of God unto the people, & sincerely administer the Sacraments, and where a doubt is in any principle of our religion, can only in brief declare the same though they be neither learned otherwise, nor able to preach, exhort, persuade, nor apply in public action. So that, these sentences of the Prophets▪ are a great deal both too unadvisedly, and too uncharitably of our brethren hated and wrested against all those Ministers of the Gospel, that are no preachers. Howbeit, if there be any such among the Ministers of the Gospel, that may be rightly compared unto these, The Proph wrested. against whom the Prophet's cry: we confess it is not fit such should be maintained, neither doth any law now in force maintain them, neither think I, that this which here confidently, our Brethren by way of a question do avow, is true: that if the Prophet had lived in these our days, might he not have spoken the same more truly of many shires in England? If the Prophets had lived in our days, they would not have spoken as our breath. No verily (GOD be praised for it) could he. For what many shires can our Breath. name in England, whereof it may be truly said, their watchmen are all blind, and cannot bark, & c? What an hard speech is this from our Brethren, to publish and denounce, though (thanks be to GOD) not against all shires, yet against many shires in England? But I verily hope, that if it should be tried, it cannot be verified of any one shire in England. And yet, if in any or many shires, there be any such (as we grant there be too many, if there be any) to still I stand to my tackeling on this point, be they many, or in many shires; they may be all well, yea, better reform (without this new alteration of our brethren's Ecclesiastical government) by the Bishops and archbishops, superior authority over them. For, howsoever by abuse, negligence, or corruption, any such blind watchmen, and ignorant dumb dogs, and idle greedy curs, and unlearned shepherds, that serve for nothing but to fill their paunches, may here and there creep in: yet are none such by the Ecclesiastical state of government allowed, but as they are found criminous herein, so they are either deprived or corrected. And as for this sentence of Ezechiel, is so directly spoken against those Pastors, that wilfully suffered all the people to run into open Idolatry, that except we should withal, burden all the Realm to be open Idolaters, and the whole Clergy wilfully to neglect it, and that they are neither willing nor able to speak aught against it: (although withal we grant, it comprehend all those that are semblable in ignorance, negligence, covetousness, and voluptuousness, without any regard of GOD'S people) it cannot thus largely and at random be applied to our whole state, neither against those that are learned, painful, and faithful preachers, of which sort (God be praised, and increase them) we are not unfurnished, neither against those their Curates in their absences and under them, ezechiel's sentence abused▪ and the whole clergy learned and unlearned slandered such as, although they be not able to preach, yet they teach truly and diligently to their ability, and frame their lives according thereunto. As for such other as here are named, I think it would be over hard for our Brethren, to find out such to be maintained, which being ignorant and unlearned, know nothing at all, and therefore nothing can do, that appertaineth to his charge, or any part thereof. Reading Ministers. Neither doth the sentence alleged out of Zacharie, touch our poor Ministers. Who though they be not so learned, that they can with any edification preach, Zacharies sentence wrested against the Ministers of the Gospel, though not preachers. as we use the name of Preachers, especially as our Brethren here pretend to understand the word: yet if they read and set forth the word of God with all their diligence faithfully, they are so acquitted from this censure of the Prophet Zacharie, that calvin writing at large upon the same, compareth them only to the Popish Pastors, not unto any Ministers of the Gospel. Now seeing (say our Brethren) we are taught by these words of the Lord God, The learned Dis. Pag. 47. that it is a great and horrible plague to have the Church of God encombered with such foolish and Idol shepherds: let us study to remove such plagues from the flock of Christ, whose arms are clean dried up, that they have no force, and their eyes utterly darkened, that they have no skill, so that they are not able to perform those duties which pertain to a wise and faithful shepherd, except we will betray the sheep of Christ, into the mouths of ravenous wolves, 1. Pet. 18. and especially into the teeth of that great ramping lion the devil, who never ceaseth going about to seek whom he may devour for his pray. For what do these reading Ministers differ from those Idol shepherds, which God in his vengeance threateneth to send, for the ingratitude of the people? What we are taught by these words of the Lord God, in these foresaid sentences of the Prophets: we have before sufficiently seen, Bridges. that they touch not any godly and diligent Ministers of the word and Sacraments of Christ, although they be not learned Preachers. We grant, it is a great and horrible plague to have the Church of God encumbered with such foolish and Idol shepherds, as Zacharie describeth: and to study to remove such plagues from the flock of Christ, whose arms are clean dried up, that they have no force, and their eyes utterly darkened that they have no skill, etc. It is good council. But to demand héereon: What do these reading Ministers differ from those Idol shepherds, which GOD in his vengeance threateneth to send, for the ingratitude of the people? Is a question with another demand to be assoiled. What they mean by these reading Ministers? For, albeit this is most untrue, What our breath. mean by reading Ministers. that those Idol shepherds of whom the Prophet speaketh, were reading Ministers, but rather they are called Idol shepherds, for that they were not reading Ministers, but dumb and silent Ministers, like to Idols, that had mouths and ●pake not. Yet, if they mean by reading Ministers, such among us, as can do nothing else but only read: although sometime in the ancient Church, there hath also been a great use of such reading Ministers, Homilies. whose office was only, or most especially to read, and great account made thereof, & served for good & excellent purposes, as out of Zanchius & Bucer is declared: yet notwithstanding, if these reading Ministers perched into higher places of the ministery than they should, (as coming some what near to the touch of these terms) they might perhaps better deserve to be removed. But if they simply mean all reading Ministers, whereas the most part are able to give good counsel, instruction, admonition, & exhortation in private conference, besides their public formal reading, though they have no dexterity in public preaching: yea, there is none so learned a preacher in this land, or in any other Church, but it may beseem him well enough to read the public form of common prayer in the Church; and to read the Chapters and Psalms appointed, and so, all sorts of Ecclesiastical persons, being comprised in this term, Reading Ministers: it were overhard to remove all, and to condemn all reading Ministers for Idol shepherds. It will be answered (no doubt) that to supply their ignorance, there are added to their appointed service, The learned disc. Pag. 48. many godly and learned Homilies, which if they read with their service, there is not so great need of preaching and interpretation of the Scriptures. And if this be answered, for any thing that is here replied, the answer might satisfy any reasonable man, that were not too litigious and importune. Bridges. Why may not many godly and learned Homilies be added, to supply their ignorance that are not learned pastors? Is not an Homely a sermon also? And if they be godly, and learned, & many such Sermons, although they be but read plainly and distinctly upon the book, and not conned or spoken without the book: may it not be safely said (at least thus much) that where they are orderly and often read, there is not so great need of other preaching, and of other interpretation of the Scriptures? When as indeed, the reading of them (being read as they ought to be) is also a kind of preaching, and oftentimes no unfruitful interpreting of the Scriptures. But now, what do our brethren here reply unto the answer of this supply? We will derogate nothing here from the dignity of those Homilies: we will not accuse here the unsensible reading of unlearned Ministers, The learned discourse, Pag. 48. neither yet the unreverent contempt of the ignorant hearers: but which all godly and wise men must needs confess, those exhortations that are not applied to the proper circumstances of times, places, persons, & occasions, are of small power to persuade any man, and least of all the ignorant people. Bridge's What our brethren here do mean, in saying, we will derogate nothing here from the dignity of those Homilies: Homilies. it is uncertain, because that this restraint here, seemeth to infer, that some where else they will derogate from the dignity of them. Which if they do: we must answer it then, & take this in the mean season that is granted here. And yet here let us friendly forewarn our brethren, to remember what they have granted here, lest they derogate there, from that which they have acknowledged here, that those Homilies are godly and learned Homilies, yea, Our breath. derogation from Hom. though godly and learned. let them take heed that even here they control not themselves, for if they will here derogate nothing from the dignity of them: how then will they not allow them to be read? Is it no derogation to the dignity of them, to prohibit the reading of them? And sith they here confess them to be both godly and learned, why may not such profit be reaped by them, that they may be a good and necessary supply, when other kind of preaching wanteth? As for the unsensible reading of unlearned Ministers, may both here and any where else be worthily misliked, and also the unreverent contempt of the ignorant hearers. But what is this against the godly and learned Homilies, when they are sensibly read, and when they are reverently heard, and not contemned, and when the ignorant hearers attain to knowledge, by the hearing and marking of them? But whatsoever they will derogate other where, or contrary themselves there or here: What a dangerous saying is this that followeth, as a reason here of them alleged? But, that which all godly and wise men must needs confess, those exhortations that are not applied to the proper circumstances of times, places, persons, and occasions, are of small power to persuade any man, What can our bre say worse to the derogation of godly learned Homilies. and least of all the ignorant people? For these general speeches take not only away the benefit, that many to their comfort and increase of knowledge feel, by the reading and hearing of many godly and learned Homilies: but also of all other writers & Father's Commentaries, Common places, Apologies, Confutations, Treatises, Sermons, postils, Homilies, or whatsoever never so godly and learned discourses, yea, it would make the holy Scripture itself, which is the power of God to salvation to all them that believe it. Rom. 1. which is quick and forcible, and more piercing than a two edged sword, reaching even to the parting of the soul and the spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and a separater of the thoughts and intentions of the heart. Heb. 4. to be of small power. And what are any godly and learned Homilies, but written Sermons, expositions, and preachings of God's word, to make the same more plain, and so to persuade more effectually the ignorant hearers? But, The smaller power ma●e yet help somewhat 〈◊〉 want of th● greate●. be it that godly and learned Homilies are but of small power to persuade any man: yet if they be of some power, though the smaller; then may they be added as some supply, though the smaller: when the greater supply of godly & learned preaching is not always so ready: albeit that many godly and learned Homilies, are not so destitute neither of application, to divers proper circumstances, of times, places, persons, and occasions, The force of godly learned Homilies to the godly disposed. but that the diligent hearer and marker may perceive himself sufficiently, and often times with more moderation, and no less pithily to be touched and moved, than perhaps with many more vehement & less considerate exhortations or reprehensions of diverse, yea, & that very godly and learned preachers. Let long experience, the mistress of fools, teach us, if knowledge the instructor of wise men cannot move us. The learned disc. Pag. 48. & 49. How many Papists converted? How many ignorant instructed? How many wicked reform, are ye able to show by this ignorant and unlearned ministery, with all the helps of reading, of formal Prayers, Homilies, without preaching & applying the Scriptures to the proper circumstances before rehearsed? If long experience be the mistress of fools: whose mistress is late & short Experience? Bridge's And why then do our Brethren cry so fast, to have us look upon and follow the late experience, Experience. and that in other Countries, as a rule for us and all to imitate? The question here demanded how many Papists converted, & c? is very captions. As though we allowed of ignorant and unlearned Ministers, or allowed of such reading of formal prayers and Homilies, as never hath the helps of preaching, or applying the Scriptures to the proper circumstances before rehearsed. How far we allow of Homilies. Whereas we hope▪ there is no Congregation so utterly destitute of preaching, albeit, that the Homilies their selves (being as is confessed) both godly & learned, be both a preaching and an applying of the Scriptures, & may be well used of any never so godly & learned a Minister, and much more the less learned that he is. And no doubt, though we name not particular persons, which we might well do, and I for my part, & that in open disputation of this matter, with some not of the meanest of our Breath. & that before the Maior then, & chiefest of the City, have heard diverse godly, zealous, & worshipful, seriously acknowledge great fruit by the hearing of Homilies, yea, and some that have plainly confessed of themselves, that before being very ignorant Papists, though they have not only been converted by the hearing of the godly & learned Homilies, nor only by hearing preachers, nor only by reading the Scriptures, nor only by prayer to God, who only openeth, molliffeth, lighteneth, and converteth the heart: but that God hath done it sometimes by all these means together, & sometimes by one, & sometimes by another, with conference, disputing, & other godly means: yet among all, they have openly professed, that God hath converted them from their Papistry, & instructed them from their ignorance, & reform them from their wickedness, not a little but very much, by the often reading and hearing of printed sermons or Homilies of our own Countrymen, & of other nations: as of calvin, Bullinger, Gualther, Hemingius, & divers others: & whether this be true or no, whereas our Breath▪ demand, how many we are able to show: let every man show himself as he hath found, I appeal to every man's conscience, for his own experience in this point: & I doubt not, but (if they will not unthankfully hide it) many thousands in this land would rise up, & with heart and mouth confess, that they have found no small comfort & edification, by the reading and hearing of such godly and learned Homilies or Sermons, as in our English tongue are set forth. Again, who seethe not, but he that is so blind that will see nothing, that these parts of a true pastors duty, The learned discourse. pag. 49. which both the prophets Ezech. & Zac. rehearse, namely, to strengthen the weak, to heal the sick, to bind the broken, to seek the lost, to bring home that is carried away, to cherish the young lambs, to feed the strong sheep, &c. cannot be performed of any man by such means as these, but only by such a one as is a godly & learned shepherd. I grant these duties cannot be performed by such means as these, of any man that is altogether ignorant & utterly unlearned, Bridges such as our breath have heretofore described. But I deny this, that these duties can be performed only by such an one, as is a godly and learned shepherd, in such sense, that he may not withal use these means. Wherefore, these poor helps of prescript form of reading of prayers, of homilies, & such like, The learned discourse. Pag. 49. & 50. when they are alleged to maintain the ignorance of unskilful pastors, are called no beteer by the judgement of God, but the instruments of foolish & Idol shepherds, which have a certain pretence of pastoral office, but in effect are altogether unmeet for the same: even as Idols & Idiots are good for nothing, but able to do much hurt, concerning whom, our saviour Christ pronounceth this fearful sentence: If the blind lead the blind they shall both fall into the pit. Mat 15.14. How long therefore shall we suffer the blind to lead the blind, to the destruction of both? Let us therefore now at length remove these blind guides, & place in their steads faithful overseers, that may lead the flock of Christ into the way of salvation. How is now the promise kept which our breath. made so late before, Bridges. that they would derogate nothing here from the dignity of those Homilies, which themselves confess to be both godly & learned? And yet here even the very next page▪ both Homilies generally, & also the prescript form of reading of prayers, & such like, are not only contemptuously called poor helps, but are in reproach termed the instruments of foolish & Idol shepherds, & that is worst of all, they say they are called no better by the judgement of God. The jews used a prescript form of prayers & written Sermons. But do they find this judgement or calling of God out of Zach. or Ezech. or any other of the Prophets? Do any of them call a prescript form of godly prayers, or of godly & learned Homilies or sermons by these terms? Had not the jews a prescript form of all their sacrifices, & of many prayers & Psalms, composed, digested, & prescribed to the children of Corath, & to other Priests and Levites? The true use of Homilies. And had they not also many Sermons written by Moses, and by the other prophets, which they often used on the Saboth days, and other feasts to read in the congregations public, without any alteration of them, or the addition so much as of any exposition or exhortation gathered on them? And did they not in so doing, even all these things that here are mentioned, notwithstanding all things were prescribed unto them? And yet were they no Idiots nor Idols, nor the blind leaders of the blind, nor these sentences of Christ nor of these Prophets were applied unto them, nor the following of the prescribed service, are of them called the Instruments of foolish and Idol shepherds. Or, what godly and learned Commentary expoundeth these words of the Prophet, for the prescript form of prayer and Homilies? calvin on these words of Zacharie, chap. 11. verse. 15. calvin on Zacharie chap. 11.15. Take to thee the instrument of a foolish shepherd, saith on this wise: The Prophet here teacheth, that whereas God hath cast off the care of the people: there shall be some vain show of government, but out of which it may easily be gathered, that God exerciseth no more the office of the Pastor: as though he should say, the people should be so forsaken, that notwithstanding they should think themselves yet for a while to be, and to remain under the safeguard of God: Even as we do see in Popery those proud boastings to fly about, the church to be never forsaken of God. Although therefore the truth of God hath hitherto been overwhelmed: notwithstanding it was the true Church, which was stuffed with wicked superstitions. Even as therefore the Papists boast and are contented with a title only: so we know the jews pretended their privileges, & these also were their weapons, when they would cope and conflict with the Apostles. What? are not we the inheritance of God? Hath he not promised, that there should be a perpetual sanctuary to himself among us? Is not the sacerdotal unction a certain and infallible sign of his grace? Even as therefore the jews puffed out those foolish boastings against the Apostles: so also at this day the Papists do shroud all their shames, under the title of the Church. This now doth Zacharie understand, when he saith, that by the commandment of God, he took the vessel or instrument of a foolish pastor or shepherd. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth unto the hebrews any instrument, we expound it a broken bag. But that is to much wrested. I doubt not therefore, but that by the instrument of the pastor, Zacharie understandeth the Ensigns or notable marks, out of the which it might be gathered there was yet some pastor, but in the mean season he calleth him a foolish pastor, that we may know, he was but a void or a deceitful vizard. The name therefore of pastor is here placed by granting to it, as the Scripture often speaketh, and at this day we also grant now and then to the Papists, the name of the Church, and also we grant to their horned or mitred Bishops the name of Pastors. Thus doth calvin apply this saying to the Papists (as the most part both of old and new interpreters, apply the Pastor here mentioned to Antichrist) and the instrument of this foolish shepherd to the title of the Church. But none that I read of, to the prescript form of godly prayers or to the reading of godly and learned homilies. If our Brethren say, that these things are not of themselves called the instruments of foolish Pastors, but when they are alleged to maintain the ignorance of unskilful Pastors: although, this be not true altogether neither; yet, were it true, when these things are so alleged: as the scripture in some sense, The scripture wrested is not the scripture which in his true sense is gods holy word. when it is wrested and alleged to maintain that, which it is not spoken of, nor appliable unto, is called a dead letter, or rather not the Scripture at all, and so may be called in such a wrested and false sense, the instrument of an Heretical Pastor, and of the Devil himself, or by any worse name: and yet used and applied in his true sense, (in which only it is indeed the Scripture,) it is the holy word of God: as also we may say the like of the sacrifices, and other ceremonies of God's law among the jews, The use and abuse of the sacrifices. when they were used in their kinds, and referred as types and figures to jesus Christ, they were the holy ordinances of the Lord: but being drawn from Christ, whom they prefigured, to maintain the error of op●● operatum, as though they had virtue and grace in themselves, to forgive the sins of those that made the sacrifices, or of those to whom they applied them: they are then called beggarly elements, and as it were the offering up of dogs, which God detesteth: so, if we should commend the reading of prescript form, of holy and devout prayers, or of godly and learned homilies, The abuse in reading prayers and homilies letteth not but that there is a good use of them. to maintain the ignorance of unskilful Pastors: then indeed it might well be said, that the holiness, and devotion of those prayers, turneth to sin and superstition; the godliness and learnedness of those homilies, might well be said, by the judgement of GOD to be no better than instruments of foolish Pastors, though in these places cited, God call them not so. But, since we allege not, nor use any prescript reading, or form of prayer and homilies, to maintain the ignorance of unskilful Pastors, but contrariwise, to instruct both them and all others that here the same, and so to bring them out of ignorance to godly and learned knowledge: these odious and contemptuous terms, can by no right be justly applied unto them. And as for the suffering of any blind guides to lead the blind: If they be such blind ones indeed as Christ speaketh of, Blind guid●. it were not convenient they should be suffered. And if our Brethren would leave these unnecessary strivings with such guides as be not blind, but see as well, or better than theirselues, those blind guides where any be, might be better and more orderly removed, Politic shifts. and other faithful overseers placed in their steed. The learned disc. pag. 50. & 51. The ministers of the Church are the salt of the earth. If the salt be unsavoury, wherewith shall it be seasoned? It is good for nothing but to be cast out and trooden down of men's feet. Let us not therefore seek politic shifts to maintain the unsavoury salt, which our Saviour Christ pronounceth to be good for nothing but to be cast out. By these and many other testimonies of the scripture, Mat. 5.13. it is as clear as the son at noon days, that it is the office and duty of a Pastor, both to be able and willing to teach his flock, and that no ignorant & unlearned person is to be admitted to that charge, or retained, if he be crept in, no more than a blind man is to be suffered in an office, which must be executed only with the sight: or a dumb dog to give warning which can not bark; or an Idol to have the place of a man, or a fool of a wise man, or a wolf of a shepherd, or darkness in steed of light, or salt that is unsavoury to season withal. We grant, no politic shifts should be fought nor used, neither (hope we) any are sought or used, Bridges. at least, our Brethren have not yet proved any to be sought or used by the state of the Ecclesiastical government, Our form of prayers & homilies no politic shift to maintain unlearned Pastors. to maintain such Ministers, as may rightly be compared unto these terms. Neither are godly and learned Homilies, nor the prescribed form of godly prayers, any politic shifts to maintain them. If they were: our Brethren theirselues might be burdened, to seek also such politic shifts, that do likewise prescribe a form of public prayer. Such Ministers as are here described, blind, fools, Idiots, Idols, dumb dogs, wolves, darkness, salt unsavoury, ignorant and unlearned persons; where any upon just trial are found and convicted so to be, and of whom is no hope that they may become able and willing to teach their flock, it had been better (we confess) they had not been admitted to that charge, or being crept in, are not to be retained. Notwithstanding, all such may orderly be removed, and yet the prescript form of common prayer, & of godly & learned homilies, & the superior authority of Bishops & Archb. with the other discipline and government of the Church of England already established, may continue well enough in force, without these byous, odious and impertinent quarrels, of maintaining any such unlearned ministers. But while we entreat of teaching, to be the duty of a Pastor, we do not only mean public preaching when the congregation is assembled: The learned disc. Pag. 51.52.53. but also private exhortation, reprehension, consolation, of every particular person within his charge, so often as need shall require. And that this is also the duty of a faithful Bishop, S. Paul testifieth, setting before the Elders of the Church of Ephesus the example of his diligence, which he would have them to follow. The Pastor's private duty. You know (saith he) from the first day that I came into Asia, after what manner I have been with you at all seasons. Serving the Lord with all modesty, etc. And how I kept back nothing that was profitable, but have showed you, and taught you, Act. 20.8.19. & 20. both openly and throughout every house. By which is manifest that the Pastor must not only teach all his flock openly, but also he must instruct every family privately, wheresoever he shall see it to be needful or expedient. Which duty cannot be accomplished by a reading Minister. Also in the 26. ver. of the same chap. he commendeth unto the Elders, a general care of the whole flock. Take heed to yourselves (saith he) and to the whole flock. Act. 20.26. Which care cannot be well, or at all undertaken, except they be diligent to teach, both all and every one of their flock, as need shall require. Which thing also he willeth them once again to observe in his example, verse, 31. saying: Therefore watch ye, remembering that by the space of three years, I ceased not night and day, exhorting every one of you. By these testimonies, Act. 20.31. it is evident to see, what diligence the holy Ghost requireth of Pastors in teaching, both publicly & privately, as well generally all their flock, as particularly every one of them. He therefore that is unapt, to execute this part of a Pastor's duty, is altogether unmeet, to whom governance of the flock of God, should be committed. All this, with these three sentences of S. Paul, (as our Breath, here say) are especially referred to private exhortation, reprehension, & consolation. Bridges. And we grant this particular and private teaching, to be a part of a Pastor's duty, The Pastor● private duty. and that he which is (altogether) unapt to execute this part of a Pastor's duty, is altogether unmeet, to whom governance of the flock of God should be committed. But again we say, that he which is apt to execute this part of a Pastor's duty▪ and is diligent to teach all and every one privately wheresoever he shall see it needful & expedient, is not altogether unmeet, to whom the governance of the flock of God should be committed. Sith there are many, both godly and learned Pastors, that can do, & do to their abilities execute & accomplish these duties, & yet have not the gift of public preaching: and therefore, for their open actions, why may they not the better & oftener, use the reading of the prescribed form of common prayer, and other godly and learned homilies, in the public assemblies of the flock and congregation? In temporal affairs, The learned disc. pag. 53. no man will commit the least charge that can be, to such persons as he knoweth to be altogether unmeet, or unable to answer unto the charge: & shall we continue as we have done hitherto, to put them in trust with the greatest charge that can be, the salvation of so many thousand souls, redeemed with the blood of Christ, whom we know certainly to be able to do, no part of a Pastor's duty sufficiently? God forbidden that we should still continue, so lightly to esteem so weighty a matter, Unable Ministers. as though we accounted the blood of Christ, by which we are sanctified, to be profane, and would contumeliously withstand the spirit of God. Bridges Our brethren are all in extremes, as though we allowed the committing this office of Pastorship, to those that are altogether unmeet, and to such whom we know certainly to be able to do no part of a Pastor's duty sufficiently, Our Breath. impugn one and we defend another. which to do is a great and just offence. But we defend one, & they impugn another. Albeit, under the quarrel against that other, they mean to wring out indeed, both the one and the other, and not only the mere insufficient Pastor, but the most sufficient. As for us, we only speak in defence, and that but by the way of toleration for a time, of such as are not altogether unmeet, What Ministers we defend & how fa●●e forth. but willing and able to do some part, or the more part, and that sufficiently of a Pastor's office, though not all, or all, though not in such sort, as other better learned, that can publicly interpret and apply the scriptures, to the circumstances of times, places, persons, occasions, and in public preaching have the gift, learnedly and effectually to exhort, to comfort, to admonish, to reprehend the hearers, and to confute the gainsayer: although, they be yet able to do these things better in private. And in public they follow the forms set down and appointed, of godly and learned homilies. Not, but that we hearty wish as well as they, that all Pastors could as freely and learnedly preach, as can the best; at least, better than they now can. And the godly Bishops and Prelates do (I hope) endeavour themselves in their charges, to exercise the Pastors thereunto. Neither do we allow, that the Pastoral charge should be committed unto any, that in any respect is insufficient. But if it were before committed unto them, except they be altogether unmeet, and no hope of any sufficiency in them; we think not, that by and by they must be thrust out by head and shoulders. But that they may be permitted to do what they can do, and be trained up with such exercises of learning, as whereby they may wax more able. And in the mean time, godly and learned Preachers to travel the oftener in such places, The exercise of our Minister's. the better to supply that which wanteth, and hereafter not to commit the charge but to such only, as shall be more sufficient to discharge it. And this not only we like and agree unto; but I trust, yea, I know in many places, (so far as conveniently may be done) it is with all diligence and care already provided for, and may well be done, the Ecclesiastical government of the Church of England, notwithstanding standing a● it doth. The learned disc Pag. 54. But necessity (you will answer) hath no law. This necessity we have answered before, to consist in two points. In lack of livings, and lack of learned men. The first we have showed aught to be no let, no not of an hour, if the other want could so soon be supplied. Learned men and maintenance. And both must of necessity be provided for in time, or else we testify before God and his holy Angels, that they which neglect or withstand this provision, shallbe guilty of the blood of all them, which perish through the default of teaching, in the whole realm. This is a good answer (being understood in his right sense) that here again we are presupposed to make, necessity hath no law. Bridges. Our Brethrens answer hereunto, Two necessities, lack of living & lack of learned men. by distinction of the things wherein this necessity doth consist, to wit, in these 2. points, in lack of livings, and lack of learned men. Well then, our Brethren here grant (when they can thus properly distinguish the same) that there is a necessity in this matter. But, to the first they answer, that they have showed it ought to be no let, no not of an hour. Now verily, than it is a gentle necessity, that so soon can dispatch so great a matter. But, for the other necessity of learned men, they confess it to be harder, saying: if the other want could so soon be supplied. If then a longer time must of necessity be required, for the supply of learned men, how then should all these Pastors that are not learned men be forthwith turned out, and no longer at all be retained? Should the Churches lie utterly vacant, until these learned men might be gotten? And should we supply this want with a greater want, that is, with none at all in the mean time, neither learned nor unlearned? But have our brethren espied it out now at length, For the time to supply these necessities is contrary to that they said before. that both these necessities, yea that of livings as well as that of learned men, must of necessity be provided for in time? This is an other song than our Breath. sang before, that the one must be done out of hand & suffered no longer: & the other aught to be no let no not an hour: but (as better advised) they now begin to see, that soft fire makes sweet malt, and in space will come grace. It must have time, or ever that these necessities can be provided for, & perchance a longer time than an hour, to provide for the easier of both these necessities. But howsoever they lengthen or shorten the time of this provision: I would wish our breath. here advise themselves, Our Breath. protestation how they protest before god and his Angels, such solemn testifications, as here they make, of them that neglect or withstand this provision. For, if they mean, this provision, that they immediately set down: it is a very dangerous provision, in diverse respects, not only against meaner persons: but also against greater personages & states, than I would wish our Breath. Protestants: yea, then beseemeth lowly subjects, or charitable Christians, to have dealt in: lest (though they have no ill meaning) they give occasion of further suspicion. And though they say, they mean generally any godly and convenient provision: as I hope there is no godly Magistrate or Prelate, that neglecteth or withstandeth the same: so I admonish our Brethren once again, to take heed of such dreadful protestations. Provisions for maintenance. Lest, while so importunately they urge for necessary, this unnecessary provision that they set down, and other their platforms and modilles of Ecclesiastical regiment: they do not their selves neglect and withstand, such godly provisions of the Prince, and of those that have authority hereunto under God and her Majesty, whereby these necessities might have been long ere now, much better than they are, provided for. And let them withal take no less heed, lest this provision of theirs that followeth, would not, while they think to mend the matter, make it far worse, both for the necessity and want of livings, and also of learned men. Which, whether it will or no, let us see and consider these provisions of theirs, to supply and take away these two necessities. The learned disc Pag. 54. The lack of livings may be supplied, either by restoring the sacrileges of Abbeys, as Impropriations of benefices, etc. or by dividing the superfluities of some places that have too much, unto them that have too little, or by any other godly means, that may be thought meet to those godly and wise governors, that by duty ought and by authority may do it. Bridge's To supply the lack of livings, our Brethrens do here set down a threefold provision. First, by restoring the sacrileges of Abbeys, as impropriations of benefices, A threefold provision. etc. Nay, soft (good Brethren) let us pause awhile on this, for (me thinks) the very name of the Abbeys (the Abbeys provisions being so great and rich) seems to promise great matters. And there were no more but this poor help to restore the sacrileges of Abbeys, meaning their lands and goods: the necessity of the poor Pastor's livings, would be helped well enough, I warrant you. All the other provisions might surcease. But I pray you, if we should go no further but to this: call ye me this a provision of an hours warning? They were a longer while ere they were set up. And as it is a true saying of old, Facilius est destruere quàm construere, W● may quicklier pull down with one hand, This restoring requireth a longer time than is here set down. than we can easily build again with both. They were quickly down, and yet in longer while than an hour, or a day, or a year: and trow you they would be all so soon restored? But I hope, ye wot well what ye mean. For ye say not, all the lands and goods of Abbeys should be restored: but, by restoring the sacrileges of Abbeys, as impropriations of benefices, etc. And I pray you, what mean you by these words, the sacrileges of Abbeys? What our Breath. me●n by the sacrilege of Abbeys. do ye not mean the taking away from them their lands and goods? If ye so do: call ye that sacrilege? which is the worst kind and highest degree of theft, when they rob such things as are consecrated to holy uses. But I hope our Brethren think not so well of those dens of tháenes, the cages of uncleaunesse, and nurseries of superstition, Abbeys sacrilege. the chief pillars and maintenance of the Pope his errors, pride and tyranny; that their lands and goods as impropriations, The taking away their lands and goods was no sacrilege. etc. were dedicated to such holy uses, that the taking of those goods from them, might be rightly called sacrilege, even as though it had been the robbery of God's temple among the jews, or of the Church among us: I think our Brethren have not so good an opinion of those Abbeys, nor so ill an opinion of the parties, that took those lands and goods from the Abbeys. For if they account the taking away of those impropriations, etc. from the Abbeys to be sacrilege: then what do they account the takers away of them? And who were they that took away these goods and lands from the Abbeys, and dissolved the Abbeys themselves? Not only the most renowned Prince of happy memory King Henry the eight: but all the whole state and persons in the Realm. Which gave them to the King, and the King to diverse Nobles and subjects, as he pleased. If our Brethren should call all these Church robbers (which the name sacrilege betokeneth) because they dissolved, took and gave them away by law▪ & that by the highest order of law in all this land, no doubt upon no less deliberation of all the states of the Realm, than it was the just punishment of almighty God upon those Abbeys, and one of the greatest shatterings of Antichrists kingdom in this land: to call now these doings sacrilege, were nothing so dutiful and considerate a speech, as our Brethren in a matter so important should have used. If our brethren's drift be, that they would have all the Abbye lands and goods restored: how their goods can possibly be restored, I can not see; The Abbye lands and go●eds can not be well restored. their riches and jewels being no small part thereof, so dispersed and consumed, as few men alive can tell where almost any relictes of them remain. And their houses for the most part left desolate like jerusalem, scarce one stone standing on another; or rather like Babylon, for owls and infamous birds and beasts to nest in. As for their lands and revenues might better be restored. But from whom again should they be taken? And from how high, and some from how low personages in this land? And how many should thereby even utterly be undone? And would not this also ask time to be considered? Or by what name shall we term the taking them away once again, from them that now enjoy them? Or by what right and law should they be taken from them, and given to the supply of the poor Pastors? I grant, no small part of them might perhaps, have been better employed: as some part (God be praised) was. But that is past and gone, and done by order and law, and done even by God's justice and great providence, whosoever looketh deeply into the doing of it But howsoever it was done; how it now should be undone, and all restored and that to the Pastors: Restoring Abbye lands. would ask (I think) a greater deliberation, a longer time, & a work of more weight and difficulty than we all do ween, or we are able to forecast would follow and perchance would fall out x. ways worse, than this one would ever be able to counterpoise. But if now our Brethren say, that they understand not by the sacrileges of Abbeys, If they mean the lands & goods ●hat the Abbeys got sacrilegrously they can not be restored. that which was taken away from them: but rather that which the Abbeys took from others, namely the Pastor's livings: whereupon they say: as impropriations of benefices, etc. what doth this &c. mean, but the lands and goods that the Abbeys had? And for my part, I had rather indeed understand the words of our Brethren in this sense, that the Abbeys committed sacrilege, in taking impropriations of benefices. Although we must offer no injury no not to the Devil himself. Neither can we so call it sacrilege of the Abbeys, when they received the same by law and order, and with all the parties consents that were the owners, or that had any title or right therein. But doth not this come in effect all to one reckoning, to rob Peter and pay paul? What a number should be rob of their right, and many, of the best or most part of their livings; and some, of all the livings that they have; if the only impropriations of benefices, without this etc. belonging to Abbeys, (some Abbey having little else) should be restored for the supply of Pastors? Which to be done without the owners good wills, that peradventure also bought it with their money, or by exchange with the Prince for other lands, by what title should we term this restoring? And to tarry till the owners were willing to restore it, and yet good men and earnest Protestants, and many also no small favourites of our Breath. I think it would ask a longer time than an hour, to deliberate thereon, & perchance clean alienate them from favouring these devices of our brethren, except they can find out some other provision for their Pastors. But, if this will be no better liked: our Brethren have another way to the wood. The 2. provision by dividing of superfluities. Or by dividing the superfluities of some places that have too much unto them that have too little. Yea forsooth, this indeed comes nearer to the touch, and is more plausible of the twain, if there be any more stakes to be divided. What talk ye of restoring that that is past? Let us fall to dividing of that that remains. Many will like far better of this devise than of the former. For why, they may perhaps in this division, come by a share for their part, if they have aught to do therein. He is an ill cook that can not lick his own fingers, What places have superfluities. if this division once come to fingering. But our brethren would divide, but only the superfluities of some places that have too much. And is there any places that have yet such superfluities, & too much? I doubt me, if they be well examined, they will be found to overflow with a small superfluity (God wot) if not rather th●se places that are envied most, dividing superfluities. or suspected to have such superfluity and too much: have that competency that may defray their necessary charge, & maintain (not with superfluity, but with sufficiency) the decency of their places and callings. O Brethren, let us take béede of judas example, and not think such abundance superfluity or too much, when it overfloweth (if it overfloweth at all) so far as stretcheth to the help and comfort of those that have to little. For if any do abuse their superfluity, The true use of abundance. (have they any) or their sufficiency, to their own excess, either in sparing or in spending, and follow not the Apostles example, which knew How to abound and how to want, Philipians. 4. nor regard his rule prescribed to the Corinthians, Let your abundance supply their defect that their abundance might supply your defect that there might be equality, 2. Cor. 8.14. which (as calvin saith thereon) may be made of a mutual collation by a fit proportion, notwithstanding some possess more and some less, and the gifts be unequally distributed: If (I say) they that possess more keep not this rule: the fault is personal, not real, rather the man's, than the matters. And if one do ill, he may be amended, or removed, The manner● quarrelled at for the Manors. and another may do more good, the living standing intyere as it did, yea, though it were superfluous indeed, and though our brethren think it too much, yet of twain, better too much than too little, Beatius est dare quam accip●re, as the Lord said: And, si honores mutent mores: mutent mores & honores. If honours change manners: let manners change honours, and not envy the manors for the manners. And what is meant here by these glaunsing speeches the Superfluities of some places to have too much? Are not bishoprics, Colleges, Cathedral Churches, and Hospitals, here aimed at? as though these places had too much, and superfluity of livings, which they would have either clean taken away, or pared and circumcised of some of their livings, lands ●nd manors as too much, what place● they mean have too much. or do they mean it of the places and Lordships of the temporalty? that they nor any estate should have any livings, that might to our brethren be thought superfluous and too much, but that a division must be made also thereof among these Pastors, that have (as they say) too little. Nay, if these words should be understood of such division: they would & that not unworthily be liked as ill and worse than were the former, of restoring the sacrileges of Abbeys as impropriations of benefices etc. Whereby not only bishoprics, Colleges, These speeches jeopardous to the whole state. Cathedral churches, and Hospitals, but all the estates, even the highest and all in civil policy (under pretence of reforming the Church and dividing the Church livings) might be called in the compass of this new division, and as superfluous be meetly well rebated. But, if this be jeopardous even to the whole state, besides manifest injuries offered, not only to many worshipful, yea, The third Provision. to all the nobles, and (that is most injurious) to her most excellent Majesty, by whom under almighty God, we enjoy, be it much or little, all the livings we have: and therefore the devise of this division may not be attempted, without the incurring greater inconveniences than our brethren would shun: Then last of all, & in general for all, this must serve the turn. Or by any other godly means, The third provision. that may be thought meet, to these godly and wise governors that by duty ought, and by authority may do it. This provision was well reserved to the last cast, and when all fails, may well serve to help at a pinch, in steed of all other devices. If it will be no butter, make it chéeze. If it will not sadge by one mean, then try it by any other means. Nay (say our Brethren) not so, but by any other godly means. And what godly means is that? hath it no name, but any other? shall we depend, we can not tell upon what? Any other godly means (say they) that may be thought meet to these, etc. What? and shall it be arbitrary, that they shall think meet? and who be they that thus shall think meet, we cannot tell what? Who? These godly and wise governors. These: which be these? These that by duty ought, and by authority may do it. But still I desire that we might know by some more plain description of what state or condition these should be: For this is still Ignotum per ignotius. Ye tell us of governors, and these governors, and godly governors, & wise governors, that by duty ought and by authority may do it. And we are never the wiser, who they are, nor what office they have, nor of what vocation they be: whether they be governors, that are so called in this Learned Discourse of Ecclesiastical government: or whether ye mean any other civil Magistrates. For it may be easily guessed, ye mean not the Bishops & Prelates: nor ye mean (as it should appear by these words) the Queen's Majesty. And who then should these godly & wise governors be, that by duty ought, and by authority may do it, without the licence of their sovereign? I see no godly no wise governor, that may or aught, or (I think) will intermeddle in such restore, divisions, or provisions, as here in a general name, of I wots not what godly means, nor how, nor when, nor to whom, nor to how many of them, it may, or it may not be thought meet. Is not this a Learned discourse, that our brethren have here devised, for the reforming, helping, supplying, restoring, providing, & dividing of these livings? The learned Dis. Pag. 54.55.56. and thus they conclude this 1. point, concerning the livings of the Pastors. Let us now see how they devise to help the other point, for the want of learned men. The lack of learned preachers must be so far forth supplied, as it may presently, by encouraging and exhorting so many as are able, to take that charge in hand, Remedy for learned Pastors. by overseeing the readers and scholars in Divinity in the universities, to do duties, the one in teaching purely, the other in learning diligently: by thrusting out these unprofitable heads of Colleges, & other drone Bees, which either are unable or unwilling to set forward the study of divinity in their several houses, and placing diligent and learned governors and students in their places, and by other good means reforming universities, by erecting of Doctors and teachers, in as many places as may be: by compelling the unlearned Ministers, in whom is any towardness, to become scholars in Divinity, with some allowance of living if they be willing to study, or else to send them from whence they came, to get their livings with sweat of their brows: and especially considering the greatness of the harvest and fewness of the labourers, by praying earnestly the Lord of the Harvest in this great necessity of ours, to thrust forth labourers into his Harvest. And in the mean time till God shall bless us with a sufficient number of Learned pastors, to take some extraordinary and temporal order for overseeing the Churches, that although they cannot be all sufficiently instructed and governed: yet so many shall not be altogether destitute, of all knowledge and spiritual government, as there are now in this most corrupt state of the Church, in which we have hitherto continued. If the lack of learned Preachers, must so far forth be supplied, Bridges. as it may presently: then must not all the pastors that are not learned Preachers be presently displaced. Which is flat contrary to that which before so earnestly was urged, that they must no longer be retained. But now when our brethren come more advisedly to consider and set down before themselves, their own devices, that they would have for remedies: they begin to find & confess that, which before they saw not & impugned. The first means that is here set down, is by encouraging and exhorting so many as are aable, to take that charge in hand. This is good counsel, adding fitness to ability: for many are able, that for divers respects it were not fit, they should take that charge in hand. The first remedy of ●ncouragement. But since encouragement & exhortation is so good means to fit & able persons thereunto: would to God our brethren themselves, would follow this their own good counsel: and not by these unnecessary disturbances, discourage & dehort many not only fit & able to take that charge in hand: but that have taken it in hand, & have both courageously themselves laid hand to this plough, and have encouraged others, and their hearts are now so discouraged, their hands so weakened and fallen down, yea, they have so fallen away, and pulled away their hands from the Plough and tilth of God's field: that withal they have discouraged many other, which are either become of ecclesiastical mere secular, Demas reliquit nos & secutus est presens saeculum or they are become Newtralles in religion: overseeing Students. yea, some are become plain apostates to the open adversaries of the Gospel. Who only are much encouraged hereby, exhorting themselves and others to gape for the spoils of us both, while we thus contend and strive one with another, and all they hold close together against us. If therefore our Brethren will exhort and encourage other indeed, let them first leave off these innovations, and especially these eager contentions for them, and join together with their Sovereign Prince, with the Magistrates and prelate's, with the laws established, like good subjects, and with us their Brethren brotherlike, in defence and advancing the Ecclesiastical state of regiment that we live under: and if we find or think aught to be amiss, seek the reforming of it in such humble, charitable, & modest manner, as beseemeth our calling, without such schism and, breach of Gods and the Prince's peace therefore, and so shall we discourage and daunt our adversaries, confirm ourselves, and withal encourage and exhort more effectually, so many as shallbe able and meet to take that charge in hand. The second means is: By overseeing the readers and scholars in divinity in the universities, The second remedy of overseeing Students to do their duties. to do their duties, the one in teaching purely, the other in learning diligently. This also is a good counsel. But who shall be these Overseers of these Readers in Divinity to teach purely? if they be all equal? how shall this be without a superior authority to oversee them so to do, and continually to oversee that it so continue? Doth not this imply a continuing superiority? and of what function shall this continuing superior be? shall he be a Doctor or a Pastor? Because our brethren so necessarily would have these offices always distinguished, and used by distinct and several persons. Shall the Pastor oversee the Teacher and that in teaching, which is made the proper function of the Doctor? But how then was the Doctor's office before, Page. 13. made the chief and principal office that is in the Church? or if the Teacher or Doctor shall oversee the Pastors, Why is not the name of overseer which is the English of the name Bishop, that our brethren always make all one with pastor, as well compentible to the Office of the Teacher or Doctor? And again why do our Brethren here restaine the office of the Readers in divinity, Why they restrain the overseer to the universities. and of those that should purely teach, to the universities? Whereas before it was avouched. pag. 15. that Doctors and Teachers should be appointed in every Congregation: yea, anon after, among these means here devised, they would have Doctors and Teachers erected in as many places as may be. But here they mention only the Universities. But now if this be a means (as in deed it is a very good means) to the supply of learned preachers: by overseeing the readers and scholars in Divinity, in the Universities to do their duties, New Doctors. the one in Teaching purely, the other in learning diligently: so (God be praised) the universities are not destitute either of teachers to teach purely, either of scholars to be learned diligently, either of overseers, both bishop Chancellors, Vicechancelors, heads of houses, Deans in houses, to oversee these things done accordingly, if we could be content and thankful for it. The third means is, The third means by thrusting out. etc. by thrusting out these unprofitable heads of Colleges and other drone bees, which either are unable or unwilling, to set forward the study of Divinity, in their several houses, & placing diligent and learned governors in their places. God save all: here is towards again, another courteous entertainment of Tom Drum, by the head and shoulders to thrust out (not now any unlearned Ministers) but the heads of Colleges, and other (we know not who) under the title of Drone Bees: & yet some affirm that a Drone Bee, may be a better head of a hive of Bees, at least wise, may do better service in the hive, than a Wasp, or than some stinging Bees may. I pray God this desire of thrusting out of the heads of Colleages, spring not from the private quarrels of some angry wasps, or of some busy Bees. These heads of Colleages are pretended to be unprofitable: perchance in this sense, that they are not for their profit. But who are these unprofitable heads of Colleages? For else these words might seem not so much to note some, as to give a gléeke to all that are the heads of Colleages, Vnprofitaheads of Colleges. to be unprofitable. But for a show of restraint, that they mean not all but some, here is added, which are either unable or unwilling to set forward the study of Divinity in their several houses. And what mean our brethren by this? that the heads of all the Colleages and houses, should be theirselues professors of divinity? but what if their places, and their whole foundation in their several houses, do altogether or for the most part, require both & in themselves, in the Fellows and Scholars of that house, another function and profession, either of Law or Physic? How shall they then set forward the study of Divinity in their several houses? shall they break their statutes and foundations, to set it forward? or what is meant by this setting forward? I hope there is none suffered that sets it backward, but so forward as they may, and as the foundations of their several Houses will permit. And if any do otherwise, and be found culpable: This provision already provided for. there are already such provisions, both of the private statutes of their several houses, and of the public Laws of the Universities, and of the Diocese, and of the whole Realm: that such heads of Colleages as can be lawfully proved to be unprofitable, & other Drone Bees, are already sufficiently provided for. They may well be reform or displaced the state of both the universities & of all the Church of England, entirely standing as it doth. As for the placing of other diligent and learned governors and students in their places: Expulsion. Soft a while the old must first be convicted, and be orderly removed, or ever these new other governors that would be, be they never so diligent or learned can be admitted governors in their places. Otherwise, their diligence might be thought suspicious, for all their learning, if they have not learned to tarry till they be lawfully called to be governors. The 4. means general. The fourth means is this, And by other good means reforming universities. This is general and uncertain, as before was our brethren's conclusion of their means, for the supply of livings. Neither are the Universities (thanks be to God) destitute of many good means already provided, for the reforming of such things as are amiss among them. Although our brethren seem here to go a great deal further, Bees better than wasps in hives. than to Readers, and to heads of colleges, or to abhor Drone bees in several houses. For in saying they would have by some other good means the Universities reform: What do they else but plainly infer, that the whole state of both the Universities should be new form, & as it were made again, Unprofitable heads of Colleges. according to the regiment of their platforms: as though they were altogether corrupted and out of order. And thus under pretence of the unlearned Ministers: all the Learned men in the Realm, yea the nurseries of learning, and all the foundations of their several Colleages and Houses, with the whole corporations of both the Universities, must be altered and come under the reformation of this our brethren's Learned Discourse of Ecclesiastical government. And yet our Brethr. not thus contented, add a fift byone means, which would not only undermine the Universities: but under a show of increasing the number of Learned men, would both discourage the best learned in the land & hazard all the land: to be pestered, with a far greater number of unlearned pastors than there are. For what mean our brethr. by this mean? By erecting of Doctors and teachers in as many places as may be. Would they have more Universities erected in as many places as may be? or would they have Doctors erected without the erection of the Universities? and that (as they said before, Pag. 15.) Doctors and Teachers should be appointed in every Congregation? would they now have that every Congregations should have authority to erect Doctors and Teachers? Bee thinks, it is another matter to erect one to be a Doctor or Teacher, and being already so erected, to be appointed or allowed a place where to teach and exercise the function of his Doctorship. I hold well with it that he might be appointed or assigned to teach, in as many places and congregations as may be. The provision already provided. And this yet is spoken with more circumspection, than to have such Doctors & Teachers in every Congregation. But herein this again is far worse, that these doctors & teachers should be erected & created, or entitled doctors, in respect of this office of professing the teaching of Divinity, but only in those places, where he should be thoroughly trained up in a convenient time of years, and tried with the exercises & disputations of the schools, Young Doctors. by the learned & already approved doctors in theuniversities, professing the study of divinity. Nor any to be admitted at all for readers & teachers in divinity, except the learned prelates, B. & overseers of those places, where he should be appointed to teach had found him sufficient thereunto, lest a young scholar should be erected, as Paul forbade 1. Timoth. 3.6. 1. Tim. 3. ● Whereon saith Beza, whom our Geneva Bibles note doth follow: Lenaste even in that that he is lift up into that degree, he take occasion of pride, that may overthrow him, & so he fall in the same condemnation, that the devil himself did. And Cal. saith: because many than were brought to the faith that were of excellent wit & learning, S. Paul forbiddeth such to be admitted to the office of a B. so soon as they have yielded their name to Christ. The too much boldness and over fervency of young scholars. For he showeth how much danger there is in that matter. For certain it is, that for the most part, they are puffed up & full of ostentation: & so it shalcome to pass, that their arrogancy & ambition shall overthrow them headlong. That which Paul saith, we find by experience, for the young scholars are not only fervent to wax bold, but also are swollen up with a fond confidence, as though they could fly clean through the clouds. And therefore not without cause they are kept back from the honour of a Bishop's office, until that in success of time, the haughtiness of their wit be tamed. And the like may we well say for this office of doctorship, that none are to be admitted into this office, & adorned with this especial title of Doctor: but those that upon experience grown in continuance of time and approved trial of their exercises requisite by order thereunto, are by the judgement of the best learned in that profession in the University authorised & entitled by that degree, to be a Doctor or professor in divinity. The way to all bold licentiousness ignorance & innovations And bring once these orders of the Universities degrees into contempt it will fall out to be the apparent discouragement of the learned, from the study & profession of divinity, besides the endangering of the whole or chiefest state of the Universities: and encouragement and giving licence to every fresh wit or rash head or ever he be half ripe, (& had more need to learn,) to intrude and erect himself to teach, Quicquid in buccam venery, and to call himself, or to be erected a Doctor, when, God wots, he deserveth not among those that be learned indeed, (or if he should be well opposed in the universities,) the name scarce of a scholar. Is not this the way to all licentiousness, for who is so bold as blind baiard?) and to open the gap to all errors, tumults, innovations and under pretence of learning, and of exclaiming against the unlearned, to overthrow those learned that we have, yea, with all the very nurseries and storehouses of all good learning, and to encumber us with 20. unlearned, busy new erected Doctors, teachers and preachers, for any one unlearned that now for lack of preaching, our brethren complain upon? Prayer. The sixth means is: by compelling the unlearned Ministers, in whom is any towardness to become scholars in divinity, The sixth meanus' compulsion with some allowance of living if they be willing to study, or else to send them from whence they came to get their livings with the sweat of their brows. This counsel is not to be misliked, if the compelling (here mentioned) be not violent. The former part already is in practice, for the unlearneder sort of the Ministers, in whom there is any towardness to become scholars in divinity, How far forth this already is in practice. which are compelled so to employ themselves in the study thereof, that they may become the more learned, and have exercises and visitations of set purpose to the same end: and being willing to study, have some allowance of living, in the cures where they serve, and do the best service that they can. As for the other, such as have not any towardness, nor any willingness to learn, of which sort (if there be any) I hope there is but very few, and wish there were none at all: except age or infirmity move some compassion, to relieve them with alms, they are well worthy so to get their living with the sweat of their brows, and so do get it, for any that (I think) will give them any allowance of living, being neither able nor willing, to do any service in their Churches. Except some here and there may have some living already of his own. And yet, if his living be ecclesiastical: he is deprivable, or shall be driven to find another, both able and willing, by the eccl. laws now in force: which if they be not executed accordingly, never blame the law but convince the officer to be blame worthy, which should better look unto it. The last means, is this: And especially by considering the greatness of the harvest, The last means prayer. and fewness of the labourers, by praying earnestly the Lord of the harvest in this great necessity of ours, to thrust forth labourers into his harvest. This is the very best means of all the other, and deserve the first place, except it be reserved to the last, as to the chiefest, when all other means fail, then to fall to prayer unto almighty God, to help the matter. This remedy which christ teacheth Mat. 9 is not now first to be put in practice, Math. 9 but hath been and is of all the faithful proved by experience long since, to be a good and most effectual means, God be praised for it, and give us grace, not to strive against the blessing of God. For, this is great unthank fullness to all those labourers whom God hath now this good while, since the shining of this day star, and revealing of the Gospel, thrust forth into his Harvest among us, Prayer is best means Our Brethren beginning now to call in question not only our actions but all our Function, and disdaining the Labours, even of those that died in the burden of this Labour,, begin so fast to call for other fresh workmen, and order all the work in a new fashion, and urge it with such a hot and contentious zeal, that the old and best labourers, yet living, are more than half discouraged. And, but that they look up to the Lord of the Harvest, which thrust them forth, their hearts should fail them. And many other toward labourers, that on the lords calling, were but late entered into this Harvest, begin to stand in a mammering, and draw back, except a number of these our too forward brethren. And therefore indeed, we had need on all hands, without ceasing: & most earnestly to pray to God, to thrust forth more labourers into his harvest, and to comfort them that be thrust in by him: lest both labourers & harvest, & all, wax thinner and more backward than it doth. Pray, Pray. Now upon all these foresaid means, our brethren make their conclusion, saying. And in the mean time till God shall bless us with a sufficient number of learned Pastors, The learned Dis. Pag. 56. to take some extraordinary and temporal order for overseeing the Churches, that although they cannot be all sufficiently instructed and governed: yet so many shall not be altogether destitute of all knowledge and spiritual government, as there are now in this most corrupt state of the Church, in which we have hitherto continued. These are very hard speeches against the present state of the Church of England, and in truth by no means justifiable: Bridges. that it is a most corrupt state of the Church, and so hath hitherto continued. A soul defamation of the church's estate. For if it be now in a most corrupt state, then was it not more corrupt in the time of all the popish superstitions. If we now, (as our brethren in their Preface to this Learned discourse confess) maintain the true and holy faith, and have the Gospel freely preached, as in this learned discourse they also grant: are we so corrupt as when manifest errors in doctrine and faith were maintained, Our brethren's contradiction and absurdities in this slander. and the preaching of the Gospel suppressed and persecuted? And yet we debar them not altogether of the title of the Church, though a Church exceeding much corrupted. Or doth the most corruption of the Church, lie in matters (or rather in forms) of discipline? Admitting we have a discipline that were corrupted: notwithstanding, professing the holy truth in all points of faith and doctrine. The Saxon Churches have in some points the like discipline, to that our brethren contend for, and yet in some material points of the lords supper, they hold as gross, if not far grosser errors, and corruption, than do the Papists: Our brethren's too great unthankfulness. And is our state (being in that and all other points of doctrine most sincere) more corrupt than theirs? Which I speak not as insulting upon them, but with pity and reverence: but only to note our brethren's unthankful not acknowledging, of our exceeding, more sincere, and far better estate than theirs, and many others, as the Grecians, Armenians, Indians, Aethiopians, etc. which are yet acknowledged to be the the Churches of Christ, albeit all differ in discipline, and are not free from errors even in doctrine, Dispensation for a time. which God be praised we are, by our breath. own confession. But why do our Brethren thus exclaim on the estate of our Church as a most corrupt state? For whose cause our breath. raise this slander. Forsooth because (as they say and do imagine) there are many that are altogether destitute of all knowledge and spiritual government. If they mean Papists, and wicked worldlings, where are not some, and that too many intermingled in the Church of GOD? And so, there may be many, (we grant, lamenting it,) among us but not of us. And the more (I fear) by reason of these garboils among ourselves. But if they be the children of God, and the true Church indeed, and have years of understanding, I hope, nay I am sure, there is none, no not one such, as is altogether destitute of all knowledge and spiritual government, set a side natural idiots, which are as infants, and without discretion. Nay, not the most of the worldly hypocrites, are altogether destitute of all knowledge of God, (and of his word) and of all parts of spiritual government, although they know not all points, or many points not so exactly, as other do, or as their selves should do. I speak not this to defend any man's default and corruption in these things: but to show, that this is a great deal more aggravated, than either needeth, or is true, or than our Brethren have any just cause to accuse so heinously, the whole state of the Church of England, to be a most corrupted state. But see now, how our malcontented Brethren, finding such a grievous fault, of this most corrupt state of the Church, though they might have all these means, that they have here devised to reform the same, granted unto them: yet are they feign in the end to confess, that this their Learned discourse of Ecclesiastical government cannot take place, but that they must take some extraordinary and temporal order, The manifest inconveniences that our breath. run into by these devices. for overseeing of the Churches, in the mean time, until GOD shall bless us, with a sufficient number of learned pastors. So that, they cannot for all these means, helps, provisions, supplies, desires, or any other thing that they are able with all their learned heads consulting together, imagine how their Ecclesiastical regiment should be set up. And yet, we must first down out of hand and away with that Ecclesiastical regiment that we have, cre ever not only theirs shall come in place, but or ever we have or can yet devise, how we shall deal in the mean time, till GOD shall bless us with a sufficient number of learned pastors. Which when this till, and this sufficient number will be filled up, Our breath. allowance of toleration for a ●●ne. to our brethren's contentation: is not here limited by them, nor we are able to conjecture. But could not our Brethren have foreseen this before, which here now, (after all their debating and devising,) they begin to see, Imagination and are driven to confess? And how then must all Pastors that be not learned preachers, be presently turned out and no longer retained? Or if they may lawfully for a time (which with all when it shall stint, is uncertain) continue still and be retained: how then are these things either true, Whether our breath. can dispense for a time with things contrary to God's commandment. or tolerable in them? Shall we tolerate such notorious and most corrupt wickedness as they cry out upon, till God shall bless us with a sufficient number of learned pastors? And till GOD shall thus bless us, what extraordinary and temporal order of overseers of the Churches will God bless: if he have flatly forbidden all other, than that only order which our Brethren pretend, that God so straightly hath commanded? Or what extraordinary or temporal order can, or dare any, or all the Church avouch, or presume to take upon them, to appoint or tolerate any time? If the overseers that our Brethren urge, and the orders of Ecclesiastical government which they set down, be of GOD commanded, for ordinary and perpetual to all ages and Churches: either they would have us wilfully to transgress God's commandment, without any special warrant, on presumption of their dispensation for a time, or else, they must needs grant (and that is indeed the very truth, which they dare not for shame openly confess, although of fine force they are constrained to yield to it in the end, and in a byous manner to acknowledge it) that the Ecclesiastical government & order for overseeing the Churches, which they pretend: is not of any necessity by GOD commanded, nor any perpetual order to all ages and Churches, by Christ and his Apostles prescribed. Which if it be not, than our Church's state is not so corrupt as they exclaim. Nay, let them look then unto it, how truly they avouch it so to be, and make such a contentious rapture in the Church for it. If it be, how can they here give any extraordinary and temporal order, warrant or plakarde, for any mean time, to the contrary? So that both ways, our Brethren apparently go about herein, both to abuse themselves and us. But now, thinking that by this Interim, wrought by all these foresaid means, they should effect many and mighty matters: our brethren waxing bold, proceed to answer even to any man's thoughts, that should doubt so much as any difficulty in bringing about these things. If any man (say they) think this is overhard to be brought to pass, let him consider that there was never work of more difficulty, The learned Dis. Pag. 56. than to build up the Church of God, so that the necessity & commodity of the work should cause us to stay nothing at the difficulty thereof, for with our faithful endeavour, we shall not want the mighty assistance of God, who will bless our godly labours, with greater success than we can look for. How hard many of these things are, we have heard already, and easily may conjecture. Bridges Yea, how dangerous and unnecessary some of them be, and how some of them are already in experience. What our brethren would have us beforehand to imagine. But now to our better encouragement, to give the onset on all these means; we must imagine, that they are the building up of the Church of God, than the which nothing is more necessary or commodious: and therefore nothing should cause us to stay at the difficulty thereof. Verily Fortis imaginatio can do much, as we see in our Brethren that imagine these presupposals, and thereon dare adventure to enterprise never so difficult attempts, to achieve this their strong imagination. But godly and stayed men must not run on such headstrong fantasies, but upon assured grounds. Now, when we should come to the groundwork of this building, Why we dare not hazard on this imagination. and find that, which our Brethren imagine, hath no better foundation on God's word, for the building up of such a frame, as they, and not the word of God prescribeth: & withal, that this their modill which they have complotted, is the manifest scattering and pulling down of that which in the Church of God is already builded: and for the chiefest part, is not so necessary, and in some points most dangerous, besides the difficulty to bring the same to pass: no marvel though so many stay, and dare not hazard to build on this platform, and in this manner as our Brethren call upon us. For as Saint Paul saith Gal. 2.18. If I build again the things which I have pulled down, I make myself a transgressor: so If I pull down the things that I have builded (if they be well builded up) I make myself also another transgressor. And sith we have already builded on the only foundation jesus Christ, and God hath already blessed our building: if now any other will build thereon, and turquise our building: except he can bring better proofs that we build amiss, and that God allows not, nor likes our building: and show, that not only we may more easily, and also with more beauty and profit, build after another order that he will teach us, but that we must and are bound to build on that fashion: he presumeth too far, and offereth us wrong, and may do more hurt and hindrance to the building of the Church of GOD, than ever (for all his zeal) he shall do good, or be able to further the same, except to put it further off, than already it is. But (say our Brethren) with our faithful endeavour we shall not want the mighty assistance of God, who will bless our godly labours, with greater success than we can look for. Our encouragement in God's blessing against all the●e temptations Very true, in all faithful endeavours, grounded on a good matter, and proceeding by a good order, GOD will bless our godly labours, and his name be blessed for it, so he hath done, notwithstanding all the stops both of our foreign enemies, Presum tuous offer. and of our own brethren's domestical impediments, we have not wanted the mighty assistance of God, blessing our godly labours, and that with greater success, than they acknowledge or wish, or we have deserved, or in these troubles we could have looked for. So that in this behalf we may well recomfort our selue● with that saying of the 124. Psalm: If the Lord had not been on our side (may Israel now say) if the Lord had not been on our side, when men rose up against us, they had swallowed us up quick, when their wrath was kindled against us. And in the 127. following: Except the Lord build their house, the labour is in vain that build it. And since God hath thus blessed our handy works, even beyond all that we looked for, (for although we might well look for no less, of the professed adversaries of the Gospel, yet who would have looked for such unthankfulness to God, and such hindrance of the work of God, among ourselves at our brethren's hands, the professors with us of Christ's Gospel?) Shall we now also look for new devices, and with them contemn and alter all that the Lord hath already so mightily blessed? and look for him also to bless the labours of our hands, in the contrary to that we have begun to labour, and wherein we have so prosperously proceeded, and which God hath already blessed, with such mighty assistance and success? But now our Brethren supposing these things might be well compassed, most confidenilie they avow and say: If God therefore will grant that these and such like means may take place, by the high authority of our dread Sovereign, The learned Dis. Pag. 56. & 57 the Queen's Majesty, and continue this comfortable peace, which we enjoy, under her most gracious government, we dare jeopard our lives, that in less than half the time, that is already properouslie passed, of her majesties most honourable and glorious reign, the necessity of learned Pastors shall be so well supplied, as we shall have no great cause to complain for lack of them, if we may use like diligence to continue them: if not, we will spend the rest of our life in mourning, & expectation of the heavy vengeance of GOD, which must needs fall upon us for this manifest contempt of his express commandment, and neglect of increasing the glorious kingdom of our saviour Christ. Act 20.26.27. In the mean time we may boldly say with the Apostle, Act. 20. We testify unto you this day, that we are clean from the blood of you all, for we have not failed to show you the whole council of God concerning the regiment of his Church. For some of these and such like means, it hath pleased God already to grant, that they may and do take place, and would take more place, Bridges. were it not for their importune hindering (as I said before) not so much of the open adversaries of the Gospel, as of our own Brethren that favour and profess it, and yet preposterously do stop the course thereof. The will & grant of god As for some of these means here devised, it hath pleased God in his great wisdom not to grant them. Her Majesties' government commended. And therefore when we see the will and grant of God already, it were fit we applied our w●lls to his, than to wish hi● (contrary to his ordinance) to become appliable unto our wills And whe●e our Brethren would have God grant these their petitions to take place, by the high authority of our dread Sovereign the Queen's Majesty, Our breath. te●tation to God▪ and disobedience to her Majesty. sith we manifestly see that by her majesties high authority, GOD hath granted such good success to his Gospel, and repaired his Church, by such lawful means of discipline, as God hath both allowed and blessed: which withal, is by her majesties high authority established and confirmed amongst us: what a tentation is this to God, not to be content, but to crave that he would grant other new means? And what obedience is this to her majesties high authority? If her Majesty herein have any authority at all, why do not we obey it? If her majesties authority here be high, What our b●eth grant in words and deny in facts why do we abase and bring it low? If she be our dread Sovereign: why dread we not thus to overthwart all her laws and ordinances, and without all dread to contemn them, and to cast forth such contumelious and slanderous speeches, on all the state of the Church, to be most corrupt? If her Majesty be the Sovereign, that is▪ the Supreme governor under Christ, of this portion of the Church: How doth not this defamation more blemish her majesties government, than all these fair speeches can suffer to salve it? And how call they her Majesty Sovereign, and not acknowledge her sovereignty or supremacy? And if we enjoy this comfortable peace under her most gracious government: why do not we continued it, and be thankful to God and to her Majesty for it? Why disturb we it, and make it uncomfortable? To conclude, if it be a most gracious government, how is the state of the Church being governed under her Majesty, most corrupted? Can most gracious and most corrupt agree together? What fellowship hath righteousness, (saith Saint Paul, 2. Cor. 6.14.) with unrighteousness? and what communion hath ●ight with darkness? & what concord hath Christ with Belial? Or hath her Majesty no government at all over the Church, but only over the Realm and civil policy? Are these terms then given her as a mere civil Prince? or is her Majesty acknowledged indeed, the supreme governor in all Ecclesiastical causes, in the Church of England? If she be: how doth she look unto her government in the Church of England, the state of the Church standing most corrupt? These things hang together like Germans lips. Who seethe not that they speak clean contradictions in this stammering? While they would thus play on both hands, and give only these fair titles to her Majesty for fashion sake, Our breath. contradictions of her Majesties' government. and to avoid suspicion, or to win favour: but if in very deed they meant as they say they would never thus impugn the established government, orders, laws, and proceed of her Majesty. They confess that under her most gracious government the time hath already prosperously passed: and yet they infer under hand, Her majesties government defamed. that it hath passed so unprosperouslie, that in less than half the time, they dare jeopard their lives, if they might have their devices brought to pass, that the necessity of learned Preachers shall be so well supplied, as we shall have no great cause to complain for lack of them. And yet withal they say, her majesties reign is most honourable and glorious. Which if it be: then have they no cause to complain. But they complain of these things with great outcries, and say they have great cause to complain, as though her majesties reign were so dishonourable and ignominious, that it nothing tended the honour and glory of God, which (they say) they only seek in this their Ecclesiastical regiment. So that in commending her majesties most honourable and glorious reign, what mean they but of such an external honour and glory of the world, as little or nought respecteth the honour and glory of the Lord. This is not well done of our Brethren, thus to slander her majesties government, and the whole state of the Church of England, under these fair and colourable speeches: lest our Breath. might seem in any show, to come near to those dissembling hypocrites, whom David so grievously complaineth on, Psal. 54. saying: If mine enemy had defamed me, I could have borne it, and if mine adversary had exalted himself against me, I would have hidden me from him. But it was thou O man, even my companion, my guide, and my familiar, which didst eat sweet meat together with m●, yea, w● walled together in the house of God as companions. And shall it be said of those, that not only live in one Realm, and are or should be governed by one law, under one most gracious Sovereign: yea, her Majesty, and we and all, under one jesus Christ, in profession of our religion, and of one Church of God, that we deal thus one against another, and that as David there saich verse. 21. The words of his mouth were softer than butter, and yet war in his heart: his words ●ere more gentle than oil, and yet they were swords? Now as these things beseem not the children of God: so is not this commendable in our Brethren, that (to set the better face of zeal upon these foresaid speeches, thus tempered with no less gall than honey, they offer thus freshly to jeopard their lives, that this which they promise and imagine, shall be done in less than half the time, that is already passed. Well may our Brethren blemish the time that is already passed, as not very prosperously passed, though for a show they say so: but to determine, De future contingenti, Our breath. adventurous p●o●ise for the time of furnishing learned ●a●ors. for that which may hap to come to pass hereafter, and to prescribe it a time: (save that they presume of her majesties clemency not to take the advantage of the forfeiture) they might peradventure hazard too far their best joints, if their hap were not better in this bargains event, than either their learning or their wisdom in the bargains making. A bold promise. But what good luck so ever would betide them, to have their desires granted, or their hope and promise come to pass: yet their words savour so suspitiouslie, that for all this they would not hold themselves fully satisfied. For when they say, The necessity of learned Pastors shall be so well supplied, as we shall have no no great cause to complain for lack of them: Our breath. restraint of their promise and exceptions. they seem in these words that they would still have some cause, though it were not great, to complain even for lack of them, when they had them. And as for other matters they would st●ll pretend as great cause or greater to complain, as much as they did before. And so after all these things were granted to them, we might be little or never a whit the more eased of their complaining. For the nature of some, is never to be contented, even when they have the thing they would, yet still Plus ultra, itch and ease cannot please. And this our Bre. seem to insinuate before hand by indenture, saying: If we may use like diligence continue them. Under which doubtful exception, we shall ever hang in a continual suspense, of as great complaining and contending as before. But now, if our Breath. cannot have all these means that they have her● devised, What our breath w●l do if these things cannot be granted. granted unto them, what then will they do? If not, we will spend the rest of our life in mourning. See here, what a strange qualm is suddenly come over the stomach of our Brethren. Right now, so full & pregnant in divising provisions, divisions, supplies, erecting, correcting, placing, displacing, & many other means: which done, they fall to chierful encoraging to give the onset, imagining facility, and expecting to overcome all difficulty, promising good success, and God's blessing and theirs to be with them, setting a time, yea, offering to jeopard their lives on the bargain: in the mean season, using all allurements, extolling the Queen's Majesty for her high authority, her dread Sovereignty, the enjoying by her a comfortable peace, her most gracious government, her most honourable and glorious r●igne, with the time that is already prosperously passed. Whose heart, would not all these things rejoice and inflame? and now on a sudden, or ever the sentence come to his full breathing period, if they cannot have their wills in all these things: this sentence is cut off, Tottenham is turned French, and all this fair weather is clean overcast, with such a black cloud and terrible threats of storms; that these our Brethren will not now pout for anger, like a sullen shrew, but they will become mourners: yea, they vow here, that they will spend the rest of their life in mourning, & take no comfort in all these blessings of God, nor in any her Majesties never so high authority, nor in her most gracious government, nor in her most honourable and glorious reign, nor in any of the time that is already prosperously passed: but even as though some cruel tyrant, some Heathen or Popish persecuter did oppress the Church and them: Our breath. mourning. as though Herode had killed all the children in Bethleem and the coasts round about, and jeremies' prophesy were yet to be fulfilled, A voice was heard in Rama, mourning, and weeping, and great lamentation. Rachel weeping for her children and would not be comforted, because they were not: even so our Brethren promise, not only to mourn for the time passed (though they confess it passed prosperously:) or for the present time, which they infamouslie call a state of the Church most corrupt: but as though it were in a desperate state, and past all hope, if all these their devised means take not place: as though they would never hereafter take comfort any more, so long as they lived, they here solempnlie pronounce, that they will spend the rest of their life in mourning. Phie, phie, Brethren, even for very shame of the world, besides the offence of God, that ever such speeches should have passed your pen, (for I hope you never speak then with your mouths, nor let them sink at least into your hearts) doth such waywardness become such learned discoursers? And I beseech you Brethren, even in the consolations of jesus Christ, (if ye speak from the heart and in good sadness, and not rather by some rhetorical amplification, more to move your readers, than yourselves are moved) that ye would be better advised, & eat this word; How unseemly these passions are for so learned discourses. that you would repent & revoke this too too passionate and hasty promise, which savoureth more of jonas or Esdras impatiency in their mourning, (to think no worse thereof) than of such stayed men as you would seem to be. If you cannot herein have your desires: possess your souls with patience, & comfort yourselves in Christ, as all good Christians, and all true subjects, & all wise men ought to do. But what is the cause, that our Bre. thus in their haste, do promise to spend the rest of this lives in mourning, if they want these things? Do the fear any danger? Yea, say they: An expectation of the heavy vengeance of God, which must needs fall upon us, for this manifest contempt of his express commandment, and neglect of increasing the glorious kingdom of our saviour Christ. This were (we confess) an horrible crime, and it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God, if his wrath be kindled, Our breath. threat of God's wrath. and go from him, we having heaped wrath unto ourselves against the day of wrath. And as Saint Paul saith, Heb, 10.26.27. If we sin willingly after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, the●● remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgement and violent fire, ●hich shall devour the adversaries. But, as when he spoke before, cha. 6 of the like dreadful expectation: he added this comfort, verse 9 But beloved, we have persuaded our solves better things of you, and such as accompany salvation, though we thus speak: even so, both we are persuaded better of our Breath. than that they will spend the rest of their lives in mourning, and expectation of the heavy vengeance of God. & I hope they are persuaded better of us also. For although we humbly acknowledge that by our manifold sins, Bretherensch eat. if God should enter into judgement with us, neither we, nor they, nor any flesh could sustain it: Our confession & comfort. yet by unfeigned repentance and assured faith, flying unto the throne of grace, our only mediator and saviour jesus Christ, we firmly hope (and hope shall not confound us) that God the Father for Christ's sake, will divert this heavy vengeance, both from our brethren and from us. But they threaten, that it must needs fall upon us, for this manifest contempt of his express commandment, & neglect of the increasing of the glorious kingdom of our saviour Christ. How we are all too negligent. God forbidden that wilfully we should do either of these things, and God be merciful to us all, we must needs confess (and voluntarily we do it,) with hearty sorrowfulness and deprecation, that there is in us a neglect in some respects, of increasing the glorious kingdom of our saviour Christ, in that neither we, nor they nor any the best of us all, do our duty, with so much diligence and endeavour as we should do God forgive us that is past, and amend as for that is to come, to be more able and diligent than we be. But that this neglect is in respect of this, that knowing these means by our Brethren here set down, and all their platform in this their Learned Discourse of Ecclesiastical government, to be the increasing of the glorious kingdom of our saviour Christ, How our breath. & we should think of these things and one of another. and wilfully and wittingly contemn it, or neglect it: I hope none of us doth so; and if we could see any substantial grounded reasons of our Breath. to move us thereunto, we pray God, (and hope God would hear our prayers,) that we might forsake all worldly livings, yea, life and all, rather than we should not join with them. And brotherly charity moveth me to think so of them likewise, that they do not strive against their consciences▪ or have no conscience in that they should, but that they make conscience of that which they should not, & rather mistake, than of purpose they would wittingly mislead themselves or others. Howbeit herein they are in the greater fault, that take on them to control and teach, Our bre●h. gre●t default herein. the teachers and all, and do misteach us, and tell us God's word teacheth that which it doth not teach, and terrify us with the expection of the heavy vengeance of God, for this manifest contempt of his express commandment: & yet for these devices and Learned Discourse of Ecclesiastical government, and discipline, which they so much pretend and urge: they have not hitherto nor h●ere do nor (I believe ever can) show and prove in express words, any express commandment of our saviour Christ, or any necessary consequence to infer it, which if we might once see, and then should make a manifest contempt, or any contempt at all thereof, then should we have right good cause to tremble and quake, to mourn, and expect the heavy vengeance of God, except God in the infinite treasury of his mercies▪ surmounting all his works, & all our sins, Our hope & conscience. did give us his comfort, and forgive us our sins, through our Lord & only saviour jesus Christ. But until this express commandment, or any other necessarily inferred, for this Ecclesiastical government, that our breath. in this Learned Discourse prescribe, be showed and made manifest: I hope that in the testimony of a good conscience, being justified by faith, we may have peace with God, by our Lord jesus Christ, by whom we have aceesses by faith into this grace (or favour) therein we stand, and glory in the hope of the glory of the sons of God. Rom, 5. And as this is the anchor of our hope, so (good Breath.) once again in the fear of God, I exhort you to take heed, how ye preten● Christ's express commandment so peremptorily, and cannot show it, & to consider with what boldness ye may take upon you that sentence of S. Paul, saying: In the mean time we may boldly say with the Apostle, Act. 20. We testify unto you this day, that we are cl●a●e from the blood of you all for we have not failed to show you the whole counsel of God, concerning the regiment of his Church. And dare ye indeed, this boldly usurp upon you these words of the Apostle, and add withal unto them, as a distinct part of the sentence, & that in the same several Character, as the very express words of the Apostle, which were neither his words nor yet his meaning, Our br●th. overbold adding to god's word. for any thing that can be necessarily gathered on those words of the Apostle, these words of your own more superfluous addition, concerning the regiment of the Church▪ But see how affection many times may carry wise & learned men away. But if this platform be either council or commandment, either expressed, or of necessity implied: Show it (as Saint Paul saith, that he showed all the council of God) and strait we yield. Or else give us leave in the name and peace of God, and in the freedom of the Gospel, with a safe conscience to dessent from it. The Argument of the 7. book. THE 7. Book concerneth the ministration of the Sacraments, & first whether they may he ministered by a Minister that is no Preacher, and without a Sermon at the ministration of them. Whether this be always in Baptism any necessary part contained in the institution of it. Whether the Apostles or other Preachers were always their selves the baptizers of such as they converted. How near our Breath. assertions herein drawn to the positions of the Anabaptists. Whether the Lords supper may not be truly administered though by no preacher, or if by a preacher, yet not preaching at the ministration thereof. Whether Christ preached at the ministration of it. Whether preaching were always necessary in Circumcision and the paschal lamb. What the word showing forth the Lords death inferreth, and that all the communicants are such preachers. Whether the Homilies & exhortations in the book prescribed, set not fully forth the Lords death. What was the practice for this point in the Apostles times, and in the Primitive Church. Whether the word that is joined to the element to make a Sacrament, is to be necessarily understood of preaching. Whether our forms prescribed in the Sacraments, join the word and the element sufficiently or no. Whether the Papists though they wanted the true Supper of the Lord, had not true Baptism for all their corruption of the same. How many kinds of preaching calvin maketh, and what kind is necessary in the lords Supper. What words by calvin, Musculus, Beza, Ollevian Hellopaeus, etc. make a true & perfect Cosecration. Whether in the reformed Churches of Helvetia, etc., they are preachers only that minister the Sacraments. How the seal and writing are to be joined always together, and we so have them. To whom pertaineth the ministration of the Sacra. Whether our Breath. prohibit none to preach whom they prohibit not to minister the Sacraments. Whether we infer women's Baptism, & whether Baptism on occasion of necessity may be ministered in private places, and whether there be any necessity at all of Baptism, and of the dangerous positions, contradictions, inconveniences, & absurdities of our Breath. in these matters: especially of this their Canon, where there is no minister of the word, there ought to be no minister of the Sacraments. What is principal, what necessary in the Sacraments, of the affinity, conjunction, & separation of preaching and administering the Sacraments. Hitherto (say our Brethren) we have somewhat at large set forth, The learned disc. pag. 58. & 59 the principal part of a Pastor's office, which is to preach the word of God, and to instruct the people committed to his charge in the same. Hear followeth now in the second part of his duti, which consisteth in right administration of the Sacraments of God. For seeing it hath pleased God to add such outward signs to be helps of our infirmity, as seals for confirmation of his promises, uttered by his word, Rom. 4.11. Rom. 4.11. He hath appointed Ministers of the same, to deliver them unto his people. Matth. 28.19. Luke. 22.19. Mat. 28.19. Luc. 22 19 For no man may take upon him any office in the Church, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron, Heb. 3 4. Heb. 3.4. Seeing therefore that God hath given some to be Pastors in the Church, Ephes. 4.11. Ephes 4.11. And it is the duty of Pastors to feed the flock of God committed to their charge, with all manner of spiritual pasture of their souls appointed by God. 1. Cor. 4.1. And that the Sacraments are a part of this spiritual food, it is manifest that it belongeth to the duty of Pastors, to administer the holy Sacraments: and that the Sacraments appertain to the doctrine and word of God, it is evident that whom God hath instituted to be the Minister of the word, him also he hath made to be the minister of the Sacraments: and as the Sacraments are compared by the holy Ghost unto seals: and the word or promise of GOD unto writings: so it appeareth to him to deliver the soul, which delivereth the writings. For as the soul hath always relation unto the writings: so have the Sacraments unto the word of GOD. By this it appeareth, that as it is the duty of every pastor to administer the Sacraments of Christ: so this office appertaineth to none, but to those which are Ministers of the word. To whom pertaineth the ministration of the Sacraments. AS all the residue here set down dependeth on thi● conclusion to all which we gladly yield and confirm the same: so this being evident, that whom GOD hath instituted to be Minister of the word, him also he hath made to be Ministsr of the Sacraments: it followeth evidently on good and necessary consequence, By our brethren's own conclusion the Doct. may minister the Sacraments & of consequence exhort and apply. that the Doctors so well as the Pastors, being of God instituted to be Ministers of the word: that them also hath he made to be Ministers of the Sacraments. Which Sacraments (as our Brethren rightly say) appertain to the doctrine & word of God, and are a part of this spiritual food. This spiritual food then appertaining to the doctrine and word of God, belonging properly to the Doctors: & it is the duty of Pastors to feed the flock of God committed to their charge, with all manner spiritual pasture of their souls appointed by God: How then are not the Doctors even by God's appointment pastors also? according as Saint Paul saith even in this place, (Ephe 4.11.) before discussed. But not as our Brethren here clip the sentence, saying thus, Seeing therefore God hath given some to be Pastors in his Church: The Doct. are Pastors. for though the Apostle spoke before distinctly, that he gave some to be Apostles, some to be Prophets, other to be Evangelists: yet when he comes to the mentioning of Pastors, he saith; Other to be pastors & doctors. Knitting them jointly both together, as appertaining both of them alike and together, unto the ordinary Minister of the word. Which though our brethren will not confess in plain terms: yet see here, when they come to the discussing of the office, will they, or nill they, they are driven to yield thereto; that the Doctor and Pastor's office do concur, and that not only the Pastor is a Doctor or Teacher: but the Doctor or Teacher is a Pastor. And yet further to overturn their own devices, they add: and as the Sacraments are compared by the holy Ghost unto seals, and the word or promise of God unto writings: It pertaineth to him to deliver the seal which delivereth the writing: but the Doct. deliver the writing: ergo. so it appertaineth unto him to deliver the seal, which delivereth the writings. But the Doctor delivereth the writings, so well as doth the Pastor: therefore the Doctor must deliver the seals, so well as the Pastor. For (say our Breath.) as the seal hath alway relation unto the writings: so have the Sacraments unto the word of God. And hereupon they make this conclusion: By this it appeareth that as it is the duty of every Pastor to administer the Sacraments of Christ: So this office appertaineth to none but to those, which are the Ministers of the word. Although this conclusion concerning the matter be true in part and we gladly grant it, yet is it not the right and full conclusion following on the premises, except it infer Doctors so well as Pastors, or by the name of Pastors comprehend Doctors. For the Doctor is a Minister of the word, and a deliverer of the writings, so well as the Pastor, The ministration of the Sacraments. & therefore they should have more fully & directly concluded, if they had said; That as it is the duty of every Pastor and Doctor, to administer the Sacraments of Christ: so this office appertaineth to none but to those which are the Ministers of the word. But now, the ministration of the Sacraments requireth withal, not only the Ministry of that part of the word, which only and barely teacheth the doctrine & institution of the Sacraments: but also and no less, that part of doctrine which exhorteth to repentance and newness of life, in the ministration of Baptism: and in the supper of the Lord, exhorting the communicants to a preparing to judge themselves, to be in love & charity, & to the worthy receiving of the same, and also in dehorting and rebuking the wicked and unworthy approchers thereunto, it appeareth therefore by these premises, that not only the pastors may teach the doctrine, besides their exhorting: but also that the doctors or teachers may and must exhort and dehort, persuade and dissuade, rebuke, comfort, and apply; so well as the pastors. Which is quite & clean contrary to our brethren's former principles. Our saviour Christ authorizing his Apostles to baptise all nations, saith: The learned disc Pag. 59 & 60. Go ye forth and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the son, and of the holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you. Likewise to the same effect, Go ye forth into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature, he that shall believe and is baptised, shall be saved, etc. Also instituting his holy supper, he said: Math. 28.19 Mark. 16.15 Luc. 22.19. 1, Cor. 11.26. Do this in remembrance of me. Which remembrance S. Paul declareth, that it ought to be celebrated by preaching of the Lords death. So often (saith he) as you shall eat of this bread, and drink of this cup, you shall show forth the Lords death until he come. By these testimonies it is evident, that the administration of the Sacraments ought be committed to none, but unto such as are Preachers of the word, that are able to teach them that they baptise, that are able to preach the mystery of Christ's death to them whom they do deliver the ward sign thereof. We wish and endeavour (so far as conveniently may be brought to pass) that all were Preachers which may administer the Sacraments, Bridges and in some respect they are Preachers. How the form of ministering the Sacraments prescribed, is not altogether destitute of preaching. While by the authority of their office they do publicly pronounce in the administration of the Sacraments, that godly form of doctrine annexed, which plainly setteth out all the institution, nature, use, ends and fruits of those holy mysteries, with godly and pithy exhortations, dehortations, and applications, joined thereunto. Besides diverse notable Homilies and famous sermons, by which they may (as they see occasion) edify the congregation at the participating of the Sacraments. But if so be that our Brethren will needs here understand by preaching, Sacr. ministered by no Preacher. the free exposition of the word, and teaching the doctrine of the Sacraments, with such exhortation to repentance, and particular application to the audience, or to the communicants, as to the learned Preacher himself shall be thought most convenient: then must either the Doctor, (being a Minister of the word, and so of the Sacraments) be such a Preacher also, which our Brethren deny, or else it must needs fall out (the Doctor being a Minister of the word, and so of the Sacraments, by our brethren's last confession) that he may administer the Sacraments, which in the foresaid sense, is not only not a Preacher, but which cannot be a Preacher, by their own positions, so long as he continueth in the distinct office of a Doctor or teacher, so that their selves are indeed further off in this matter, than we are. No distinction in the baptizer of teaching & preaching. As for these sentences of our saviour Christ, and of Saint Paul, that here (to confirm their sayings) they allege: I marvel not a little, of their vnaduis●d handling of them. For, to begin with these two former in Matthew and Mark concerning Baptism: if our Brethren urge these words so precisely, that they should enforce always preaching, at the very instant of baptizing: they should extort more out of the words, than either they express or infer. Our saviour Christ indeed, biddeth them go and teach all nations: and telleth them also what they shall teach. And Mark calleth this teaching, preaching. Teaching or preaching not always done at the time of baptizing. So that here was yet no distinction of the teacher from the preacher. Their teaching was preaching, and their preaching was teaching. Though, as they had herein a special gift: so had they also a special office of teaching or preaching to all nations, but that their teaching or preaching (were it all one or distinct) was always joined together with their baptizing, and both done at one time, and so commanded to be jointly done: how will our Brethren prove it on these sentences? The text rather gives, that their preaching should go before in a several action, to those that were of understanding; and so to continue preaching or teaching, till the unbelieving people did believe: & then after that preaching to add the other action of baptizing, as a seal to confirm them in the former. And not that these words, Go ye forth and teach all Nations, baptizing them, etc. should be done, the one while the other is a doing. For, although our Brethren translate these words thus to the advantage, He that shall believe and is baptized, etc. as though he were baptised, even at the present instant, when he believeth, which is, at the preaching: yet is not this indeed so well translated, but rather, He that shall believe, and shall be baptised; The one action following the other, yea, many times, in several both times & places, The preaching & the baptizing not always by the self same person without any prejudice either to the validity of these actions, or to the precept of our saviour Christ to do them. Neither followeth it, that by these words we must understand, both these actions to be always done by one & the self same person. S. Paul converted many by his preaching, which became believers, as appeareth Acts 18.8. Baptising without preaching. But Crispus the prince of the Synagogue believed in the Lord withal his household, and many of the Corinthians hearing it believed and were baptised. And the Lord comforting Paul said, Paul a great while at Corinth, where many were baptised, & yet not by him. he had much people in the City. So he continued there a year and six Months, and taught the word of God among them. And yet Saint Paul writing afterward unto them, saith. 1. Corinth. 1.14. etc. I thank God that I baptised none of you, but Crispus and Gaius, least any should say, that I baptised into mine own name. I baptised also the house of Stephanas. furthermore know I not, whether I baptised any other, for Christ sent sent me not to baptise, but to preach the Gospel. Whereby it is most apparent, that he all that while being there and then the only preacher, and so many being converted and baptised, and so few baptised by him, and none might baptise but a Minister of the word: there were other Minister of the word being not Preachers which did baptise them. And this (among other his notes on these words of Paul, Christ sent me not to baptise, but, etc.) doth calvin plainly confess, saying: Caluines plain confession that many under Paul being ministers of the word, baptised that were not preachers. neither therefore doth Paul make this comparison, to detract any thing from it, (he speaketh of the virtue of Baptism) sed quia paucorum esset docere, pluribus autem baptiZare datum foret: Deinde cum multi simul doceri possent, baptismus autem non nisi singulis posset conferri, etc. But when it apperained to few men to teach, (or) when as few men had the gift of teaching, and it was given unto many to baptise: Moreover, when as many could be taught altogether, but baptism could not be conferred but to every one in order: Paul that excelled in the faculty of teaching, pursued the work that was more necessary unto him: to others he left that, which they were more commodiously to perform. Yea, if the Readers shall weigh all the circumstances more nearly: they shall see, there is under it a privy frump, with the which they are pleasantly nipped, which of another man's labour (under pretence of a ceremony) do hunt after a small glory. The Labours of Paul in building that Church, were incredible. After him came these delicate masters, which by the sprinkling of the Water, drew Disciples unto their sect, Paul therefore yielding them to the Title of the honour, testifieth that he is content with the burden. Whereby it is evident, that although such evil Ministers abused this order, to seek their own glory, yet, that this order was used even then among the Godly and faithful ministers, that some were preachers & did not baptise except seldom, and few, on especial occasions: and some did baptise that were no preachers, & yet were well allowed so to do. Beside many other, who though they were preachers, & also did often times baptise, yet joined they not these two always together in one action, and often used the help of others, Baptizing without preaching. which at the same time did not preach. When Peter at one sermon Act. 2. converted so many, he counseled them to be baptised, and (saith the text, ver. 41. They that gladly received his word were baptised, The baptising of 3000 Acts. 2. and the same day there were added to the Church, about 3000. souls. Is it likely, that Peter did baptise every one of these, and all of them himself that day? or rather that the other Apostles and Disciples though they all at the same time preached not, did help S. Peter to baptise them. Neither is it likely, that they were baptised at the present action of the sermon, nor in that place where the sermon was, as it is thought in mount Zion, but that they went unto some other place in or near the City, The baptizing of the Samaritans. Acts. 8. more convenient for baptizing such a multitude. And although Philip were himself (Acts 8.) both the preacher, and the baptizer, yet can we not conceive, how he alone should baptise such a mighty number of Samaritans, at the same instant, that he preached to them: but that first by preaching and miracles following, he did convert them, and then as he had leisure afterward, did baptise them. And when Peter Acts 10. had Preached to Cornelius, and to all his household, and to all that were assembled with him, The baptizing of Cornelius and his household. Act. 10 when he saw how the holy Ghost fell on them that heard the word: He said, Can any man forbidden water, that these should not be baptised, which have received the holy Ghost as well as we? So he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Upon which words calvin saith: It was not necessary that Baptism should be administered by the hand of Peter, even as Paul also, 1. Cor. 1.14. testifieth, that he baptised few at Corinth, for other ministers might take upon them those parts. How do not these examples even of the primitive Church, clean overturn our brethren's principles, that every Minister of the word and sacraments that baptizeth, must not only himself be a preacher: but that he must also preach, at the action of his baptizing, or else, he breaketh our Saviour Christ's institution? although, this withal by the way, is to be noted, that Baptism (as calvin and other do well observe against the Anabaptistes,) was not here first instituted, though it be here alleged: nor, who only should baptise: nor▪ who should be baptised: as the Anabaptistes do imagine, and hereupon do urge principally these two places: And, save that we hope better of our Brethren the compilers of this Learned Discourse, that they be not of this erroneous opinion, Otherwise, their precise urging of these words, might strengthen the Anabaptistes to do the like, and breed suspicion on themselves: especially, in applying these words in this sort, unto our state of the church now. That by these Testimonies is it evident, that the administration of the Sacraments ought to be committed to none, but unto such, as are preachers of the word, that are able to teach them that they baptise. How are our Ministers, Baptizing (were they never so Learned preachers,) able so to do? sith all those whom we ordinarily baptise, are late borne Infants. Are any, yea, the best learned of our Brethren themselves, (not considering what they do, but what they are able to d●) able to teach these Infants? How are they able to teach them, A dangerous & impossible position of our brethren. that are not able to learn of them? Except they would not have Baptism administered unto Infants, until they be able to learn, that that is taught them in the Sacraments. Which is the plain assertion of the Anabaptistes. I trust our Brethren be not of this opinion, for then farewell all our brotherhood, if they go about under colours of Ecclesiastical government, to shove in Anabaptism among us. And yet (I may say to you) this hangeth shrewdlie together, conferred with that we heard before, Page 9 about the Civil Magistrate and Christian princes. Where they said, the Church of God was perfect in all her regiment, before there was any Christian Prince: yea, the Church of God may stand, and doth stand at this day, in most blessed Estate, where the Civil Magistrates are not the greatest favourers. These were perilous speeches, and the very speeches of the Anabaptistes against Christian Magistrates. And again, Pag. 36. our brethren contending for preachers, used these words: If there be no way of salvation but by faith: and none can believe but such as here the word of God preached: Which are again the very assertitions of the Anabaptistes. These speeches savour to strongly of the Anabaptistes arguments. I speak not this as accusing our Brethren, nor yet, will I excuse their compiler of this Learned Discourse of Ecclesiastical government, whosoever he were, or were it (as it pretends) the desires of them all. Because, if they be not of the Anabaptistes' opinion, yet these speeches savour to strongly of them. Howbeit, I had rather ascribe them, only unto such inconsiderate earnestness, as (to defend their positions,) care not from whom soever they borrow any thing, that may serve their turn: than, that I think they hold, or will maintain (when they shall better advise them) these gross and dangerous errors besides this danger, that these propositions of our brethren, (Baptism aught to be administered of none but a Preacher, & that this office pertayns to none else, & that there must be a preaching at the ministration of it, & other like speeches, By these positions our baptizme & our brethren's is called in question. ) may cause such a scruple to arise, as might call in question (even as the Anabaptistes do) whether the most and best part in the Realm, yea, and perhaps the most and best of our Brethren their-selves, be as yet truly baptised, yea, or no. But I trust our Brethren will not, nor dare say so, that it is no true Baptism, if it be not administered by a Preacher that preacheth at the action of the Baptism. Neither do our brethren so say directly, but only, that the administration of the Sacraments ought to be committed, but to such as are preachers of the word, that are able to teach them that they baptise. Thechildrens are not to be debarred for the ministers in ability of preaching. Albeit, that to be able is one thing, and to be driven necessarily to do the action that they are able to do, is another, yet (as I said before) we must take heed of these speeches, scythe, they be not able, nor all the world is able (respecting the time of that action) to teach them that are not yet able to learn. Neither must they be put back, for this inability. Because they have another and better Charter for them, than all the ministers ability of teaching, although that were able and capable of learning. But if they mean not so, (as I charitably would construe their words, to any gentler sense, to save them from this suspicion:) then this ability to teach, in respect of the infants that are baptized, is not necessary in the baptiser, in that manner of teaching, that is to say, public preaching, to be at that instant put in practice. Except only in respect of the congregation which as they are already taught & grounded in that matter, so though it be convenient, that at the action of baptising any infant, the Doctrine of that action, and the exhortations thereunto pertaining, should be set forth: so is it not necessary, especially having so plain godly and learned a form thereof prescribed, and used accordingly, and homelyes also (as further occasion may serve) provided, and the people already not ignorant of the action: that it should be always administered by a Preacher, which both should be able, and after his ability should preach a sermon, on that matter at the action doing: or else, the children are not baptized as they ought to be, or the people not sufficiently instructed. The ministration of the supper may be truly administered though not by a preacher. Now, as we see this, both for our, and for the primitive use, of the administration of baptism, which I hope may suffice those that are not contentious: so, to come to that our Brethren adjoin hereto, of the other sacrament of the lords supper. Which indeed requireth an earnest & grave admonition and exhortation, besides a plain and clear declaration, of the holy mysteries in this sacrament, to be joined with the administration of it, for the instruction and edification of the receivers and participants of the same: which thing, that in every place where and whensoever, it might be done: and that without any sophistication of false doctrine or any such clog: or variety of ceremonies, as might breed disturbance or offence: and that thereby the Lords death might be fruitfully showed forth until his coming: there is already (as our brethren know, & are not able to find fault fault with any thing therein) a godly and learned form of administering the communion prescribed and established. beside Godly and learned Homilies in that behalf provided, to be publicly and reverently read, in everyenever so simple and rural a Congregation, to expound the matter andedify the people when there is no other preaching, at the receiving of the sacrament. And yet we wish (as well as our brethren do) if it were Gods will, The lords Supper. that every place were so furnished, that so often as this Sacrament is administered, there were a Sermon preached before the receiving of it: but that there aught of nenessitye, such a Preacher to the be only Minister of this Sacrament, and then and there to Preac● thereon, or else it is not at all, or not rightly administered: that is the point we stand upon. Our Brethren do first urge the institution, and allege out of Luke, 22.19. our saviour Christ's own words. Also instituting his holy Supper, he said: Do this in remembrance of me. Here is indeed the very Institution of Christ, The observation of Christ's Institution. and a straight commandment, Do this, to wit, that that he there did. And also this commandment stretcheth to the principal end of the doing. Do this in remembrance of me. So that, if this which Christ here did institute, be not done, or be not done in remembrance of him: it is a manifest breach of Christ's commandment. But can not this be done that Christ did, & commanded to be done, and be also done in his remembrance: but that the Minister which is the Doer, must needs preach a sermon at the doing of it? yea, if we should go thus exactly to work, can our Brethren prove that Christ himself the chief of all Preachers, and instructor of this holy Sacrament, either at the doing of the action, or immediately before the doing of it, preached unto the participants any sermon concerning this matter? Whether Christ himself preached a sermon at the very time of the first institution of the sacrament. It appeareth rather the contrary, both by the conference of the Texts, and by the best, (if not all the) Commentaries that we read, that he made no Sermon thereon, at or presently before the Instituting and celebrating of it. As for that large and most heavenly sermon, which is contained in the 13.14.15.16. and 17. Chapters of the Gospel by Saint john, and the other speeches mentioned in the other Evangelists, it is evident enough in the Text that they were spoken after this mystical Supper, and after the grace or Hymme was said. Although some think otherwise of that, which john noteth in the former part of the 13 Chapter: how after the paschal supper was done, (and that also was done without any preaching, albeit not without a showing forth, what that paschal Lamb did signify,) that then Christ arose and washed his Disciples feet. The celebrating of the paschal lamb● had no preaching though teaching at it. Which done, and sitting down again, he began to show them the meaning of his doing. Nothing pertaining to the Mystery of this Sacrament, as we have seen already, by our Brethr. collection on the same. Pag. 28. Christ now on this washing, taking occasion to mention who among them was unclean: entereth into the deciphering of judas treason, which was not yet any part of his new Sacramental Supper that he instituted. For he gave not that Bread, neither at that time, nor in such order, nor to such end, nor by such Sops, as the Papists used at their mass, masking at liker to a judasses' sop, fit for such as may well therein be called treachers, that would presume to sacrifice Christ again. Whereas Christ in his mystical supper, The sop givento judas was not the sacramental bread. gave the bread by itself, and the Wine by itself. So that this might well be, that judas having his sop and possessed with the devil, departing immediately, was gone before this holy supper began, as also it may appear by Matthew and Mark, that this should be done before he instituted this sacrament. Howbeit, Luke placeth it otherwise, which if (as he saith) it were done after: then, is it yet more evident he had no sermon at all, before he instituted this sacrament. But, be all this before, (as I have said) yet is here nothing appertaining to the exposition, exhortation or participation of this mystery. So then, if our brethren will so precisely urge the words of Christ, do this in remembrance of me: We may safely gather, that if the same thing be done that Christ did, that is to say, in such an holy and reverend manner as Christ's example and the holiness of these mysteries teach us, those that be his lawful ministers of his word and sacraments, do before theassembly of the faithful people take the bread, and when they have given thanks, break it, and give it unto the faithful, disposed to receive it: saying, take and ea●e: this is the body of our Lord jesus Christ, which was given for you, do this in remembrance of him: or other such words to this effect, as we use in the administration of the Lords supper: saying, the body of our Lord jesus Christ which was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul into everlasting life: and take and eat this in remembrance that Christ died for thee, and feed on him in thy heart by faith with thanksgiving: And likewise do and say, in the like manner (as Christ did, and said) with the Cup: to the which also accord the words in our Communion book: and do all this to the end and purpose that Christ ordained the same: The true administration of the lords supper. shall we dare to say, that if moreover a sermon be not preached hereupon, that now this sacrament is not administered as it ought to be? have we not that which both Christ did, and that he did bid us do, and in his remembrance also, as he did bid us? No (say our Brethren) for this remembrance, Saint Paul declareth, that it ought to be celebrated by preaching of the Lords death. yea? doth he so? and where hath he these words? so often (saith he) as you shall eat of this bread, and drink this Cup, you shall show forth the lords death until he come. And is here this word, preaching of the lords death? If it be: how chance our Brethren, in citing the very words of the Text itself, dare not so traslate it? No, they did better than so, keeping in the text, the proper signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉▪ you shall show forth, or ye do show forth, or, show ye forth the lords death etc. True it is, there is a more excellency comprised in this compound, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, than if he had simply said, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, show ye: and therefore our brethren do well translate it, you shall show forth. And in a sort, this may be called preaching. And Musculus note thereon is very good, wherein also he useth this note preaching, in an improper sense, saying: Musculus. in 1. Cor. 11. Neither must this be overpassed that he simply saith not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, you do declare, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, you do chiefly or most of all declare. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this composition, hath a force of a signification to be bend thereto. The Apostle delivered unto them, not any light memory of the lords death, in three our four words by the way and slightly: but in great earnest, and public showing forth, to be performed and to be preached out, as of a benefit incomparable & to be astonished at. So that here is a kind of preaching in an improper understanding comprehended, as calvin also calleth it, saying. Now Paul adjoineth, what manner of memory should be celebrated: to wit, with giving of thanks. calvin in 1. Cor. 11. Not that the whole memory consisteth, in the confession of the mouth. For this is the chiefest thing, that the virtue of the death of Christ, should be sealed up in our consciences. Howbeit, this knowledge ought to kindle us unto the confession of praise: that we should preach before men, that which we think within before God. The supper therefore is, (that I may so speak) a certain memorial, which ought perpetually to endure in the Church, until the last coming of Christ: instituted unto this end, that Christ might admonish us of the benefit of his death, and that we might recognise the same before men. Whereupon also it hath the name of the eucharist. Therefore, How we should preach Christ at the Communion. that thou mayest orderly celebrate the supper, thou shalt remember, that of thee is required the profession of thy faith. Hereupon it appeareth, how impudently they mock God, that boast they have in their mass any kind of Supper. For what is the Mass (for I speak not of the papists, but of the Pseudo-Nichodemites,) he meaneth those that openly come to Mass for fear of persecution, and think it is enough that they secretly come also to the Communion and to the gospel, as Nichodemus came to Christ by night for fear of the jews) that it is stuffed with detestable superstitions: they feign by the external gesture, that they allow them. What kind a preaching of the death of Christ is this? Do they not rather forswear the same? So that, this preaching which here calvin speaketh of, is not that which is proper to a preacher, and whereof Christ said before to his Disciples (as our Brethren therein used the word rightly,) Mark 16.15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Go ye forth into the whole world, & preach the Gospel. But it is such an improper kind of peaching, as belongeth in general to all men. And therefore it is far better, simply to use Paul's word, who saith not, neither was it his meaning, ye shall preach the lords death: but ye shall show forth the lords death, till his coming. Who are these that he saith should show it forth? Doth he speak here unto Preachers? or not rather to all the Corinthians men and Women, that should be communicante● of these Mysteries. So often as you, who are these you? You that shall eat of this Bread, and drink of this Cup. And what shall these do? You shall show forth the lords death until his coming. If now, he meant Preaching by this showing forth: then must all the people men and Women be Preachers, that be no Ministers of the word and Sacraments. So that hereby we may most plainly see, how our Brethren, to thrust in a necessity of preaching, to be always had at the administration of this Sacrament, spare not to wrest and abuse saint Paul's words to a necessary importing of that, which by no direct sense, they can be drawn unto. Bullinger briefly, and as it were in a word, telleth us in his marginal note thereon, what this showing forth meaneth: Bullingerus in 1. Cor. 11. Annunciare mortem Domini, est laudare & gratias agere domino. To show forth the lords death, is to praise and give thanks unto the lord Whereupon it is called, Eucharistia a Thanksgiving. Musculus (me thinketh) very well Parapharastically sets out, the full meaning of these words. This Institution of the lords Supper being received of the Lord himself▪ have I delivered unto you. Whereupon ye may perceive, Musculus in 1. Cor. 11. that ye eat not a Supper private of every one of you, but a common and a mystical Supper, instituted unto the memory of our common redeemer, and this can ye not be ignorant of. For, so often as ye eat this bread, and drink of this Cup, you being thus of me trained up, do show forth and preach the death of the Lord, whereof ye are partakers, not some only separately, but all in common. Whereupon ye mought enough have been admonished, with what faith and with what concord communicating, ye ought to eat this Supper in the memory of his death. This I take to be the right sense: although the vulgate translation have these words in the future tense, after this manner. For so often as ye shall eat this Bread, and shall drink of this cup, ye shall show forth the Lords death, until he come. Erasmus translateth it even as we read and do expound it. There are that read the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Imperative mood, Do ye show forth. But this little word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is, for, being causal (or importing a cause) favoureth not that sense. They, do judge that the Apostle in these words expounded, (and withal commanded,) how the Corinthians ought to celebrate the remembrance of the Lord, that is to wit, so, that as often as they should eat this Bread and drink of this Cup, they should show forth his death. As though he desired also this thing to have been in them, because that in this mystical & memorial supper, they did not set forth the lords death. Even as we see the sacrificers to celebrate their Masses, that they make altogether no showing of the lords death. For those things that separately (or by themselves) they say; cannot be accounted for this showing forth. For they say then both being turned away from the people, and in a tongue unknown to the Church, and under such a silence, that they can not be perceived, no not of those that know the latin tongue. This is a manifest breach of Christ's institution, and of the Apostles interpretation. If the Lords supper were so administered in any place with us: we did not keep Christ's institution, nor did it in his remembrance, The right & godly manner of our administration of the sacrament. nor showed forth his death, as these Corinthians and these Papists did not. But with us (God be praised for it) it is never administered by any so simple a minister, but though he be not able himself to preach, nor there be any other preacher present: yet the very form which the Communion book prescribeth unto him, is so plainly and pithily set down, to express all the institution, the use, the fruits, and the ends thereof; with the duty of the worthy receivers, with the danger to the unworthy; so dreadfully terrifying these, and so comfortably animating the other; and in all points so lively showing forth the death and passion of our Saviour jesus Christ: that no man can justly say, but that as Christ biddeth, Do this in remembrance of me, we do the same thing in remembrance of him: and as S. Paul expoundeth this remembrance, to be the showing forth of the lords death, so the lords death is showed forth, both by the action of the minister, and with all by the action of the faithful people. And so well showed forth, that if the only form of our Communion book be of the minister duly observed, and of the participantes religiously considered: they shall (no doubt) though there be no other sermon preached, both truly and worthily participate the holy communicating of the lords body and his blood. Our homilies and exhortations at the ministration of the L. supper. And yet commonly at the receiving of these blessed mysteries, if there be no sermon preached: there are other both godly and learned homilies appointed to be read, which are sermons also, and serve especially for that purpose, if the people be negligent in communicating, or criminous in life, or unskilful in the understanding of the necessary points belonging to these mysteries: to encourage, to persuade, and to instruct them. Neither yet have we these, as so content herewith, but that we think it also very expedient (if it may be had) that at this action, (beside the form prescribed) a godly learned preacher were also the shower forth of the lords death, and of the other mysteries contained in this sacrament. But this so strict necessity of our Brethren, we see is evidently here confuted, and namely that they say: by these testimonies it is evident, that the administration of the sacraments, What our Breath. mean by ability to teach and to preach. aught to be committed to none, but unto such as are preachers of the word, that are able to teach them that they baptise, that are able to preach the mysteries of Christ's death to them, to whom they do deliver the outward sign thereof. But by the way, what mean they by these words, able to teach, speaking of Baptism: and able to preach, speaking of the Lord supper? Is the former ability to teach, an ability of the Doctors? Who (they say) cannot exhort, nor apply, etc. which are especial points requisite in a preacher. If it be: then, here is ministering of the sacrament without preaching. Except they will say, the Doctors can not minister the sacraments. But then again must they revoke these words on the other side of the leaf, pag. 59 It is evident, that whom God hath instituted to be minister of the word, him also he hath made to be minister of the sacraments. These evidencies agree not well together. Especially this other for the preacher, expounding this showing forth the lords death, for preaching. For by this construction of our Brethren, (as we have already seen) all the people should be Preachers. Where before they said, and that more truly, pag. 58. no man may take upon him any office in the Church, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron. Hebr. 3.4. If they say, they mean not here preaching in his proper sense, and as it is a function peculiar to the minister of the word and sacraments: why then do they bring it in? Or for what preaching all this while do they plead, and allege these testimonies? For such as all the people may do, and must do as well as they? But because in all these speeches, they drive it still to this, that he should be able: what mean they hereby? One that can preach, The preaching of a sermon no necessary part of the sacrament. if need so require, but nevertheless he always doth not? For it followeth not, à posse ad esse. If they mean so: then may the sacrament be administered, as with a Sermon; so without a Sermon. Neither is the preaching a sermon, any part of the sacraments substance, nor any accident thereunto of mere necessity, though of the more conveniency: but the remembrance & showing forth the Lords death, is one of the chiefest, and the most substantial part of this sacrament: therefore the remembrance and showing forth of the lords death, and the preaching of a sermon, are not all one. Yea, to come to the abuses that Saint Paul reprehendeth in the Corinthians, The abuses of the Lords supper, that S. Paul reproved in the Corinth. to whom he wrote these words, by our Brethren cited. For, as we have heard out of Musculus, that in these words he spoke, as though he desired these things in them, because they did not show forth the lords death, in this mystical and memorial supper. Now, although it follow not: they had no preaching (understanding preaching in his proper sense) at the administration of the lords supper, therefore they had no remembrance or showing forth of the lords death: because, non sequitur à specie ad genus negatiuè: yet this followeth necessarily, à genere ad species: they had no remembrance nor showing forth of the lords death, at the administration of the lords supper: therefore they had no preaching thereat. And yet, had they preaching often at other comings together, whereof Saint Paul treateth afterward, chap. 12. and 14. But Saint Paul reproving their abuses, and here reckoning them up particularly, that they had dissensions, and were not in charity when thy came together, to this action: ver. 18. that they took their own suppers before: ver. 21. that one came hungry, another came drunken: ver. 21. that they showed not forth the lords death: ver. 26. that they examined not themselves: ver. 28. that they discerned not the lords body: ver. 29. that upon the examination of themselves, they judged not themselves: ver. 31. that they tarried not one for another: ver. 33. to conclude, and that which summarily he put first of all, ver. 20. that when they came together into one place, they made such a supper of it, as whereof the Apostle saith, this is not to ea●e the Lords supper: S. Paul now reckoning up all these faults among them, at the administration of th●s sacrament: and this being (as our Breath. say) so necessary a matter: is there any probability, but that he also particularly would have reproved them for this, that they had no sermon preached among them at this action? Which in all these corruptions had been very needful, and might have refrained them from these abuses, if their preachers had not also been corrupted, as it likely that they were, which suffered among them such foul abuses. No probability that S. paul thought preaching at the communion, to be so absolutely necessary as our Breath. urge it. But if preaching had been so necessary at that instant, no doubt he would have touched the neglect of that also, especially mentioning the showing forth of the lords death, to be principally required at their eating and drinking in the lords supper. But the faults of their preachers, and of their preaching, he mentioneth still in other places, and not in this treatise of the Sacrament, nor in any place burdens them herewith: and therefore it is not like, that he thought preaching to be always so necessary at the celebration of these mysteries. But not to look on their abuses, but on the order and use of the Apostles themselves, and of all the faithful at jerusalem, & that even presently after they had received the holy Ghost, Act. 2.42. And they continued (saith Luke) in the Apostles doctrine, and communion (or fellowship) and breaking of bread, and prayer: of which breaking of bread, The use and practise of the Apostles in the communion. Act. 2.42. saith the Geneva note, which was the ministration of the lords supper. calvin giving a reason hereof sayeth: Why I had rather that the breaking of bread in this place, should be interpreted for the lords supper: this is the reason. Because, Luke mentioneth those things, The Geneva note. wherein though public state of the Church is contained. Yea rather, he expresseth here four notes, calvinus in Act. 2. whereby the true and natural face of the Church may be judged. Do we therefore seek the face of the Church of Christ? The image thereof is here lively pictured unto us. And indeed he beginneth with doctrine, which is as it were the soul of the Church. Neither nameth he every doctrine, but the Apostles doctrine, that is, that which the son of God delivered by their hands. Wheresoever therefore, 1. doctrine. the pure voice of the Gospel soundeth thoroughly, where men abide in the profession of thereof, where they exercise themselves in the ordinary hearing of it: there undoubtedly is the Church. Now as doctrine is the first note: 2. the communion or brotherly love. so the text placeth their communion (or fellowship) next in order. Which (saith the Geneva note) standeth in brotherly love and liberality. In communicating this member (saith calvin) and the last (meaning prayer) flow from the first, as fruits or effects. For doctrine is the bond of brotherly communicating, 3. the sacrament. and also openeth unto us a gate to God, 4. prayer. that he may of us be called upon. But the supper approacheth to the doctrine, in steed of confirmation. Wherefore Luke reckoneth not up four, rashly; when as he will describe unto us a state of the Church orderly instituted. And it behoveth us to put our endeavour unto this order, if we desire to be truly accounted the Church before God & his Angels, not to boast only before men of a void name thereof. Now if we must not only keep these four, but also have so great a consideration to the order of them, insomuch that Marlorate addeth to these words of calvin: Marloratus in Act. 2. For the justiciaries of works do invert this order, and gather thus of the later: good works are to be done, and then righteousness will follow, O blindness worthy of great judgement. For how can works be good without faith going before? Without which, whatsoever is done, is sin. Rom. 14. d. 23. If then such a strait respect is to be had, of the orderly placing these four notes: and this communicating of fellowship consisting in alms, brotherly love, and works of mercy, come between the hearing and believing of the doctrine, and the breaking of the bread, that is, the communicating of the Lords supper: it argueth, that although preaching the doctrine have gone before: yet the sacraments are not so immediately joined, especially to the preaching of the doctrine, but that other godly exercises might go between them. Not that any of these notes was altogether destitute of any of the other: the supper of the Lord had evermore doctrine joined with it, but not always preaching of the doctrine. And so it had both union in fellowship, and prayers: but yet, might all these be also publicly exercised, though at that instant of the doing of them, the supper of the Lord were not administered. Now this being the manner in the Apostles days, that although they had many times sermons at the administration of the supper: Act. 20. ● c▪ 7. & 11. as Act. 20. ver. 7. & 11. at that solemn confluence, where S. Paul preached until midnight: and yet (as these were several actions) see, how even by the providence of God, (albeit, no doubt, to confirm the doctrine preached, and to be a warning to the negligent hearers) when they had minded presently upon the sermon, to have proceeded to the supper of the Lord: The primitive church what an occasion senered the conjunction of these two actions, by the young man's fall out of a window, from the third loft, that was taken up dead. Whereupon Paul being the Preacher, descended down, & laid himself upon him, & embraced him saying: trouble not yourselves, for his life is in him. So when Paul was come up again, and had broken bread and eaten; he communed a long while till the dawning of the day, and so departed. Now as they had these sermons sometimes preached at the celebrating of the lords supper, (howbeit here this interruption divided these actions some space of time, and yet this is that only place that bringeth them nearest together) so if they had not a sermon preached thereat, notwithstanding they no more discontinued the administration of this Sacrament, than they did the public exercises of their prayers, or than they did abstain from baptizing, as we have already at large proved. And even so, that this custom did thus continue in the primitive Church: The practice of the primitive Church. not only their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, their love feasts, which they made at this supper, do declare: whereof diverse authors, especially Tertullian and justinus Martyr do make mention: but also the whole order thereof is by justinus fully described, both of this sacrament administered with a Sermon, justinus Martyr in defence. pro Christ. ad Antoninum Pium. and without it. In the Apology that he made for the Christians, unto the Emperor Antoninus Pius, he hath these words: we bring him that is thus washed (meaning baptised) and instructed, unto those whom we call Brethren, where the assemblies are made, that we might pray as well for ourselves, as for those that are newly illumined. That they may be found by true doctrine and good works, to be worthy observers and keepers of the commandments, and that we m●y obtain eternal salvation. After the prayer we salute one another with a mutual kiss. After which, the bread, & the cup allayed with water is brought unto the chiefest brother, as Gelenius translates it, but in justine himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And here is our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 over those Brethren, which brethren are not only the faithful people, but also the ministers as is before by Beza confessed. Which being of him received he offereth up praise and thanks giving unto the father of all, by the name of the son and of the holy Ghost, and so for a certain while he doth celebrate the eucharist. After the prayers and the eucharist, all the whole assembly singeth together, Amen. And the word in the Hebrew tongue signifieth the same that doth, Sobeit, (or l●t it be done). The thanks giving of the Prelate, and the well wishing of all the people, being accomplished: those whom we call the Deacons give a part of the bread and of the cup allayed, unto every one of them that are present, over whom the thanks giving was made, justinus Martyr. and they suffer them also to carry it to those that were absent. And this food is among us called the Eucharist: to the which none is admitted, but he that believeth the doctrine to be true, being washed with the washing for the remission of sins, and living according as Christ hath taught. For we receive not these things as a common bread and a common cup: but even as by the word of God being made flesh, jesus Christ our Saviour had flesh and blood for our salvation: so also by the word of prayer and the thanks giving we have learned, the food (being of him sanctified, which being changed, nourisheth our flesh and) blood to be the flesh & blood of the same jesus Christ that was incarnate. For the Apostles in their writings that are called the Gospels, have delivered forth, that jesus thus commanded them: having taken bread, and thanks being given, he said: do this in the memory of me. This is my body. Likewise, having taken the cup, and having given thanks, he said: This is my blood, and did communicate it only unto them. The ministration of the L. supper without a sermon. In these words we plainly see, all the manner of the primitive Church, in the days of justine the Martyr, about the hundred year after Christ's ascension. Concerning the administration of the lords supper, without any sermon preached thereat. But it followeth even anon after, of the administration also of the same, with a Sermon or an Exhortation made at the participation thereof, saying: On the sunday are made assemblies, of those that are of the City, and of those that are of the Country, where the writings of the Apostles and Prophets are read before: the reader then ceasing, he that is placed our them maketh an exhortation, The supper of the Lord ministered with a sermon. provoking them to the imitation of the things that are honest. After this we all arise and offer up prayers, which being finished, there is brought (as I said) bread, wine and water. Then he that is placed over them, so much as he is able, offereth up prayers & thanksgivings, but the people singeth Amen. Thereupon those things that are consecrated, are distributed unto every one, and sent unto the absent by the Deacons. The rich if it please them, contribute every one according to his will. The collections are laid up with him that is placed over them: he succoureth the fatherless and widows, and those that want by reason of sickness or other necessity, those also that are prisoners and traveling strangers, and in sum, he is made the provider of all the needy. But these assemblies we make upon the sunday, etc. Thus do we see at large the order of the primitive Church, for the celebration of the lords supper, both without, and also with a Sermon or an Exhortation at the same. If our Brethren reject their orders, because of some additions that they used, or that the words of justine might see me suspicious, to savour of the Popish error of transubstantiation: not only the Magdeburgenses do clear the words of justine from that error: but justine cleareth himself, both from that, and from the error of consubstantiation or carnal presence in the Sacrament. justines' words maintain neither transubstantiation nor consubstantiation. For the former, say the Magdeburgenses, (who not withstanding maintain the latter:) The devise of transubstantiation was also unknown unto the Church of this age. For although justine say: Which being changed nourisheth our flesh, and blood: notwithstanding he only looketh unto, and driveth it to that that he may discern (or sever) this bread and this cup, unto the which cometh this word of Christ, from other usual meats and drinks, with which our bodies are nourished. And as for consubstantiation, this his sentence maketh less: referring all the consecration, to the spiritual and thankful remembrance of the death of Christ, as he also doth, disputing with Tripho the jew, saying: justinus in dialogo cum Triphone judeo impress. paris. 1565. fol. 42. this also ye know, that the solemn oblation of the two goats in the time of the fast, was not suffered to be done otherwhere than at jerusalem. As neither the oblation of the meal (or flower) which was wont after the custom to be offered, for them that were cleansed from the leprosy, signifying figuratively the bread of the Eucharist: which for the memory of his passion cleansing the souls of men from all sin, our L. jesus Christ hath delivered to them that come after: to the intent that in the mean time, we should give thanks unto God, both for the world created for man, with other things that are contained therein, and also for the redemption wherewith he delivered us from sins, the principalities and powers being universally vanquished, according to the divine counsel. Thus doth justine acquit himself sufficiently of those errors. As for the water mingled with the wine, The occasion of mingling water with the wine in the sacram. and the sending these sacramental signs unto the absent, whereof afterward came great corruption and superstitions: we say (as Aretius doth) thereon. Concerning the reason of the mingling wine and water, it seemeth unto me probable, because that making the supper of the Lord in a common banquet, they also drank more largely, not sipping, as at this day it is the manner. And therefore, Aretius' in probl. ●om. 2. tit. de fract, panis. that the wine by itself being strong, should the less hinder them; water was put unto it. Which we see also at this day to be done in common banquetes, that the noble wines are mingled. The place 1. Cor. 11. makes me thus to think; where manifestly he teacheth, that the abuse of the lords house began even then to take hold, insomuch that many were drunk in that love feast. Thus sayeth Aretius for the original of the water mingled with the wine. And as for the sending to the absent, he sayeth: Fourthly, a portion of the supper was also sent to them that were absent, the which was done without superstition, a token of friendship, and of union in doctrine and in their whole profession, even as we have rehearsed before out of Eusebius, that it was done at Rome, The Helvetian order. neither is here any mention made of any merit, or of any passport exhibited to those that were about to die. To conclude (saith Aretius on this practice of the primitive Church next after the Apostles) hereunto came mutual exhortations, to concord and constancy in faith and profession, that this might be a certain stipulation and obligation, Aretius' description of ministering the lords supper in the reformed Churches of Helvetia. that they should be constant in Christianity, whatsoever fortune at the length should hap unto them. These things in our action may almost all of them be declared. First in the public assembly, which is a show of a public banquet. Then the like oblation is of us observed, the words of the institution are recited, and to God the father is pronounced praise and glory. The mingling of wine and water, we have not: for it is no part of the institution, neither have our wines need of mingling, as the oriental wines have, neither do we drink freely, as than they did. All that are present if they list do communicate, and both the kinds are delivered unto all. It is not sent unto those that are absent, because superstition hath corrupted that custom: they sent it then to those that were whole, & unto strangers, that came not into the assembly: at this day only to those that are ready to die, and that for a certain lucre and advantage; yea, add this unto it, with a vain persuasion of a kind of necessary passport. A collection is made for the poor, and every one giveth as much as he will, save that our folks will give too too little. The action is not mute (or dumb) but the history of the passion is recited. Private voices (or the speeches of private persons) come not hereunto, Kneeling at the communion not offensive. for because of moderate or comely order. They approach (he speaketh of the order in his country at Bernes) and it is received of them standing, for the paschal Lamb was eaten of them that stood: howbeit neither makes it any matter, whether the communicantes stand or sit. (nor yet if they kneel, as is the order of our Church.) This briefly (sayeth Aretius) is our action not unlike justiness. By which description of justine and conference of ours, and of the Heluetians order of administering the supper of the Lord; we most plainly perceive our brethren's no small error in this, that not content with all these things in the supper of the Lord, if a Preacher make not a sermon also at the ministration of the same: The learned disc. pag. 60. & 61. they not only count it not sufficiently done, but they frustrate and evacuate all the action. Hereupon our Brethren make this conclusion saying: How intolerable an abuse than is it of the sacraments of the Lord, to commit the administration of them to those men, that are not able to expound the mystery of them. Bridges. This conclusion stands all on that word able, which we have sufficiently (I hope) answered before, save that here in this conclusion, it is more ambigiously referred to expounding, than in the premises. Ability of expounding. For by the ability to expound the mystery of the sacraments, may be meant, either the preaching (which notwithstanding is to be wished, that every Minister were able so to expound the mystery of them, Ability to expound the mysteries of the sacram. if it pleased God so to grant it although always they so did not:) or else, their ability of discrete setting forth those expositions of these sacraments, that are prescribed in the public form of their ministration: or other godly expositions of other learned men, authorized to be read at the same times, the ministers themselves being, though not able with any commendable gift of public eloquence, to treat at large upon them, and so expound the mystery of them: yet able well enough to show unto the people, or to any that ask them, plainly and briefly the sum and principal content of the mystery of them. In which sort (I trust) the simplest minister of them all, is able to expound the mystery of them: or else no Bishop or ordinary would permit him, to serve any never so small a cure, Unable ministers not allowed. or any other would allow him any stipend at all thereunto, if he be convicted of such inability. So that this intolerable abuse, either is not in use at all, or at least, in any Minister not allowed, by any law or constitution now in force, but that such unable Ministers may be removed, and other more able placed, although they cannot expound the mystery of the same by public preaching. But now let our Brethren proceed to their further arguments and proves on this matter. And seeing the elements of the world, The learned disc. pag. 61. of which the outward part of the sacraments is taken, be dead & beggarly of themselves, except they be animated and enriched with the promise and word of God, which is the life of the sacraments: what can it be better than sacrilege, to separate the ministration of preaching of the word from the sacraments? If the elements of the world, Bridges. be separated from the promise & word of God, & opposed against it: these terms, dead & beggarly, might better sit them. And so S. Paul called the ceremonies & sacraments of the old law, How the elements are dead & beggarly. elements of the world, & not after Christ, Coll. 2.8. and so calvin expounds those words saying: But what calleth he the elements of the world? No doubt but ceremonies. calvinus in Coll. 2. For strait after in place of example he bringeth in one kind, to wit, Circumcision. And also Gal. 49. S. Paul calleth the ceremonies of the jews, weak & beggarly elements. calvinus in Gal. 4. The which he doth (saith Calvin) because he considereth them without Christ, yea rather against Christ. For to the fathers, they were not only healthful exercises & helps of godliness, but also effectual instruments of grace. But their whole force was in Christ, and in the institution of God. But the false Apostles neglecting the promises, would oppose them against Christ, as though Christ alone sufficed not. No marvel therefore if Paul repute them trifles & things of no value. Now, if the outward sign or element in the sacrament, be thus used among us, A general preaching. that is to say, be destitute of the word, of the institution, of the promise, of the remembrance of Christ: yea, of Christ himself, & be opposed against Christ: then are these speeches of worldly, dead and beggarly elements well alleged, and truly applied against our sacraments. For, true it is, that Saint Augustine, tractatu in joh. 80. Aug. tractat. in joh. 80. saith: You are now clean for the word that I spoke unto you. why saith he not, Ye are clean for the baptism with the which ye are washed. But saith: for the word which I have spoken unto you? But that also in the water, the word cleanseth. Take away the word, and what is water, but water? The word cometh to the element, and it is made a sacrament; yea, as it were, even a visible word. For verily, he said this also, when he washed the Disciples feet: He that is washed, The joining of the word to the elements. needeth not, save that he wash his feet, but is clean throughout. From whence cometh this so great a virtue to the water, that it toucheth the body, and washeth the heart; except, that the word do it, not because it is spoken, but because it is believed? For in the word itself also, the sound passing is one thing, and the virtue remaining is another thing. This is the word of faith the which we preach (saith the Apostle) because, Rom. 10. if thou shalt confess in thy mouth that jesus is the Lord, & shall believe in thy heart, that God raised him up from the dead, thou shalt be safe. For with the heart it is believed unto righteousness, Act. 15. but with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. Whereupon we read in the Acts of the Apostles; cleansing their hearts by faith. And the blessed Peter in his Epistle sayeth: So hath baptism also made you safe, ●. Pet. 3. not the putting off the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation of a good conscience. This is the word of faith that we preach. With the which (out of doubt) baptism is also consecrated, that it may be able for to cleanse. For Christ being the vine with us; with the father being the husbandman: loved his Church and gave himself for it. Read the Apostle, and see what he adjoineth: that he might sanctify it, (saith he) cleansing the same with the washing of water in the word. This word of faith availeth in the Church of God so much, that by the same it cleanseth the believer, the offerer, the blesser, the dipper, yea the infant, being so little a one, although he be not yet able, with the heart to believe to righteousnesses, and with the mouth to confess to salvation. This is done altogether by the word whereof the Lord saith: Ye are now cleansed for the word that I have spoken unto you. I thought it not amiss to set down at large the whole sentence, not only for the notableness thereof, The word preaching at the face. comprehendeth the action of all the people. touching other matters: but for fear of cavilling: lest, our Brethren might say, I left out the word preached, here twice named. But that we should plainly see, he speaketh here of preaching it, in such sense, as although it comprehend the proper action of the preacher, yet withal we see it stretcheth to the public confession of all Christians. The word abused. And the word that here most especially he speaketh of that the Disciples were cleansed for (or through) the word that Christ spoke unto them: although this sentence of Christ, Io. 15.3. be a part of that notable sermon, that he had after his sacramental supper: yet these words that he maketh relation unto, supposing they were spoken before the supper) were no preaching, nor any part of preaching, The words that Christ spoke in that action were not preaching. but spoken by Christ unto Peter, when he came to him among the residue, to wash his feet, as appeareth in the story hereof, joh. 13.5. etc. After that he powered water into a basyne, and began to wash the Disciples feet, and to wipe them with the towel wherewith he was girt: then came he to Simon Peter, who said to him, Lord dost thou wash my feet? jesus answered and said unto him, what I do, thou knowest not now, but thou shalt know it hereafter. Peter said unto him, thou shalt never wash my feet. jesus answered him, if I wash thee not, thou shalt have no part with me. Simon Peter said unto him, Lord not my feet only, but also the hand and the head. Ies●● said unto him, he that is washed, needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit. And ye are clean, but not all. Shall we now say here, that Christ made a Sermon? Indeed, if our Brethren mean the preaching of the word in this sense, that it is preaching, though only it be thus briefly spoken by the Minister, to the end the people may better understand and believe the word: in that sense I hold well, that in the lords supper the word of God concerning the death of the L. should always be so preached. As Olevianus also saith on these words, Olevianus in Rom. 10.8. Rom. 10.8. This is the word of faith, the which we preach. Note a difference between the true word of God, which is preached to this end, that faith & conversion may be in the hart: & the magical word, which is pronounced upon the things, that it might work something * In visua. on the things that are set (or grafted,) or else, that a power should be ascribed to the syllables. Example, the gospel of john is the word that we preach. In the beginning was the word (saith john;) he teacheth to trust in Christ the true God, he teacheth that all things are made by him. The end is, that I should believe, not that I should drive away tempests. The whole Mass is magical, although they recite the Gospel, and mutter it upon the host: because it is not the word of faith, that is preached. If it be not preached, that it may be understood; or that virtue be ascribed to the syllables, the which resideth in God alone, so that, it is due to him alone: and this is Magical. So, The Papists magical abuse of the word. they that say when the words are pronounced over the bread, than it is the body: it is Magical. Christ pronounced not the words over the bread, but preached his death at the table to his Disciples, with the words and with the tokens, and that they might understand, to what end those tokens were instituted. In baptism the Papists, use much Magic. Out of the 7. of Mark they say, The word rightly used. Ephata, that is, be opened, as Christ (said) unto the deaf man. And by the virtue of words, they will include the holy Ghost into the water. All these things are not the word of faith that we preach. Paul knoweth no other word of faith, than preaching not murmured. Here lighteth the absolution, Auss. an Boden, even from the very bothome (or from the messengers) made upon the head, by the virtue of the words, Act. 10. to him give all the Prophet's witness. etc. Peter muttreth not words upon the heads of every one of them, but preacheth of Christ the promise of the Gospel, confirmed by the testimony of all the Prophets: and the holy Ghost fell upon the hearers. Thus saith Olevian. So that, preaching being understood in this general sense, as not only it may signify such a solemn sermon as Peter there made, Act. 10. but also as may comprehend the words of our Saviour Christ at the table, when he instituted his mystical supper: If the word want his preaching in this manner in our administration of the sacraments, than indeed our brethren might have some cause to say, that we maintain the elements of the world, & dead & beggarly elements: yea, that although we have the word, it were but a magical murmuring of it. The sacramental signs having the word so uttered by the ministers as it may be understood, are not beggarly elements. But becometh it our Breath. to bestow these speeches upon the outward signs of the sacraments, when they are animated and enriched with the word of God, in such order as Christ instituted them, and the Apostles practised them? Is this to separate either the word, or preaching of the word from the sacraments? But our Breath. only understand by preaching, such a further exposition & exhortation upon this matter, as the learned Minister shall at his discretion, amplify & set forth the same with all. And can our Breath. prove that this manner of preaching the word, is either any such substantial part of the sacraments, or any such inseparable accident thereunto, that except it also be annexed, The life of the sacr. li●th not in the manner of preaching the word. the life that animateth the elements, & the treasure that enricheth them, which is the promise & word of God, is separated from them? Is not in baptism the word of God itself, being not magically murmured, but clearly & with understanding spoken, & conceived with understanding & believing of the hearer (if he have capacity to hear and understand and believe, yea, though he have not, (as infants have not) this life & riches of the element, understanding the word as it is joined with the spirit, that animateth and enricheth the word, whereby the word becometh effectual, to animate & enrich the element, without ascribing virtue to the bare word? Is it not then of sufficient virtue to baptise & cleanse the infant, when besides the element of water, these words, In the name of the father, of the son, & of the holy Ghost, that Christ hath commanded those to use, which are his ministers appointed thereunto, besides the promise there declared of washing away our sins, of newness of life, and that we shallbe saved: which promise, where God's spirit worketh by his word, is annexed to the element, Our forms of sacram. is not all this sufficient and effectual to baptise an infant, except a sermon also hereof be made at his baptism? Nay, though he that were to be baptised were of ripe years, to hear, Baptism may be ministered with out a sermon. understand, and believe all these things, yet sith that he is not to be on a sudden baptised, before he be catechised in a sufficient understanding and believing, both of all the mysteries of that sacrament, and of all the necessary articles of our Christian faith: shall we say that even then when such a one should come to be baptised, he must have also a sermon made unto him, at the celebrating of this sacrament, or else the element of water is but a worldly, a dead, a beggarly element, and the word never so plainly pronounced, is but a magical murmuring? And what if there be yet besides all this, a godly and learned form also, most plainly expressing all the points contained in that mystery, and that all the covenant betwixt God and us, be so fully expressed, that the best preacher in the world cannot in effect say more, and all this so clereset out, that all of understanding may understand it: shall it yet be said, How clearly the word is set forth in our form of baptism. that the element is here dead, and beggarly, and separated from his life and spiritual riches? And all this have we, besides godly & learned homilies, and many other sermons set out for that purpose, & yet all this will not serve our Breath▪ without a sermon preached at that instant. And for the supper of the L. have not we likewise most pithy & godly exhortations, before we approach unto it, with prayers and thanksgiving, and public confessions, & the whole institution also laid forth before us, when we come thereto? And the words of Christ not used with a magical murmuring, nor any such virtue ascribed to the words, How fully the word & all the mystery of Ch●ists death and our union with him is set forth in our form of the communion. but all to Christ the instituter, and to the virtue of his death and passion, whom, and whose passion we record, and take the elements with the word in remembrance of him, & of his body given for us, & of his blood shed for us, & show forth his death by this action, feeding by faith in our hearts, on his flesh and blood, as effectually & truly, in spiritual manner, as our bodies feed on those bodily elements: and that hereunto these elements are consecrated as holy & lively signs & pledges, to confirm our faith, relyin& at 〈◊〉 the promise of the same our Saviour, that by eating his flesh & drinking his blood we shall have life everlasting. And all this is clearly set out even as it is contained in the scripture, & gathered together in so excellent disposed a form, as all the world cannot amend, nor is inferior to any of our brethren's forms. Yea, (all things considered) our form is far more convenient for us than is any of theirs, to inflame & confirm our faiths in our Saviour Christ, & in the merits of his passion, to make us repentant of our sins, to comfort us in the forgiveness of them, to knit us in love and charity all to God, in a communion with Christ our head & in the communion of saints one to another, to provoke us to lead a new life, & to offer up to God a spiritual sacrifice of our souls and bodies, Sacrilege. besides that of our lips by praising & glorifying God, for all these benefits sealed up thus unto us in these mysteries of our Saviour Christ, and withal unfolded unto us, by this so clear setting out of all these things, that every communicant may understand them, and be moved by them. Our Breath. intemperate speeches against our forms of minis●ting the sacram. And can now our Breath. say, (if they will say the truth) that here wants the promise and word of God, and that it is separated and not set forth? that here is but a dead, & beggarly element? that here is but a part, and that but the outward part of the sacrament, and so no sacrament; as the body of a man without the soul, which animateth and giveth life to the body, is not a man but a dead corpse? And dare our Brethren (beyond all this) be thus bold to demand, what can it be better than sacrilege? For if it be no better than sacrilege; then is it no sacrament at all. We dare not burden the Papists so far, for their baptizing, notwithstanding all their incantations, superstitious toys, and material additions to the element of water, besides their dangerous errors about baptism that the baptism which their Popish and Idolatrous sacrificers ministered; no, what heretic soever he were, so long as he and they observe the form and matter of baptism, by our Saviour Christ prescribed: we dare not say, they are not baptised at all, and take upon us to baptise them again, nor I think our Brethr. dare attempt it or avouch it. And can they avow these speeches then of our baptizing now, that keepeth the mere and simple institution of Christ, without any of those corruptions? How far more modestly writeth calvin in his 265. calvinus in Epist. 265. Epistle Rogant quidam, etc. There are certain that inquire, if it were lawful for the Apostles at the hour of prayer, to ascend into the temple: and moreover for Paul to perform the solemn rite of sanctification: why may not we also intermingle prayers with the Papists? We must first hold this, that the prayers which were in use among the jews, were pure, & form to the laws prescription. Neither yet (if the Papists did conceive a pure form of praying) would I make any religion to enter with them into the ●emple. But nder became not them to join themselves, unto their assembly that had ●de●●fied Christ: I answer, a godly & holy action is not corrupted by the vice of the men. As I am wont to say, that If all the Angels were present at the Mass, they are not able with their holiness to cleanse the filthiness thereof. Nor yet again, are all the devils able with their presence to bring to pass, that the holy supper when it is celebrated according to the institution of Christ, should not retain the purity thereof. Since therefore we have the very institution of Christ both in his supper and in our baptism, so clearly set forth as we have seen; shall the ministers insufficiency to preach the things the he (after so good a form prescribed both to him & us) declareth, be such a pollution, that these holy sacraments should be defiled thereby, and be counted or called beggarly elements? No necessity of preaching at baptism. Is it lawful for calvin to say of the jews ceremonies, that though without or against Christ they were weak and beggarly elements: yet having the promise adjoined and referred to Christ, they were to the fathers not only healthful exercises & helps of godliness, calvinus in Gal. 4. ●. but also effectual instruments of grace? And are ours being done according to Christ's institution, & with Christ, & for Christ, of less force now than theirs then? For as for theirs, How the Papists committed sacrilege in the L. supper. neither circumcision nor the. paschal Lamb, had always a sermon preached at the ministration of them. And shall we then say, that if ours want a sermon at the ministration of them, ours are less effectual than were their sacraments? Indeed we dare burden the Papists with the term of sacrilege (by Gelasius their own Pope's mouth) for subtracting the L. cup: and burden them again so far as all these terms amount unto, for their so transforming of the L. supper: that they made no supper of the L. at all thereof, nor any sacrament but a mere sacrilege, & an Idolatrous sacrifice of their own making. Both wresting the word into an absurd & monstrous sense yea, into a sense clean contrary to any sacramental sense, taking clean away the element And so (as we have heard out of Augustine) they overthrew the nature of a sacrament. For (as he saith add the word to the element, & it is made a sacrament: so take the element from the word, & it is made no sacrament. But can our Breath. say as much of us, that as the Papists take the element from the word, when they bring in transubstantiation: so, we take the word from the element, when we ever have the word & the element joined together, though in their sense, it be not always preached? And yet it is always so at large expounded, How sermons are very profitable at the sacrament. that I see not what a learned preacher can say more, concerning the matter & substance of the sacrament, or any thing necessary for the worthy receivers, save either to their further exhortation, upon some especial occasion, or to their further resolution, if any doubt arise about the true understanding of it. And to these purposes, sermons we grant are very profitable, or some homilies read to the same purpose. But to say (as our Breath. do) that except the sacraments be administered, by one that is is able to preach, & at the same time do preach a sermon, besides all these things aforesaid, or else the element is but worldly, dead & beggarly, & is separated from the word, & no better than sacrilege: these are very presumptuous, dangerous and erroneous speeches, & indeed not tolerable, being such as necessarily imply, that the most part of us, and peradventure of themselves also, are not as yet any whit more baptised, than in the Popish time we celebrated the Lords supper, that is to say in plain English, not at all. Which how near it would draw to any true baptism, let the reader and their selves consider. Our brethren's argument is this: To separate the elements in the ministration of the sacraments, from the promise and word of God, which is the life and riches to animate and enrich the sacrament, is but to give us worldly, dead, and beggarly elements, and is nothing else but sacrilege: But, to separate the ministration of preaching of the word from the sacraments, is to separate the element in the ministration of the sacraments from the promise & word of God, which is the life & riches to animate and enrich the sacrament: therefore, it is but to give dead & beggarly elements and nothing else but sacrilege, to separate the preaching of the word from the sacraments. The minor of this argument, as we have seen (understanding preaching as they understand it) is apparent false, for although it be true in the supper of the L. where the participants have discretion, understanding preaching, so the the word and promise of God be taught and set forth in any such sort, as the congregation may be edified in the understanding and believing of these mysteries: Nevertheless we can not grant thereto so absolutely for baptism. Which it may be fully received (for the truth and substance thereof) by the infants that want discretion to understand the mystery of it in what language soever it be spoken. So that either our Brethrens must both deny themselves to be as yet baptised, and yield to the anabaptists in repelling infants: or deny this argument. Albeit restraining the argument to the other sacrament: we gladly yield and subscribe to that part of the argument, as having always both the word, and ministration of preaching of the word, when soever the sacraments are with us administered. And so far forth, we construe and allow of that order, which calvin himself prescribeth in his institutions, Calvin in instit cap. 18. sect. 34. concerning the Lord's supper. cap. 18. sect. 34. saying: Hitherto we have have reasoned how it serveth to our faith towards God. But when the Lord in this sacrament revoketh into our memory so great a bounty of his goodness as we have declared, and stirreth us up to acknowledge the same: he warneth us with all, that we should not be unthankful to his liberality so plentifully powered forth, but that rather we should with praises wherewith it is meet, preach the same, and celebrate it with thanksgiving. Therefore when he delivered the institution of this sacrament to his Apostles, he taught them that they should do it in memory of him, which Paul interpreteth, to show forth the Lords death, (here again is that interpretation, whereof our Breath. spoke before) but that publicly, and all of them together with one voice openly to confess, that all our trust of life and salvation is placed in the death of the Lord, that we should glorify him with our confession, & should exhort others by our example to give him glory. Here again appeareth, whether the scope of the sacrament aimeth, to wit, that it might exercise us in the memory of the death of Christ. For, that we be bidden to show forth the death of the Lord, until his coming to iudege: is no other thing, but that we should preach with the confession of the mouth, Four kinds of preaching. that which in the sacrament our faith acknowledgeth, that is to wit, the death of Christ to be our life. This is the second use of the sacrament which appertaineth to external confession. Here is in one sense (as we have also showed before, & that out of Calvin) a general preaching at the ministration of this Sacrament. And this preaching, our brethren can not deny, but we have. Now for the other kinds also of preaching more peculiar to the Minister, calvin proceeds. thirdly, The diverse kinds of preaching in the Lord's supper. and that in the steed of an exhortation unto us the Lord (him self) would be. Than the which (exhortation) none could more vehemently animate and enflambe us, both unto purity and holiness of life, and also to charity, peace and consent. For the Lord doth so communicate there his body unto us, it is altogether one with us, and we with him. etc. Here again he maketh another kind of preaching, which he saith is the Lord himself, in steed of a most effectual exhortation, to wit, the communicating of his body unto us. And this preaching again (God be praised) we have in the Ministration of this sacrament. Now hereupon he cometh to the third kind of preaching at this sacrament, & saith: Sect. 36. From hence is best of all confirmed, that which otherwher I said: that the right administration of the sacrament is contained i● the word. For what profit soever cometh into us out of the supper, requireth the word. Whether we are to be confirmed in faith, The papists mute actions in the Lord's supper. or to be exercised in Confession, or to be stirred up to our duty: there is need of preaching. Nothing therefore can be done more preposterous in the lords supper, then if it be turned into a mute (or dumb) action, the which thing was done under the tyranny of the Pope. For they would have all the force of the consecration, to hang upon the (sacerdotal) Priests intention: as though this appertained nothing to the people, to whom this mystery ought most of all to have been laid open. And hereupon was this error bred, that they marked not those promises, wherewith the consecration is made, not to be directed to the elements themselves, but unto those that do receive them truly. Christ speaketh not unto the bread, that it should be made his body: What is the preaching of the words of Christ. but he biddeth his Disciples, eat: and to them he promiseth the communicating of his body and his blood. Neither doth Paul teach another order, then that together with the bread and the Cup, the promises should be offered to the faithful. Thus certainly it is. Here it becometh not us to imagine any magical incantation, that it might be enough to have murmured up the words, as though they were heard of the elements: but we should understand those words to be a lively preaching, that edifieth the hearers that pierseth into their minds that is imprinted and sitteth in their hearts, that may bring forth an efficacy, Caluines' order in the lords supper. in the fulfilling of that that it promiseth. By these reasons it is evident, that the reserving (or laying up) of the sacrament, which some urge to be extraordinarily distributed to the sick, is unprofitable. For either they shall receive it, without reciting of the institution of Christ, or else the Minister shall join together with the sign, the true explication of the mystery. In silence is an abuse and vice. If the promises be rehearsed, and the mystery declared, so that those that are to receive shall receive it with fruit, there is, no doubt, but that this is a true consecration. Thus saith calvin of this third kind of preaching. Now if this be as he saith, a true consecration, where the words are not muttered to the element, but spoken to the Communicants, & the mystery laid forth before them, and the promises recited: and that we must understand those words of Christ, The sacrament ministered according to our form hath a true consecration. to be such a lively edifying and effectual kind of preaching: all which are so clearly set forth whensoever this sacrament is of any Minister with us celebrated: can our brethren say, that here wanteth the ministration of preaching the word, so much as is necessary and sufficient, to make a true consecration of the sacrament? True it is, that when Calvin comes to the full conclusion of this treatise, he reckons up a fourth kind of preaching, sect. 70. Concluding thus. So far as pertaineth to the holy supper, it mought thus most decently be administered, if that most often, and at the least every week it were set forth unto the Church. But the beginning should be made with public prayers, after which a sermon should be had: than the Minister (the bread & wine being set forth on the table) should rehearse the institution of the supper. Then should he declare the promises which are left unto us in the same. And withal he should excommunicate all those that by the Lords forbidding are put back. The form that Calvin prescribeth with a fourth kind of preaching. afterward prayer should be made that with what benignity the Lord hath given unto us this holy nourishment, he would also instruct and frame us, with faith & thankfulness of mind to receive the same. And sith that we be not of ourselves he would of his mercy make us worthy of such a banquet. But here either the psalms should be song, or somewhat read, and the faithful should communicate of this holy food in such order as is seemly, the ministers breaking the bread and delivering it unto the people. The lords supper being done, an exhortation should be had for sincere faith, etc. Thus doth Calvin write of all the order that he would have observed, in the administration of the Lords supper. Nowbeit, he prescribeth it not to any Church, but only saith it mought be thus administered most decently. And although he mention that a sermon should be had, before it, and an exhortation after it (seeming to make some difference between them) yet whether such a sermon or exhortation may be had, as if a preacher want, may be of the Minister red unto the people, of another's making: that he doth not express. Nor yet, whether the preacher or reader of the same, Musc. for the M. of the Sacrment, that are not preachers. must always be the party that ministereth the sacrament, So, here is also nothing set down, but that we already have in use (his words being thus understood) except the excommunicating of all those, that by the Lords forbidding are put back. Neither do we think it necessary, that either excommunication should be then used, or that all those should be excommunicated, that by the Lords forbidding are put back, from this supper. For so every one that is not in charity with his neighbours, should forthwith be excommunicate. But sith Calvin, so modestly in these things, only telleth, what he thinketh mought be a most comely manner of the administration, prejudicating no other reformed churches: let Geneva (with good leave of us,) follow this order. And let us in God's name, follow our Communion Book, which (me thinks) both containeth the most and chiefest of all these things, and in a far more decent order for our state. Yea, the book of the orders of Geneva maketh the Deacons also ministers of the cup and why not aswell of the Bread and of all both parts as well as of one? and yet they will not permit them to be Preachers. Musc. in his common places, De coena domini: upon this title, by whom the Supper of the L. should be administered (with the like modestly that Calvin) saith on this wise. I know that this is the custom in some churches, that the ministers of the word exercise the place of the prophets & doctors: & in the mean time, they leave the administration of the sacraments, to the parish priests & curates of the people (as they term them) with the deacons. Notwithstanding, The reformed Churches wherein the Minist. that are not preachers do minister the sacraments. that custom ought not to prejudicate other churches in which the dispensers of the sacraments, are the same that are the dispensers of the word, so that, they execute both the parts of the ministry. Otherwise, it should be convenient, that according to the saying of the apostles, act. 6 they should apply themselves to prayers & administering doctrine, leaving the ministry of the tables. Seeing that many more may be had that can dispense the sacraments, than those which can rightly cut sound doctrine in the church. By which testimony of Musc & by the very order prescribed even in Geneva. It plainly appeareth, that not only in these reformed Churches, many are admitted to minister the Sacr. that are not able to preach: but that also, this was the use of the primitive Church in the apostles times. Many can minister the Sacrament that cannot preach. Which overthrows all that our breath▪ have hereon alleged. Neither helpeth it to say, that yet still this taketh not away, but that there should be preaching used at the administration of the sacrament, though the minister of the sacrament be no preacher. For our breath. said, the administration of the sacraments ought to be committed to none, but unto such as are preachers of the word. etc. pag. 60. But for this that they say here also, It is no better than sacrilege to separate the ministration of preaching of the word from the sacraments, so hard a speech following: Musculus, for the points requisite in the sacrament. Musculus proceeding with the minister of this Sacrament though he be no preacher of the word, yet he requireth in him such a competency, as hath a triple respect, both to the person that he sustaineth, and of the matter that he administereth, and of the people to whom he communicateth. After he hath showed for the first part how he should be no lewd person, but sober and virtuous: coming to the second respect in him, he saith: Furthermore, he ministereth it competently, if he have a consideration of those things which he dispenseth, and do worthily frame himself unto them. He dispenseth the communicating of the body and blood of Christ. The bread which we break (saith the Apostle) Is it not the communicating of the body of the Lord? And the Cup of the blessing over which we bless, is it not the communicating of the blood of the Lord? 1. Cor. 10. Thus therefore shall he competently administer this sacrament, that it may be a communicating, not that it should be a holy private thing. He dispenseth the remembrance of the Lord, or (as Augustine in a certain place speaketh) the sacrament of memory. This shall he do competently, if he shall adjoin unto the mystical communicating, What kind of preaching Musculus requireth in the L. Supper. the showing forth of the L. death, according to the word of the Apostle, who saith: so often as ye eat this bread and drink of the Cup, ye show forth the lords death till he come, For so did he ordain this custom in the Church of the Corinthians. It is not fit that it should be a dumb communicating. Either let some thing be read before the people, or be sung, concerning the history of the death of the Lord, as it is begun to be done, in very many churches in our age. He dispenseth the eucharist: he eucharist, is a giving of thanks and a sacrifice of praise. Let him therefore have a care, that this holy communion may be closed up with public giving of thanks. He dispenseth the love feast, that is, the banquet of brotherly love. It is meet therefore that a clear exercise of Christian love and mutual communicating should be adhibited. Unto the which he ought not only with exhortations in the act itself to instruct and accustom them, but also with constitutions of a certain order. These are the principal things, of which the dispenser of the lords table, ought chiefly to have a care and consideration, whereby he may apply himself competently unto this sacrament. The third respect is of the people communicating, which the more simple & ruder they are, so much the simplier must the minister speak of the mystery of the lords supper, that he may apply himself to their capacity. But he must by all means take heed of those two vices, that entrap the people, to wit, superstition and contempt. Superstition, lest the people worship and adore that for the thing itself, that is the sign thereof: contempt, lest they stick only in the bread and Wine, The seal & the writing joined. not discerning the body and blood of the Lord, and therefore contemn it, understanding nothing beyond the judgment of the eyes, because by sight and taste they perceive it to be bread and Wine. Such a point did Augustine give warning of, in his book of Catechizing the rude, in the ninth chapter, where he saith thus: Concerning the sacrament that they shall receive, it sufficeth for those that are more prudent, to hear what that thing signifieth: but with the duller sort, it must with more words and similitudes be treated upon, lest they contemn that which they see. These things wrote he. To conclude he must take heed that he swerver not either to the Corinthians, or to the papists, in this cause of the lords Supper. And to the intent that the people not only with the hand and mouth, but with faith and heart may receive that which is given, let him declare all things that are to be spoken, in the vulgar and usual tongue, not only the exhortations, but also the words of the lords institution, the Prayers also and the thanksgiving, whereby the people may understand all, and in their heart assent thereto, according to the Apostles admonition, 1. Cor. 14. Thus we see how although the Minister be no preacher, but being a discreet and virtuous man in all these foresaid respects, and observe these exhortations, which are both plentifully set out in Homilies, and in the Communion Book itself, and the other things here noted, in such order as the communicantes may understand and believe the same: although there be no other sermon preached, yet is the Sacrament truly and effectually administered. Neither can these things with the residue that he setteth down, be understood, for the only action of a Preacher: confessing and allowing, that many Ministers not Preachers, may minister this Sacrament, and yet in every one that ministereth the same all these things are requisite. For what is plainer than this argument, out of Musculus sayings? Musculus thinketh and proveth, that it is not necessary, that every one which administereth the Sacraments should be a Preacher, and preach at the ministration of them: But Musculus thinketh, and proveth it necessary, The effect of Musculus argument. that all things ought to be done by the minister, at the Ministration of them, which here he reckoneth up. Therefore Musculus thinketh and proveth that all these things might be done of one that is no preacher and without a sermon then preached of these matters. If our Brethren will deny the mayor, (for the minor, I think they will not) I refer them to Musculus and his reason, out of, Acts 6. and to the reformed Churches that he meaneth. It sufficeth for us to prove both by him and by calvin, that, as we have always soon kinds and that effectual, of preaching the lords death at the Ministration of the lords supper: Ministers forbidden to preach. so, though we have not always the kind of preaching, which our Br. urge unnecessarily, as mere necessary, and we grant also to be convenient, and wish it could in every place be had: yet wanting this manner of Preaching, & having all the other: we may boldly and safely avow, that it is a consecration, as Cal. calleth it a right administration of the Sacrament, as we use it, But say our Brethren: The learned Dis. Pag. 61. And forasmuch as the spirit of God compareth the sacraments to seals, that are added for confirmation of writings: we know well, that a word or writing may be available without a seal, but never a seal without a writing. How can this be rightly alleged against us, that have both the seal and the writing joined together: Bridges. but rather make for us against our Brethren? For, if this confirmation of writings by the seal added thereunto, and this availeablenesse of the seal joined to the writing, be of the spirit of God: Sith we have both of them in the Sacraments, jointly together, and use the seal never without that word or writing, that God's penmen by the inspiration of his holy spirit did set down in authentical record of writing: We have both the seal and the writing joined in our form of sacrament. How can our Brethren maintain their sayings, that we sacrilegiousely separate and pull the writing from the seal, or the seal from the writing, and give a dead, beggarly, and worldly Element or bare seal, that is not available, but against Christ's institution, and against God's spirit? Surely, in this and such like slanders our Brethren do not a little sin, even against the spirit of God in them, and against their own spirits and knowledges: that know well enough, and can not be ignorant, but that we join always the writing to the seal, whensoever we deliver the seal: and that in as ample manner, as the writing is left written unto us. Neither do we deliver only the writing with the seal, and read the whole writing at the delivery: but read it in such plain & clear manner, that every one which receiveth the same, may well perceive the content of the writing, the validity of the seal, and all the mystery, purport and effect of the whole deed. Only this, no large voluntary Discourse, is at every time of the delivery made thereupon. And is this so necessary also in all deeds written, sealed & delivered, and withal briefly and plainly declared, in whose name and act, and to what use & end, it is so passed, that there must be always besides all this, a large treatise uttered by the deliverer to the receiver, or else the deed is not an authentical deed nor available? our brethren's fallation is to open a secundum q●id ad simpliciter. We have not the writing preached at the action (in such manner as they would have it preached): therefore we have not the writing in this action, but the seal without the writing. The learned disc. Pag. 61. Hereupon our brethren again conclude. Therefore in this behalf we have had great default, so long time to commit the administration of the sacraments to those men, who not only have been known to be unable, but also have been forbidden to preach the word. We do not excuse the default of any, that have admitted any such into the ministery, Bridges that have been known to be unable to administer the sacraments. Neither defend we any such unable Ministers, or would have them them to be allowed or tolerated. Let such (being known) a God's name, be orderly removed and provided for. But we stand now upon the absolute necessity of this ability, that our brethren urge to be in every Minister, to whom the administration of the sacraments may be committed: What ministers herein we defend & defend not. that he must needs be withal a Learned Preacher of the word. Which though we also like off, so far as stretcheth to conveniency: yet we dare not, nor can admit this absolute necessity, understanding preaching as is aforesaid. But see here, on whom most of all, our brethren's accusation of this so great default will light. They do well before hand to include themselves in the number, saying: in this behalf we have had great default. for although they mean nothing less in this (we) that here they speak of, than to charge themselves, with any part of this default, but with a mannerly term, reach at others: yet how will they acquit themselves hereof? For if, we have had great default in this behalf, to commit the administration of the sacraments to those men, that are known to be unable to preach the word: understanding preaching in that sense, that our brethren here do, for free, extemporary, or premeditate exhortation, Our brethr. accusation lighteth. on their own selves. admonition, application: etc. How do not they incur the same default? except they will deny Doctors or Teachers to be Ministers of the Word, and so (by their own confession) Ministers also of the Sacraments, and yet, by their former principles, they permit them not to exhort, admonish nor apply, etc. Which things are most necessary unto preaching, namely, to that preaching, that is used at the administration of the Sacraments. If they say these Doctors notwithstanding, be not unable: for they can do it, though they may not do it, What booteth this shift? for if they may not: then in all right, which is as good as in all might, they be unabled to preach and yet not unabled to minister the sacraments. Either therefore, let our Brethren deny that they may minister the sacraments: or deny this to be so great a default, that a sacrament may be administered without this manner of preaching Or else, whether shall we be found more faulty, that suffer Ministers to administer the sacraments, that are unable to preach at the administration of them, wishing not withstanding they were able, and helping their unabily what we can, and provide as many able as we may: or they, which do unable many Ministers that are able, and say, they can do it, but they must not. And so, both commit a great default herein, and quite and clean overturn themselves, and all their own principalities on this matter. And see again, how this in the nick cometh in, Baptizme by Women. that they add of our forbidding to preach. Doth not this also, most of all, even in this point fouch themselves in not permitting Doctors & teachers to exhort & apply? is not this all one as if they forbade them preaching? as for our forbidding, it is not so absolute, nor so peremptory, but, either it is, because they have not the gift of public exhortation and application, etc. Which if they had, and would use the same, as they should accordingly, none of us would forbid them. And yet may they notwithstanding be Ministers of the Word: else, how should even our brethren's Doctors be Ministers of it? Or, perhaps, they are forbidden, The force of the sacrament & substance thereof dependeth not upon the ministers not preaching. because of some defect in the party's life, or some other occasion, that might make him offensive for that action, for a time to be stayed, and yet that Minister so farre-foorth, on some good consideration, being forbidden to preach, may notwithstanding be not forbidden, to continue the other parts of his function, both to set forth the public form of prayer, and to read the Lessons appointed out of the Scripture, and to administer the Sacraments to the people. And this is as true a saying, as it is old, Vim sacramenti non tollit vita ministri. God forbidden, that the sacrament which such a Minister doth administer, should so depend upon him, or his life or preaching; that when he upon infirmity, or default, or prohibition, or any other occasion ceaseth to preach: then the sacrament that he administereth should be thought not to be effectual. Which to affirm, is a perilous error, and inferreth many dangers and absurdities But now, besides this quarrel of not being preachers: our Brethren draw this matter of the sacraments to other points and say. And that which is more strange, to be suffered in this clear light of the Gospel, The learned disc. pag. 61. & 62. to permit the ministration of baptizme not only to ignorant men, but also to Women which have no voice to speak in the Congregation, 1. Cor. 14.34. and 1. Tim. 2.11. and that in private places, 1. Cor. 13 34 1. Tim. 2.11 but in case (they say) of necessity, as though there were such necessity of the outward sign, when it cannot be ministered according to the institution of Christ, which is nothing else but to affirm with the papists, that sacraments confer grace of the work wrought: and that the sacrament of Baptism, is a sacrament of such necessity, that whosoever is not dipped in Water, must be eternally condemned. Which heretical opinion, as we have hissed out of our profession and preaching, so is it a great shame for us to maintain by such corrupt usage of Christ's holy sacraments. Bridges Concerning the permitting the administration of Baptism (in this light of the Gospel) to Women. Baptising by women. (Be it spoken with the reverence of our Brethren) it is most untrue. When as it is not only given customably in the open charge of every visitation, whether any such thing be done by them, as in the time of the popish darkness was used: but also if any such thing have happened and be found out, the parties that so have done, Baptism, in private places. are openly punished for the same. And how then is not this more strange, that our Breath. dare say, it is suffered & permitted unto women: concerning women's having no voice to speak in the Congregation: women's speaking in the Congregation. I hope our Brethren will not stretch it further, than saint Paul meant it, nor urge it as Sanders and the papists do, which were not only against the scripture, but against the state. As for baptising in private places: though ordinarily, the open church and place appointed in the church, (as is the public font) be the most fit place for such public actions: yet, where a sufficient congregation is present and upon some extraordinary occasion, if the sacraments be orderly administered, according to the godly form by the Church prescribed: shall we say this is not a true sacrament, or not to be permitted, or corruptly administered & received? if a Christian be sick, and by reason of his infirmity may not, or dare not go abroad, may he not be permitted to receive by the ministration of the minister the holy Communion in his house, with some of his family or neighbours participants with him? and if this may be done in the lords supper, may it not be done as well in baptism, concerning the substance of the same, and also for all points of decency: thereto belonging, having a sufficient Congregation present, so that the Church be sufficiently certified of the orderly doing thereof? What place shall we call that, where the Eunuch was baptised by Philip? The eunuchs baptism. Acts. 8. For although it was by the common high way, yet in respect of the public places ordinarily accustomed for such solemn and sacred actions, it was but a private place. And in what place did Saint Peter command Cornelius to be baptised, with all the residue, on whom the holy ghost did come? Cornelius' Baptism Acts. 10. is it not most likely, that it was done in his private house? and likewise Saint Paul's baptizing the keeper of the prison and his family, Act. 16. It seemeth it was done either in his house, or in the Prison. If our Brethren say, that there was some necessity or occasion so to do: whereas now, there is no such necessity nor occasion, we having this clear light of the Gospel, and a public place appointed for public actions. We praise God for it, and acknowledge it withal thankfulness, that we have now this clear light of the gospel. And having this, our brethren have no such cause to grudge and complain for these other matters as they do. But had not S. Peter and S. Paul the clear light of the gospel too, when thy baptised in private places? but whatsoever particular necessity of circumstance and occasion drove them, The clear light of the Gospel debarreth not all particular necessities of occasion in that clear light of the Gospel so to baptise those parties, they knew that the difference of the place public or private, infringed not the virtue of the action. For the action is still of one and the same virtue, though upon an extraordinary occasion, it be done for place, for time and diverse other manners of circumstances, extraordinarily. In which points, there may be also some ordinary differences, of one Church from another, without prejudicating one another, or any prejudice to the sacraments, or to the receivers of them. As for us, who have a comely and very good ordinary form prescribed unto the Church of England, nor diversities of circumstances prejudicate the substance or virtue of the sacrament. we allow not that the sacraments ordinarily (and without necessity or conveniency of some important extraordinary occasion) should be administered but in the ordinary and public place, and time, and manner by the book appointed, and by the laws of our Church prescribed, and indeed should not otherwise be permitted. And much less, that the breach hereof should openly, (besides the private practices in private houses) both in the pulpit, and in books printed be maintained and defended: which is more strange, than in this clear light of the gospel an extraordinary circumstance or occasion to be suffered or permitted to be done. And which is yet more strange), that they which do all these things, contrary to all Law & order, would for very shame open their mouths & say, that baptism is permitted to be administered in private places: their-selves both in private places and in strange manners many times administering both these sacraments. But our brethren presuppose, that in our suffering of baptism, to be now and then extraordinarily administered, though by a lawful Minister, and by the order appointed yet being done in a private place: that we permit it only for the necessity of baptism. Wherein although they threape more kindness on us, than need: when other occasions may be and are alleged by us, then only the necessity of baptism: For although in the book, the title be this. Of them that are baptized in private houses in time of necessity: yet afterward saith the book: & also they shall warn them, that without great cause and necessity, they baptise not children at home in their house. And when great need shall compel them so to do, that they minister it on this fashion, etc. But go to, let us say, as they would only have us say: that if it be permitted of us to be administered in any private place, it is only, but in case of necessity what say they hereto? Necessity of baptism. As though (say they) there were such necessity of the outward sign when it cannot be ministered according to the Institution of Christ. What do our breath here mean? that there is no necessity at all of baptism although there be no such necessity? is there no necessity, of consequence of condition, nor of conveniency: aswell as absolute, simple, and inevitable necessity? If generally there were no necessity at all of baptizing: then it were free: whether we would be baptised or no: But it is not free: Christ did institute baptism under flat commandment: therefore, Necessity of ●●rcu●ncisiō there is a necessity, and an important necessity of it. Did not baptism succeed circumcision? as Paul clearly setteth out, Col. ●. 11. & 12. In whom also ye are circumcised (saith he) etc. And was there no necessity at all of circumcision? we grant this necssity was not so absolute, that it reached to them before their time assigned: no, nor yet after, was it so absolute necessity, Necessity of baptism that it reached to them while they traveled in the wilderness, God dispensing, (for other manifold necessities) in that long journey, with the necessity of that Sacrament. And yet God's commandment remaining entire: and they with such a necessity severely bound, that they should not contemn on their parts, the obedience and execution of it. And therefore sayeth Zanchius in this very well, in his confession of Christian Religion, concerning Baptism, Capite decimo quinto, Aphor. 5. We believe that baptism is altogether necessary in the Church, as a sacrament instituted of Christ, & which the Church can so little want, that where it is not, (when it may be had, there we may not acknowledge the Church of Christ. Howbeit we think it needful unto salvation in this wise: that notwithstanding, if any for the default of the Minister, but not through contempt, depart this life not sprinkled with the water: we believe not that he is therefore damned, and wrapped in eternal destruction. For the children of the faithful are therefore saved, because they are in the covenant: but they that be of ripe years, because they believe in Christ with a true faith, which verily cannot suffer the contempt of Christ's commandment. Gellius Snecanus whom we have before often and at large cited, (that we might see how our brethren answer themselves) in his method of baptism, the sixth part, saith: The sixth circcumstaunce remaineth, when baptism should be administered, Here we must note, although the time be free: yet by God's threat. Gen. 17. (where the neglect of circumcision is esteemed the violating of God's covenant) it consequently followeth, that fit occasion being offered, baptism ought forth with to be administered. Whereunto exhorteth us the danger that was imminent on Moses, by the delay of Circumcision in his child. The same do the examples of the godly teach, those that were Act. 2. baptized of Peter, Act. 8. of Philip. Act. 16. of Paul. Here is to be reprehended, Gellius Snecanus in method baptis. part. 6. the abuse of many, and chiefly of great men in this our age, deferring baptizme unto some months, I know not for what causes▪ etc. The examples of the ancients sheltereth, neither these lingerers, neither the Anabaptists, as it shall be noted in his place. Thus writeth Gell. on this necessity. And even immediately he proceedeth to the lawful manner of administering baptizm, which because it cometh next to hand, I will also here set down. Let us come at length, (saith he) unto the lawful manner. Here is required that baptism should be administered entirely with all his parts, according to the circumstances of the Institution, & of the administration. The form baptizing s●t down by Snecanus. In the administration therefore of baptism, let the sum of the doctrine, concerning the covenant & imputation of faith, comprehending as well the children as the parents, be repeated. To these let there be added an explication, of the general commandment of baptizing all nations, and of the final causes of baptism, instituted according to the sum and order of a method. For the signs of their own nature signify nothing, but by the institution of God. Therefore it is necessary that all things be referred to the will of God, which is made manifest in the holy scriptures. Afterward, let the examples of circumcision, and of the baptism of the Israelites. etc. come hereto. Finally, let all this doctrine be concluded with the invocation of the name of God. Thus writeth he also of the full manner and form that he would have observed in the sacrament. And is not the form that is prescribed unto us, in effect the same. Hellopaeus, agreeing hereunto, both for the necessity of this sacrament, (so far forth as we do urge the same) and for the places, Hellopaeus, de sacramentis. cap. de bapt. pag. 120. circumstances and order, that here we stand upon: For the necessity, in his 5. chapter, concerning the efficacy of baptism, whether it wash away sins, or confer grace: Among other things after his proofs, pag. 120. he saith: Neither must we think Baptism to be absolutely necessary to salvation. Nevertheless, me thinks I hear the papists, & some other, who notwithstanding will not seem to be Papists, arise against me, affirming that baptism is so much necessary, that they teach, except this sacrament be adjoined, they cannot attain unto salvation, no not by faith. But we also verily do confess that by the ordinance of God, the sacrament of baptism is a certain thing correquisite to salvation. Neither can it be omitted, without sacrilege. Yea, rather, if it be omitted by contempt, this should be a deadly heinous offence, except upon earnest repentance following. Howbeit, to say it is so necessary, that if any be excluded by necessity, whereby he cannot use it▪ that he should be in danger of his salvation, we affirm it to be a manifest error. Neither say we, it is the depriving of the sacrament, but it is the contempt, that is the deadly thing. And again Cap 8. page 155. he bringeth in these words against the Papists, Cap. 8. pag. 155. that our brethren iviuriously object to us. And after he hath alleged his reasons against Women and lay persons administering baptism, whose doing we allow not, neither yet doth our book allow it, for any such persons to have done it. How far women's extraordinary baptism. De post facto i● improved. Though if it be done, & be done in such order, that they observed (both for the matter and the form) the element of Water, and the words that Christ assigneth to be used, with other godly prayers at the doing: the Book (to annoyed all cavils of Anabaptists) only approveth the substance of the baptism, when it is done: but not such persons to have done it. Who, (notwithstanding any thing in the book) are worthily punished for their so doing. But (saith Hellopaeus) these things (say the defenders of this error,) ought to be understood of the ordinary ministry. But they treat of the case of necessity lest that any should departed this life not baptised. for, they thought by this means, Circumstances in baptism. to secure the salvation of those that should be baptized in the danger of death, least being prevented by death without baptism, they should make wrack of their salvation, but we have taught Cap. 5. that this is no danger, neither that baptism is of an absolute necessity of salvation, so that contempt be away, Because the covenant of God apprehended by faith, is firm by itself and effectual to salvation, although the seal, (without the fault of him that wanteth it,) come not thereto. So that in all this, he excepteth only the opinion of absolute necessity, not of all necessity. As for the place of baptising (whereof our Brethren spoke last) besides the other circumst aunces, yea, for all the order also and that with a sermon preached at the ministration of this sacrament: in the conclusion of the self same Chapter, Page. 171, he saith: It remaineth that we discuss the other circumstances, where, and when, and how, baptism ought to be conferred, we answer, that thing is chiefly to be required, that, as all other things, so principally the administration of the baptism, should be done decently & in order as for the place, although that it be not necessary: yet it is most convenient, that it should be public, as the temple, Cap. 8.171. or any place appointed to the public Ministry. And as concerning the time, it is meet (if it may so be done) that it should be at an hour appointed, and that such an hour, wherein the Church is full of people. First, that very many may profit in the enarration of this sacrament. Then, that their faith may be kindled to embrace the grace of god, when as they see the infants approach unto the same covenant, that God hath made with their fathers. Besides that it is convenient, to commend unto God with the public prayers the salvation of the Infant. To conclude, God is to be celebrated with thanksgivings. But with what manner, baptizme aught to be conferred, is not obscure to see. This thing must principally be observed, that certain ceremonies are necessary, but certain are free: In the which we ought diligently to look, what is expedient, and what convenient for the regard of the times & places. The form of baptizing allowed by He●lopeus. But we have rehearsed before those toyish additions, salt, oil, tapers. Howsoever it be, the dipping, or sprinkling, the washing, the explication of the sacrament itself, are parts necessary. But that all may be done decently, they may proceed in this order: First, let the Infant that is to be baptised be offered unto the public assembly, where the whole Church being witness and looker on, offereth unto God with their Prayers their tender Brother. Secondly, let the minister recite the confession of the faith, that it may be known with what doctrine, he which is baptised, shall be instructed hereafter. Thirdly, let the institution and promises of baptism be showed, ●nd that in the vulgar tongue, that of the Church it may be understood. Fourthly, let the Infant be baptized, in the name of the father, and of the Son, & of the holy ghost. It makes no matter, be he dipped either once or twice or thrice, or sprinkled with water. Although in the old time, he was wholly dipped. Which also the word baptism (that is, a washing) signifieth. But herein the custom may vary, according to the diversity of regions, & the tenderness or firmness of the infant's body. Fiftly, to conclude, godly prayers being made the infant being commended to God, may be sent home. This is a true manner of administering baptism. Baptism effectual and formal enough with out a sermon Now then, if this be a true manner of administering baptism: Here being no sermon prescribed, but all this may be done well enough, without a sermon: and our book prscribeth as much as all this comes too, and more: how have not we baptizme truly ministered? I know, that after this, he presently findeth fault, with demanding of the child, whether it believeth, & renounceth Satan, the World, and the flesh: As our Brethren also pick a quarrel thereat. But since he confesseth, it was was taken from the custom of the ancients, when they demanded these things worthily, of those that were of ripe years: The custom of answering in the child's name. though he say, it was ill translated to the demanding it also of the Infants: for, to what purpose should those that be ignorant be asked, and other folks answer the demands? I like not of Hellopaeus misliking this custom so long as he knoweth, or may easily do, that it is but spoken by stipulation, and to bind the Godfathers etc. the more solemnly to see that the child, in whose name they answer should afterward perform those things. So that this is but a comely order, at which (understanding the meaning,) no good man ought to take offence. Yea, (in my opinion,) if this order were altered, we should seem to open a shrewd gap unto the Anabaptists, that none were then baptised but such only as were of ripe years and could answer for themselves to these demands But since it is evident that they baptised Infants, and that they used this form in baptizing of them (as in Augustine is most apparent) we can not think that this custom was translated only from the baptizing of them that were of riper years, but were they ripe or unripe, it was the usual order of baptizing all, in the ancient & primitive Church. And therefore, containing nothing contrary to the Institution of baptizme, but all for it: and being done only by the way of stipulation, one in the name of another, (which withal more lively answereth, ●o the nature of a covenant) and being of so great antiquity: though we grant it is not necessary to be retained: no more is it necessary to be removed. But all this is nothing to the absolute necessity of a sermon, or of the public place, whereof is now the question. Hellopaeus making the public place not of necessity, albeit for the ordinary course, most convenient: neither for sermon, mentioning any at all: and therefore, (otherwise than for convenient) it is plain, that he taketh it not to be of such necessity. And afterward in the next treatise of the lords supper, he do h notably also handling the consecration. cap. 4. pa. 209. where he saith: The words of consecration. Yet there remaineth one question. For we say, that the bread & the Wine is sanctified of the Min. so far forth, as he is the legate or interpreter of God's will, & the word of God's institution, is as it were a certain mean to be adhibited unto this consecration. Even so Aug. said well: let the word come unto the element, & it is made a sacrament, that is to say, by the commining between of the word, the thing (otherwise by his nature appointed to a common use) is made a Sacrament. This therefore we will have to be understood by the term of consecration. Otherwise, even as Aug. saith of the water of Bapt. take the word from the baptism, & what is the water, but water: So, if thou takest away the word from the bread & the wine, What is the word added to the element to make the sacrament in the L. Supper. it shall be nothing but bread and wine. Now therefore, we must search out, what & what manner a word, that word is. For some take this word to strictly: & some more at large than is meet. They (take it) strictly, which overpassing as well the former as the later words of the institution, have delivered that in these 4. words, This is my body, again, this is my blood, the consecration is made: as though by a certain divine virtue engrafted in those words, the substance of bread & wine were changed: striking out the other words, to wit, Take ye, eat ye, drink ye all of you, as superfluous, so far as to the force of transubstantiation doth pertain (which they do) to this purpose, that they might not be compelled to confess, that the supper is common unto all, & moreover that they might not subscribe unto this rule that nothing hath a reason of a sacrament, without the use by God instituted. Howbeit, other do join the thanksgiving and the prayers, as though they also with the word of the institution, did make the sacrament, that is, did profit the consecration. And indeed this is true, that all this rite (or ceremony) is furnished with a solemn thanksgiving and prayers, especially concerning the sending of the son, and of the purging of our sins made by him. And the very words also of the institution, are so to be rehearsed, that both they should begin at thanksgiving & prayer, and also should end in the same, T●e only words of the Institution do make consecration. even as Christ the Lord having given thanks, said, this is my body: and the supper being ended, an himme being sung, he went forth. Moreover we have showed, that the sanctification should be made with thanksgiving. In the mean time we must know, that the only words of the Institution, and those entire, do perfit the consecration. Which being whole recited in the lawful use, in which thanks being given and prayers being recited, all things are done: of the element is made the sacrament. For of this word said Irenaeus: when the Cup mixed, & the bread broken, receiveth the word of God: the Eucharist of the body and blood of our Lord is made. But, that he understandeth the only words of the Institution, appeareth by that which he setteth under it, that the earthly bread taketh the calling of God. For it is the calling of God, when God calleth the bread his body. After the same manner Theodoretus, in Atrepo, (that is, in his Dialogue called immutable) he teacheth, that our saviour did honour (or commend) ●he visible signs, with the appellation (or calling) of his body and bloud●: ●ot that they ha● the same (appellation or calling) of nature, but alonely of grace. For so he saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (not changing the nature, but adding grace unto nature). Now, we understand, which, and what manner words, are the words of the Consecration, to wit, those same that are (the words) of the Institution. But they again are of two parts. For some of them are the words of the Evangelists, of which sort are these. Our lord jesus Christ in the same night that he● was betrayed took bread, and said: likewise he took the Cup after supper. Which are wo●des of the institution. But some of the words are Christ's own words, as are, This is ●y body that is given for you, take ye, eat ye: this is my blood, etc. Drink ye all of this: do this in remembrance of me. Those words (to wit, the evangelists) as Ambrose witnesseth, lib. 4. cap. 5. De sacrament●, are not only recited as historical: but do admonish as well the Ministers as the Communicantes, what Christ did, what again he bade both of them to do. But these words serve to the consecration. Now, howsoever this alone do thoroughly accomplish the consecration: notwithstanding, if the other (to wit the Evangelists words before rehearsed) be either omitted, yea or indeed recited hystorically: (albeit the things are in very deed done, which Christ did, & would have to be done) the consecration is not made at all, but either it is an historical explication of the Mystery: or rather, it is a play and jest. And thus far concerning the consecration. Which words of Hellopaeus, if we shall well consider: we shall see withal most apparently, that howsoever the preaching of a sermon may do much good▪ for the further opening of these mysteries, and moving of the hearers and participantes: yet is it not anya substantial part of the sacrament, or inseparable accident, absolutely necessary thereunto, and as it is thus of the lords supper: so for the material and formal parts, which are the Element and word of Baptizme. To the same effect saith Beza in his Conf. cap. 4. Arti. 41. This change dependeth not of the recital of any words, as the sophisters and deceivers deliver forth, but of the ordinance of God, comprehended in his word. The word therefore, that is, the very institution of Christ, as it is of the Evangelists and Paul expounded, is as it were the very life of the sacramental signs, because (as in the word is declared unto us) the water the Bread & the Wine, are made sacraments, that is, true signs and seals of those things, which in the word are promised to us, and are truly signified by the same. And again, We call the sign of baptism, (saith Beza, cap. 4. artic. 47.) first of all Water: then, the substantial ceremonies prescribed in the word. Beza for the form & effect of Bapt. To the which (we think it wickedness) to add any thing or to take from it: that is to say, the sprinkling of the water, the stay under the water, and the coming forth out of the water, etc. We call the word in baptism, the ordinance of jesus Christ, joined with the promise of eternal life, whereof this is the form: Baptize ye in the name of the father, of the son, and of the holy Ghost: whosoever shall believe and be baptised shall be saved. If then in these 2. parts, the whole substance of baptism consist: how are not they baptised, where these 2. parts are, although no sermon be preached at the action? Albeit I know not how to reconcile Beza his words, for this material part: for joining all these three actions together with the element of water: sprinkling of the water: an abode or stay under the water: & the coming forth out of the water: Bezaes' opinion of holding the infant under the water. and that in none of these aught must be added nor diminished, but that he will think it wickedness. For we rather think, be the child dipped in the water, and that without any abode or stay therein, and much less to be held any while under it, which might breed danger to tender infants, or be it but only sprinkled with water cast upon it: it sufficeth for the action of the material part. But howsoever we may construe to the best those words of Beza; in that (which though he make it no absolute necessity of infant's baptism, in respect of their salvation to depend thereon: yet in reasoning for it, he makes some necessity of it; yea, he goeth so far. Articl. 49. that baptism cannot be reiterated: that (me thinks, and let other judge thereon) he clean overthrows this our brethren's principle, that none can minister sacraments but preachers of the word. We have said (saith Beza) that Baptism is the sacrament of our engrafting into Christ and his Church: neither dependeth the efficacy of baptism on the person of the baptizer. But now, Baptism true Baptism without a ●erm●ō whosoever is once truly given to Christ, although now and then he turn out of the way: yet, may he never be cast clean out. And therefore it is enough that he was once received. By no means assent we unto them, which rebaptize those that were baptised of Heretics, or of other impure ministers. Neither yet do we doubt, but that in the Papistical Church, the baptism remaineth true, although it be administered of ministers nothing fit, and be defiled with infinite pollutions. For because it pleased the mercy of God, even within Popery, to preserve the relics of his Church, so long, until he erected it up again; therefore would he not that Satan should be able utterly therein, to overthrow baptism, whereby all the elected are joined together in a society. If then this baptism of Heretics and Papists, were so sowly polluted, where not only no preaching was: besides that, no part of the institution, of the mystery, of the use, of the ends, thereof were so declared, that the congregation understood it: and yet, all this notwithstanding, it was true baptism, and they were so fully baptised, The truth of Bapt. for all the abuses. that it were a dangerous heresy to go about to rebaptize us, though they that did baptise us were Idolatrous Priests, and Antichristes chaplains: & can it now be said, that the administration of baptism among us, whom our Breath. confess to be a true Church of Christ, we having nothing for the material part, How true & lawful we may better think our Baptism is. but the only and mere element of water that Christ ordained, with the which we sprinkle the infant, if he be not dipped into it; and using not only the words of Christ's institution, with the promise annexed, besides prayers and thanksgiving, with a plain and full declaration of all the institution, the causes, the use, the ends, the effects of this mystery, set forth to the people assembled, that they withal may in their mother tongue, perceive the whole content of all this action: that if all this be not administered by such a minister, as is withal a preacher, and that he also preach at the administration thereof, and that also in the public and ordinary place appointed, and in no private place: or else all this is but a worldly, dead, and beggarly element, a seal without the writing, and so nothing available, & nothing better than sacrilege? Bezaes' saying confutes our Learned discoursers. Durst Beza have said so much, of the very Papists for this sacrament? Yea, although a midwife, or a lay man (as often times than it happened) did administer the same? Or would he, or would our Brethren for that default, rebaptize them? Or count them not baptised at all, that are so extraordinarily, yea, and disorderly baptised? Is the only lack of the persons lawful vocation, yea, the lack of sufficiency in his vocation, a greater pollution, yea, and clean disannulling of the sacrament, more than all these corruptions of the Papists, or than the insufficiency or unlawfulness of their calling? And yet theirs must be true and very baptism; ours is not. And why so? Have we any like or worse pollution? No. Have we any such unsufficient and unlawful ministery? No. What then? Though it be not so unsufficient and unlawful as theirs, yet is it unsufficient and unlawful. Our Brethr. more allow of the Papists ministration of the sacraments than of the Protestants that are not precher●. And why? Forsooth, The administration of the sacraments ought to be committed to none, but unto such as are preachers of the word. pag. 60. But what mean our Brethren by this word aught? An absolute necessity? Or a convenient duty? Saint Paul prescribing the conditions of a Bishop, saith: a Bishop ought to be unreprovable, the husband of one wife, watching, sober, modest, harbourous, apt to teach, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre, but gentle, not covetous, one that can rule his own house; having children under obedience withal honesty. What doth Saint Paul mean here, in all these and other properties, that he saith a Bishop ought to have such an absolute necessity? that if he want any of these properties, he is by and by no Bishop at all, nor hath any lawful function? And if he minister the sacraments, they are no sacraments? Are all these properties of the substance of his office? If they say, though all be not, yet this is; to be apt or able to teach, Necessity of Bapt. & to exhort with wholesome doctrine. Indeed, if he had no aptness nor ability at all, that were very hard. And yet most of the Popish Bishops & Priests were such, & their baptizing still true baptism. And shall ours be said, to be no baptism at all, if the minister of (absolute necessity) be not such a learned preacher, as can freely and at large, by his own discourse, expound unto the people, the mystery of the sacraments? Have we not already heard how Musculus avoucheth, that in many reformed Churches, there are many that can minister the supper of the L. & few that can preach the word of the Lord? Baptism hath more need to be received, & less need of a sermon to the receiver of it. And that it is not necessary, that the Preacher should be the minister of that sacrament? And is it otherwise in this sacrament of baptism: which both hath the less need of the twain, to have a sermon preached thereat, & yet withal of the twain, hath a greater necessity of receiving thereof, than of the L. supper? But if now, as we have seen for that sacrament, that it may be ministered orderly enough by those that are no preachers: & yet none can orderly minister the sacraments, but he that is a minister of the word: doth not this consequence then follow of necessity, that some may be ministers of the word, that are not preachers of the word? Which clean overturneth all our brethren's process of this necessity, that they must needs be Preachers. But our Breath. challenge us here for this, that where we will make no necessity of Preachers, to be the ministers of baptism; notwithstanding, of baptism itself we make a necessity. But both ways they do us manifest wrong. For, neither we deny all kind of preaching, nor all kind of necessity in the minister for preaching at baptism, or at the lords supper; but only this absolute simple and inevitable necessity, granting a necessity of conveniency. Neither do we urge this absolute, Whatnecessitie we deny or grant in the sacrament. simple & inevitable necessity, of any of both the sacraments themselves. Save in general, that they must needs be had in the Church (as Zanchius said) not only as necessary tokens and demonstrances of the true Churches, but also as Gods seals ordained for the confirmation of our faith, & such parts of his covenant with us and ours with him, as the whole Church is bound to have & use. But when it comes to the particular use & application, we do not so necessarily tie them to this or that person of or in the Church, that if they have them not, be it not by their own default, the want of them may endanger their salvation: the virtue whereof depends not upon any sacrament, or is included in it. Neither acknowledge we any necessity of it, but such only as is agreeable to Christ's institution. And therefore, when we say baptism maybe ministered in private places for necessity: & our breath. reply, as though there were such necessity of the outward sign, when it cannot be ministered according to the institution of Christ: etc. This reply is not to the matter in hand. For that necessity that is of the institution of Christ, is a mere and absolute necessity, Christ's in situation. and of the substantial parts of the sacraments, either for the matter or form of them, whosoever shall minister or receive them, Wh●t is and is not necessarily contained in Christ's institution of the sacr. and when, and where soever they shall be received. But th●s prescribeth not any time when, nor any place where, they shallbe necessarily received. No nor the parties that shall receive, nor yet the parties that shall only minister them. Howbeit, our question is now here, not so much for the persons that shall minister them, for we yield, that none orderly aught so to do, but he that is lawfully called thereunto. Neither permit we, but forbidden all other, and punish them, if any be found so to have offended: nor yet for the person to be baptised, whatsoever necessity lies on him to have it: but on the place. For, although it must needs be done in some place, or not done at all, and the most necessary (respecting conveniency) is the pubike place, to wit, the temple: yet this being none of the parts of the sacrament, nor this or that place, public or private, but an accident pertaining to circumstance: why should exception be made of this, that because it is done in a private place, and that for necessity of conveniency, that there can be no such necessity of the outward sign, when it can not be ministered according to the institution of Christ? Did Christ mention place in his institution? Or rather doth he not include all convenient places without exception, when he saith: go ye into all the world to baptise, etc. and did they it not both in the open rivers, and in private houses? And where, and when, and how was the lords supper instituted, if we should urge the institution on that fashion? Let our Brethren prove that the public place, and that the preaching of a sermon by a preacher (understanding the word as they construe it) is a material part, & of the substance of the sacrament by Christ's institution: and strait will I yield unto our Brethren, that no kind of necessity in the world, may alter it. But good Brethren take good advice, how ye enter into the maintenance of that point. Which if it be true, than the sacraments without a sermon preached, are not only corruptly ministered or received, but not ministered nor received at all, wanting the substantial parts that make a sacrament. And so it might be further called in question, whether we or they, be as yet baptised at all, yea or no. The dangerous sequel of our Breath. assertion. But I am most assured that we be, notwithstanding (as Beza saith) all the pollutions of the Pope. And if those, I mean not his tromperies and trash that he added, but his suppressinges of the declaring the very institution of Baptism, besides his manifold and horrible errors of doctrine concerning Baptism, that then blinded both the people and the minister, were not yet able to make baptism uneffectual: shall we now say or think, and beat this scruple into the people's heads, that all these superstitions and errors being removed▪ and having Gods pure word and promise, joined to the simple element ordained of Christ; & having withal the whole nature of the sacrament so fully and clearly set out, The Popish corruptions that all the people may perceive it; and receive great edification by it; and a lawful minister do it; and all the congregation join their prayers and thanksgiving to it; and perhaps also some godly and learned homily, or exhortation, or sermon written and set out, by some learned preacher, read unto the people at that time: tush tush, what talk ye of all this? If if it be not done only in public place appointed, that is to wit, the Church or Temple: if it be not ministered only by a preacher: yea, and if he preach not a sermon at the ministration of it: all is corrupt and unavailable. All is nothing else but a worldly, a dead, a beggarly element, a seal without a writing. A separation of the ministration of preaching the word, from the sacraments, and what can it be better than sacrilege? Thus do our Brethren shake all off, & make our sacraments as ill: yea, worse than the very Papists; yea, to be none at all, and so to be no Church: not where preaching is not, but where it is not joined to the sacraments. As for Beza his words from whence our Brethren seem to have borrowed theirs: if they had retained the same moderation of speech, that Beza doth, we would have joined with them. For, we say herein as he doth. Therefore the necessity of receiving the sacraments, Beza in confess. Christ. cap. 4. 〈◊〉 35. reacheth not so far forth, that without exception every one that hath not obtained them, is clean fallen from salvation: but thus far forth only, that he which shall have despised them, sith that he declareth himself to be an infidel, is guilty of eternal death, except he shall have acknowledged it and repented him of it. Well therefore doth Bernard testify: not the depriving, but the contempt condemneth. But he cannot be thought to have contemned the sacraments, that could not so receive them as they were ordained of the Lord. And God forbidden that we should imagine any cases of necessity, in which we might violate the ordinance of the Lord. As indeed they do (as verily unto me it seemeth) which transfer (or assign over) the ministery of baptizing unto women, or to any other private persons. And they that without the public assembly and times not prescribed of the Church, do administer the Lords supper. So that here he alloweth a necessity of baptism, but not any such as were against the lords ordinance. And he speaketh of them that transfer and assign over the ministery of baptism to women or private persons, Our Breath. use the sacr. without the pub. assemb. and times prescribed of the Church. as for the other of place & time he restayneth to the supper of the Lord, not to baptism. From the two former for the acknowledgement of any such fact to be orderly done (God be praised) we are free. From the later, both for the lords supper, and for baptism too; let our Brethren look to it, that are deeper in that matter than are we. But when all is done, Bezaes' modesty. this modesty of Beza is commendable, that he doth not clean annihilate and make no sacramental act at all of these doings, as our Brethren do: Bezaes' modesty. but only saith, they violate the ordinance of the Lord. For (as we have showed) he saith all the Papists pollutions (of the which these were some, and that our Brethren I think will grant) were not able to take away the virtue of baptism, and make it frustrate & uneffectual. And therefore our Brethr. overreached, and abuse us, in laying the error of the Papists, maintaining an absolute necessity of the sacrament, unto our charge, and to say the necessity that we stand on, is nothing else, but to affirm with the Papists, that sacraments confer grace of the work wrought: and that the sacrament of Baptism is a sacrament of such necessity, that whosoever is not dipped in water must be eternally condemned. Which heretical opinion, as we have hissed out in our profession and preaching, so is it a great shame for us, to maintain by such corrupt usage of Christ's holy sacraments. This opinion of the Papists, as they now obstinately maintain the same, is (I grant) heretical. And yet, neither was this (besides all other that they maintained, even concerning baptism) able to take away the virtue of it, but that all the Papists had true baptism, whosoever he or she were that baptised them. But, do we maintain this, or any other of their erroneous or heretical opinions? No. I hope, our Brethren do include us, in the number of this (we) as well as themselves, Our Brethr. contradiction. when they say: which heretical opinion, as we have hissed out in our profession & preaching. And how then, do we maintain or affirm that, which is nothing else, but to affirm with the Papists this heretical opinion? Do we maintain & affirm that, which we have hissed out? Or do we hiss out that which we maintain & affirm? How do these things hang together? But they say, we maintain it by such corrupt usage of Christ's holy sacraments. What corrupt usage have they proved, or are ever able to prove that we maintain in Christ's holy sacraments, either the one or the other, contrary to that, which in our profession & preaching we have hissed out? For if we maintain it, we profess it. But, if our Brethren accuse us so sharply, of so great a shame, as in our profession & preaching to hiss out this heretical opinion; and yet charge us that we maintain it, by such corrupt usage of Christ's holy sacraments: because only we affirm, there may be some necessary usage of these holy sacraments: although (following the ordinary form in our book set down) they be extraordinarily now and then used in private places, in cases of necessity, professing and preaching, that we understand no absolute necessity, but conditional, and of convenience: how shall then our Brethren not incur a greater shame, that hiss not out in their profession and preaching, but affirm and maintain such necessity of a preacher, to be the only minister of the sacraments, and of preaching at the ministration of them: Our Breath. dangerous positions. that if there be not this preacher and preaching; they make it not only a corrupt usage of Christ's holy sacraments, but no sacraments at all? shall we say, this is nothing else but to affirm with the Papists, that the preacher & his preaching conferreth grace of the work wrought? And that this preaching is of such necessity, that whosoever hears not a sermon when he receives the sacrament, must be eternally condemned, as receiving it unworthily to his condemnation? Our Brethr. absurdities in this assertion. And yet he receiveth no sacrament at al. And that this necessity of a preaching is as necessary to Bapt. as ever the Papists thought baptism itself to be to the infant? And that the want of this necessity, doth more frustrate & void all the whole substance and virtue of the sacrament: than all their corrupt abusages, pollutions, and heretical opinions of Christ's holy sacraments, was ever able to do. What a greater shame is the maintenance of this opinion? Which if it should be maintained obstinately, (as I hope our Breath. will not): surely, it were as ill or worse, than the other, & in very sooth, no better than an heretical opinion. But our Breath. may err, and so may we. Let us both learn in modesty to say with Augustine, as I said before, Errare possum, hereticus esse nolo. Err I may, but (God willing) I will not be an heretic. But now for the final conclusion of this matter, say our Brethren. Let us therefore retain this principle, The learned Dis. Pag. 62. & 63. that the administration of the sacraments, is a part of the Pastor's duty: for although the office of preaching be more excellent, than of ministration of the sacraments, as S. Paul speaketh comparatively. Christ sent me not to Baptizm to preach. 1. Cor. 1.17. 1. Cor. 1.17. Yet they are of such affinity, that the accessory can not be separated from the principal thereof. For where is no preacher of the word, there aught to be no minister of the sacraments. This principle, Bridges. that the administration of the sacraments is a part of the Pastor's duty: is a true principle, and safely to be maintained. But, as that which went before, was not to be maintained without great shame & danger: so not only this necessary conclusion made hereon, is no less shameful dangerous & erroneous to be maintained, than the other: Our Brethr. most dangerous conclusion. where there is no preacher of the word: there ought to be no minister of the sacraments. For, if this Canon of our Breath. should be put in execution at this present, throughout all England, & much more throughout all Christendom: Baptism might be a long while clean exiled, Baptism banished throughout the most part of Christendom. from the most part of a number of Christian Realms and Churches, that yet amids all their corrupt usages, retain the virtue of baptism, as Beza saith. But to look to our own estate; which have none of those or any other corruptions remaining, but as sincere a form, concerning the very administration of the sacraments, as any of all our Brethren in any reformed Church set down, No preacher, no sacrament. full of exhortations, admonitions, consolations, instructions, and declarations of all the mystery, with prayers and thanksgivings: yea, and often with godly and learned homilies, and other excellent treatises and sermons, to be reverently read, that the people may understand them, and may be much edified by them: yet, until they have a preacher come among them, and he also must be their own Pastor, or else again they break their own rules: and he then and there make a sermon to them, at the ministration of the sacraments, or else as good away as there, What a state our Breath. under pretence of making it better. would bring us unto. yea, as good no preacher at all, as not preach at all: and he must preach also of that matter, or else it is not to that purpose: all which things if they be not done: then God be with you, for any sacraments that may be administered. None must be baptised there, nor any never so godly disposed, and desirous to come to the Lords table, shall find any crome of comfort to refresh his hungry soul there. Though also the minister would never so feign baptise the poor infants of the faithful parents, and break the lords bread, and deliver the lords cup unto other hunger-starved and thirsty souls; no, they must be packing and go home again empty, no sacraments shall there be ministered. Per quam regulam? What a rule is there here, why the poor & faithful people should be thus debarred of these holy sacraments? Forsooth, our Brethren have set down a rule, and a final conclusion, that over-ruleth and knitteth up all this case. Ye can have no sacraments at all. And why I pray you? It is a plain case, there is no minister to administer them. No? That there is, The duty of a good Curate that is no preacher we have a minister ready to do it. What? Is he a preacher? No, but he is an honest, virtuous, sober, and painful man in his function: and he is a good scholar too, and studious, and can read (and so he doth) very fair, that all the parish may plainly understand him: and he catechiseth our children diligently, and we sit by and here it, to our great comfort and edification: and he can and doth give us also in private (as he seeth cause) very good counsel when we come unto him, and he comes to us when we are sick, and maketh very good exhortations, in private, and if need be admonisheth us in secret, yea and openly also, of our faults; and calleth upon us often to come to the divine service, and to hear him read the homilies, and other good sermons, and to receive these holy sacraments that we would now have. Tush, a point for all this. Is he a preacher? No. He hath no gift at all to edify us that ways, as you mean preaching. Why, then we have a flat rule, that he ought to minister no sacraments. For, where is no preacher of the word; there ought to be no minister of the sacraments. The inconvenience of our Brethr. rule. Would not this rule make a fair rule, if things were overruled on this fashion? But how long now shall the people be thus debarred? Till we can get preachers for every several congregation? But that our Brethren have examined already, and found, and confessed, No preacher no sacrament. that it can not be done presently, and it will not be done in haste, to furnish so many places; no, though we should clean disfurnish the nurseries of all our preachers. Nor every one is to be allowed a Preacher that hath learning enough, & utterance and audacity, except he have the grace of God enough also, to be as S. Paul calleth him, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, one that divideth aright the word of truth. So the many should not be admitted to be preachers, that in their own opinions, & in many others among our Brethren, are holden for jolly and plausible preachers. And how then should all those places do, till preachers were provided for them? Our Brethren told us before of a help, pag. 56. when they had willed us to pray to the Lord of the harvest, to thrust forth labourers into his harvest: yet doubting lest they should not have them by & by thrust in, Our Brethr. extraordinary order till all places can be furnished with preachers. they said: and in the mean time, till God bless us with a sufficient number of learned Pastors, to take some extraordinary & temporal order, for overseeing the Churches, that although they cannot be all sufficiently instructed & governed, etc. And what now? Is this one of these extraordinary & temporal orders, that shall be taken in the mean time; that there shall be no sacraments, at all administered to the poor people in all those places? That were a handsome extraordinary order, with all my heart. It were pity such a temporal order in the mean time, till preachers could be gotten to be in every several congregation, should have any temporal continuance of so long time. Yet, better is half a lose than no bread. Yea, we may have the whole lose well enough, as unprovided as we be, & cut aright also, though not with so fine a knife as hath a learned preacher. But this heavenly bread of the lords table, he may the casilier break & deliver, being broken before hand to his hand. And especially minister the sacrament of baptism, if he be a minister at all: of which sacrament, there is somewhat more necessity (though not absolute) than of the L. supper. But for every congregation to tarry till they have a preacher of their own, to do these things unto them, besides the injury offered, not so much to the present ministers, as to the people, not only for the present state, The dangers flowing from this rule. but we can not tell for how long time to come, so to be debarred: would not this go near to bring in Anabaptistry? Either by keeping back the infants from baptism, till they had a preacher to be their Pastor, under pretence of no such necessity, as may endanger their salvation, because they have not a preacher to baptise them, & so to tarry till they can answer for themselves as the Anabaptistes say they ought to do, & admit none other; yea, and perhaps they may so stay from baptism longer, as a thing at all not so necessary: or else, to hasten all places furniture with this necessity of preachers, more than of baptism, & so to shove in a number of bold unlearned men. taking upon them to be preachers: which may breed as dangerous a point as the other. Principal and accessory. And when all this is done, for such an absolute necessity of preachers; will not this heretical opinion of the Papists, go near to creep in after, of opus operatum, while we stand so necessarily on opus operantis, pressing so hard on this new coined Canon? For, where there is no preacher of the word, there ought to be no minister of the sacraments. But our Brethren say, they are of such affinity (preaching and the ministration of the sacraments) that the accessory cannot be separated from the principal thereof. Preaching is not the principal thing, but accessary to the sacram. Which is here the accessory, which the principal? For they name it not▪ but think, that it is so apparent, that it must go away without touch of breast, that the preaching is the principal, and the administration of the sacraments is the accessory. But by their leave, we must withal consider this, that although it may be well said, when the one of these is compared to the other; the office of preaching is the more excellent, than the office of ministration of the sacraments; yet when it cometh to the ministration of the sacraments, then is the word and promise thereof, including the matter promised, which is called res sacramenti, What is the principal thing in the sacrament. the thing of the sacrament, that is, Christ himself, and his death set forth, and our uniting unto him, the principal and most excellent thing in that action: and the preaching or making a sermon more at large thereupon, is but an accessory thing unto the sacrament: and so accessory, that although, if the preaching be there it is so much the better set forth: yet, whether the preaching be there or no, (so be it have at other times so effectually gone before, that the congregation be not ignorant of the state of these mysteries) if the only word and promise be there, (according to the institution thereof) joined to the outward sign or element: there is a full and perfect sacrament, (as we have seen in Beza and Hellopaeus) both administered by the minister, though he be no preacher: and received of the faithful Christian, if it be the Lords supper: and of the Christians child, if it be the sacrament of baptism. So that, the comparison is not here between these two offices, which office is the more principal of the twain. For we confess, that in many considerations, the preaching of the word is far above the ministration of the sacraments: and yet in some respects, the sacrament itself is more principal than is the preaching of it. As in Baptism, to incorporate the infant into the Church of Christ, which infant is not properly as yet faithful, though he be the seed of the faithful, and have (as Beza calleth it) the seed of faith, but not faith in him. And in the lords supper, to comfirme the faithful in the faith, that they have long already before conceived by the word, and yet perhaps also not by the word preached, as our Brethren understand the preaching of it. But, vnd●rstande it how they will: here preaching is in these respects, but accessary to the sacrament, & the sacrament principal to the preaching. And in this consideration, Beza even in the next words to that which I cited out of him last, proceedeth saying: Fourthly, Beza in confess. cap. 4. art. 35. whereas the simple preaching of the word doth strike one only of those our five senses: but the sacraments beside, do run into our eyes, and also stir up our other senses, and they are so administered with ceremonies of greater moment adhibited: it may easily be understood how much the use of them helpeth our faith, The commendation of the sacram. as those that bring us even as it were unto the thing present, as though now we felt Christ himself after a certain manner in our hands, and saw him with our eyes, and perceived him with the whole body. So far is it therefore that we should despise the sacraments, that contrariwise we should confess, the use and profits of them can not be enough commended and praised according to their dignity. And although S. Paul, as our Brethren here say, speak comparatively: Christ sent me not to baptise, but to preach, 1. Cor. 1.17. yet this comparison of Saint Paul was not in comparing the dignities of these offices, but only in comparison of his own especial vocation; and of all other places, is quite contrary to our Brethren, as we have partly seen already: but since our Brethren so solemnly avow it, let us once again hear calvin on that saying. Calminus in 1. Cor. 1.17. Notwithstanding (saith he) here are two things to be observed. Whereof the one is, that the Apostle doth not not here deny, but that he had the commandment of baptizing (for these pertaineth to all the Apostles, Go ye, baptise ye; and he had done rashly even in baptizing one, except he had been furnished with the commandment) but only to show what was the chiefest thing in his vocation. But the second is, that the dignity or fruit of the sacrament is not here abased, as some do think. For neither is the question here of the virtue of baptism, neither did Paul purpose in this comparison to withdraw any thing therefrom: but whereas it pertained to few to tech, but it was given to many to baptise: Moreover, whereas many could be taught all at once, but baptism could not be conferred but to every one of them in order: Paul that excelled in the faculty of teaching, followed the work that was more necessary unto him. He left that unto other, which they could perform more commodiously. What can be plainer spoken than this against our Breath. that they are deceived, which think Paul made here a comparison, between the dignity of preaching, & the dignity of the ministration of the sacraments? For Paul's comparison is but in comparing himself & his peculiar vocation with others. Howbeit he frames his comparison so, that he plainly showeth, both that some might minister the sacraments that were not preachers: & that the gift of preaching was given to few, in comparison of the multitude of those, that being no preachers, The separation of the sacr. and preaching. yet a lawful function was given to them to minister the sacraments. Which being granted: let the other go which way it shall, in the comparison of these offices, which is principal, and which is accessary. For the sacraments being principal in the foresaid consideration, & preaching being but accessary unto them: as preaching may be effectual without them, where they cannot be had: so they become not uneffectual, although that at the ministration of them, among those that by former preaching at other times, are already faithful; & to their children, though they as yet have not faith, and though there be no preaching at that action. And whereas in other respects again, the function of preaching is of such dignity, that the ministration of the sacraments is but accessory in comparison thereof: so the ministration of the sacraments may be a function common unto many, and therefore lawfully of them used, although they have not the gift of preaching, which is a more rare gift and given to fewer. And therefore, principal and accessory which of them soever be, in their several respects & considerations; and though also they be both of such affinity, that they may well often times meet, help, and confirm on an other: yet (being of so near affinity) the banes may lawfully be forbidden, if our Brethren shall so ask them, that like man and wife they may never but by the death of them be separate. But, as preaching may well be separated from the administration of the sacraments; How the administration of the sacr. & preaching may be joined and separated. so the administration of the sacraments may well now & then be separated also, both in time and place from the preaching of the word, without any derogation of the dignities, or dissolution of the affinity, in which these two offices, the preaching of the word and the administration of the sacraments, are linked and joined together, but not inseparably. Thus it was both in the two principal sacraments of the old law, circumcision and the paschal Lamb: and thus, as we see it amongst us now; so was it even in the purest time of the Gospel among the Apostles, as this very instant that our Brethren their selves here out of Paul allege, doth clearly testify, to wit, that these 2. offices, as they may excellently be joined together: so they may often time be well separated. But a question by the way, and so an end hereof. Are these two, preaching and ministration of the sacraments several offices? How our Breath own positions overthrow themselves. For else, how hang these words together? For although the office of preaching be more excellent, than of ministration of the sacraments, as S. Paul speaketh comparatively: if then they be different Ecclesiastical offices; and that so distinct, that Saint Paul speaketh comparatively of these two offices; and in that comparison, separateth the one from the other: then, although they be of never so near affinity, which soever be principal or which accessary: if this with all be true, that one office requireth one officer; & that, to put 2. offices to one officer were confusion; and every officer may fully discharge his own office, without the intermeddling with any other office: why may there not then be a minister of the sacraments, distinct and several from a preacher, and minister the sacraments to the faithful people, though he preach not being a several distinct office from preaching; as well as a preacher distinct from a minister of the sacraments, and preach the word to the faithful people, though he minister not the sacraments unto them? But I will not so straightly press our Brethren. These two offices may be well and better in one officer, even as may the doctor and the Pastor: and yet they may be separated well enough in some. So that hereby, with the residue aforesaid: I conclude, that this conclusion of our Brethren, is not a true, but a most untrue (be it spoken with due reverence) and a most dangerous conclusion. That where there is no preacher of the word; there ought to be no minister of the Sacraments. The argument of the 8. Book. THE 8. Book consisteth of the Pastor's duty in public prayers. First whether all public prayer ought only to be such, as is all conceived and uttered by the minister and not to follow any ordinary prescribed form: with a view of the jews public prayers before Christ's coming: The order of the Church in the Apostles times, and in the primitive age, with the times next succeeding, and of the orders of the reformed Churches. Whether the people might not join altogether their voices in some of the public prayers with the Pastors, to avoid confusion but only to close with him in their consent, by answering Amen: with another like view of the order in the old and new Testament, for the people's voices without confusion: and of the primitive and ancient Church's order therein. Whether any several prayers may now and then be used in public congregations with a like perusal thereof in the old and new Testament. Of the abuses that our Brethren complain upon, for long prescribed forms of public prayers, the ministers ill pronouncing, the peoples not attending, the unsensible reading, the ministers unfit place, screens, Rood-lofts, organ lofts, chauntrey chapels, high pews, opinion of well serving God. walking & talking in the Church, gathering money for the poor, private prayer and reading, neglect of preaching by reason of praying, the establishment of both, comparison of our public prayers to the Popish service, of the services giving place to a sermon, and whether public prayer may be made without a sermon preached thereat, with another view of the use throughout the scripture and in the primitive Church. Whether we contemn or thrust out preaching for praying or no. Whether morning and evening prayer may be song in the churches. Of the order in Cathedral & collegiate churches, and men's delight to come and hear the service there, being moved thereto by the Organs and music, and their departing at the sermon. Our brethren's comparison of our public prayers to the Mass, as a gentle beast that biteth not, & of the nature & effects of our publ. prayer. Our Brethr. prayer that all forms of prayer might be abolished to bring in preaching. The people's singing of Psal. all at once. The Pastor's duty in joining all ways these 3. preaching, ministering the sacraments & praying, the ancient custom of his giving the blessing at marriages. furthermore it appertaineth to the duty of the Pastor to make prayers, as Act. 16.16. not only private as all men are bound to do, Act. 16.16. The learned Dis. Pag. 63. & 64. but also publ. prayers in the name of the whole church, Act. 6.4. 1. Tim. 2.1. being the mouth thereof. Act. 6.4. 1. Tim. ●. ●. For whereas the spirit of God, commandeth all things to be done in decent & comely order, & forbiddeth all confusion & disorder: as it were great confusion and uncomeliness, for every man to make his several prayers in the public assemblies: so is it orderly for one to pronounce the prayer in the name of the rest, & the rest to pray with him in silence, & to answer Amen. 1 Cor. 14.16. It is also decent that he which is the shepherd, should go before the sheep in prayer, 1. Cor. 14.40. & the sheep follow him, in lifting up of their hearts in mutual consent. Moreover, for as much as preaching & administration of the sacraments, ought not to be used without public prayers; as it is the Pastor's office to preach & minister the sacraments: so is it his duty also to go before his flock in publ. prayers. But here we have to observe 2. things. The first that as it pertaineth to the Pastor to conceive publ. prayers: so it is the duty of the whole Church: in the name of the whole Church, to join in heart with the Pastor in the same prayers, that they knowing and understanding what he hath prayed, may at the end give their consent by answering Amen. 1. Cor. 14.16. ALthough these quotations of our Breath. Act. 16. v. 16. Act. 6 v. 4. 1. Tim. 2. v. 1. do not prove that this especially appertaineth to the duty of the Pastor, Bridges. to make the public prayers in the name of the whole Church: yet we gladly confess it. And many other more proper places, & examples prove it, & our Pastors use it. So that herein we agree: save for 3. great and material points here touched together: For the only Pastors conceiving of all the prayers, and so rejecting all prescribed forms: For prohibiting the people to join all their voices together in any prayers, except only in answering Amen: And for their so utter forbidding of all several prayers in public assemblies. All which points require a further declaration. And first for these words, of making prayers, being undrstoode (as we commonly use the phrase) only for praying, The jews public prayers. or, pouring forth our prayers unto God: as we allow that sense, so we grant, it is the Pastor's duty to make prayers, not only private, as all men are bound to do: but also to make the public prayers, & that in the name of the whole Church, he being in some respects, the mouth thereof. But, if by making prayers, they understand him to be such a maker of them, that he may not pronounce any prayers, which by any other are already made to his hand, and he by public authority prescribed, to make those public prayers, that is, publicly to pronounce or say them, in the name of the whole Church: but only such prayers, as he his own self, either hath before hand made and conned by roate, or such as without any premeditation or committing to memory, he doth in his head conceive, even as he uttereth them with his mouth, and so at that instant make them: this we utterly deny. And, not to suspect here without good cause, that our Breath. understand this term, of making public prayers in this sense: not only their words here following do plainly expound their meaning: when they say, It appertaineth to the Pastor to conceive public prayers: and it is a common phrase among our Brethren, that such and such a one is an excellent conceaver, meaning that he can make godly prayers: but also, that they can not away with formal reading (as in contempt they call it) and a prescribed form of prayer. A prescribed form of prayers & divine service among the jews before Christ's coming. But, to confute this, and to prove that a prescribed form of the divine service, for the public prayers, besides the reading of the scriptures in appointed courses and orders, is a thing lawful and profitable: First, the jews had the same before, and in, and after Christ's time, not only as pertaining to the ceremonial, but to the moral law, for the obedience of the first table, pertaining to the worship of God. Numb. 6.22. etc. Numb. 6.22. etc. The Lord spoke to Moses saying, speak unto Aaron and to his sons saying, thus shall ye bless the children of Israel, and say unto them, the Lord bless thee, and keep thee, the Lord make his face to shine upon thee, and be merciful unto thee, the Lord lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace, etc. And although they had many of their public prayers, being mixed with hymns & thanksgivings, not only said but song also: yet were they such, not only as their selves made or conceived (were they never so learned men): but such as either Moses, or Samuel, or David, or Esdras, or some other Prophet, especially appointed thereunto by God, had drawn out, and prescribed unto them. As may appear 1. Chron. 9 where after he had showed, ver. 22. etc. how David and Samuel the fear had established the porters and other officers, ver. 33. he saith: And these are the singers, 1. Chron. 9.33. the chief fathers in the Levites, which dwelled in the chambers, and had none other charge. 1. Chron. 16.4. & 7. For they had to do in that business day and night. And speaking of David, (who made the most pa●t of the Psalms) in the 16. Chapter, ver. 4. And he appointed certain of the Levites to minister before the Ark of the Lord, and rehearse, and thank, and praise the Lord God of Israel. And vers 7. Then at that time David did appoint, at the beginning, to give thanks to the Lord▪ By the hand of Asaph and his brethren. Whereon saith the Geneva note, The Geneva note. David gave them this psalm to praise the Lord signifying that in all our enterprises, the name of God ought to be praised and called upon. psalm. 105. 1. Chr. 21.2 Thus do our brethren apply these doings of David unto our estate. And in the 25 chapter, for 2. He mentioneth those that were under the hand of Asaph, which sang prophecies by the commission of the king. Thus did Asaph then set forth the public prayers, indited, & prescribed by David. Although he as divers think, conceived & made many psalms and Prayers, and prescribed, then to others. Likewise 2. chron. 29. verse. 27. And Ezekiah commanded to offer the burnt offering upon the Altar, and when the burnt offering began, the song of the Lord began, with the trumpets, and the instruments of David king of Israel and all the congregation worshipped singing a song, etc. All which orders and forms of public prayer at the Divine service, though the jews afterward corrupted, Esdras after the captivity recollected, & set again in order. Which though they were eftsoons corrupted and intermingled, especially with the Pharisees traditions: yet till, and in the time of Christ, they had at the divine service, the ordinary courses of reading the Law and Prophets, as appeareth by S. Luke. 4. vers. 16.17. etc. Where the book of the Prophet Esay was delivered to Christ. And by that saying in the person of Abraham to the rich glutton they have Moses and the prophets, let them hear them. Luke. 16.29. Which Paul testifieth in his sermon to the Antiochians. Acts. 13.27. For the inhabitants of jerusalem and their rulers because they knew him not, nor yet the words of the prophets which are read every saboth day. etc. And that this was the ancient order, james the bishop of jerusalem, in the determination of that famous assembly holden by the Apostles, Act. 15. ver. 20. saith: For Moses of old time hath in every city, them that preach him, sith that he is read in the synagogues every sabbath day. And here also is the public reading called a preaching. With which exercises, they especially adjoined the reading also of the Psalms, The jews order in the Apostles time. and other solemn public prayers of the Scripture. For which principal cause, Christ saith of the Temple, Math. 21.13. It is written, mine house shall be called the house of prayer. etc. And Act. 3. Peter and john went up together into the Temple at the ninth hour of prayer. Which orders were of Christ so little improved, that not only as Luke declareth cap. 11.1. that one of the Disciples said unto him: Master teach us to pray, as john also taught his disciples: desiring that they might have some prescribed form of prayer set down unto them: The public prayers in the Apostles times. but that also john baptist had taught some form to his Disciples. Which request, Christ did so little mislike that he himself also taught his Disciples among other precepts, a prescribed form of prayer, which the Evangelists wrote, and all Christians do use, as the lords prescription. Which is a strong warrant unto us, that so long as all forms of prayers are according to that platform of prayer: they may most safely be prescribed. For it serveth not only for private, but for public prayer. Now, although besides this only form of prayer prescribed by Christ, The Christians order in the Apostles time. we find no form set out, that the apostles, or the primitive church immediately after them, did use, or prescribe to be used: because they having that full measure of the spirit of God, namely the Apostles, Evangelists, Prophets, Bishops, Pastors and Elders, yea the most of all the faithful people in these days: so that they might well make & conceive their public prayers before the Congregation, even as the spirit of God, suggested in their heart, & gave them utterance in their mouths: yet because, that in the public assemblies, the Apostles prescribed the written scriptures to be read as Col. 4. ver. 16. Col. 4.16: And w●en this epistle is read of you, cause that it be read in the church of the Laodiceans also, & that ye likewise read the Epistle writ●en from Laodicea: and as they used that, so (no doubt) did they use to read in their public assemblies the residue of the Scripture: both of the old and new testament, as in the chap before, ver. 16. Paul charged them: Let the word of Christ dwell in you plenteously in all wisdom: teaching and admonishing one another in Psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the lord: and likewise, Eph. 5.19. Ephes. 5.19. Speaking unto your selves in psalms, & hymns & spiritual songs, singing & making melody to the lord in your hearts: sith therefore they used to speak & to sing these prayers & praises of God in their public (not only banquets, as some expound it) but also assemblies of their divine service: as appeareth plain by S. Paul's teaching the Corinthians the use of these psalms & prayers, 1. Cor. 14.26. 1. Cor. 14.26. What is to be done then brethren, when ye come together, according as every one of you hath a Psalm, or hath doctrine, or hath a tongue, or hath revelation, or hath interpretation, let all things be done unto edifying: It followeth hereupon, that howsoever the Corinthians abused this order of their public prayers and psalms, every man to sing or say his own psalm or prayer in strange languages, breeding confusion and no edifying: yet that in the godly use thereof, they used some prescribed form, as of the Scriptures which they red or interprepated, so of the psalms, hymns, or prayers that they said or sung, besides the Lord's prayer, and were not the makers & conceivers of all the public prayers that they uttered. Plinius secundus having examined certain of the revolted Christians, that were brought before him, what the manner of the Christians was in their assemblies, because they were accused of high crimes, The primitive Church. and such numbers murdered: writeth to the emperor trajan, that their manner was this, that on a day appointed, they used to come together before the day light, Carmenque Christo quasi deo dicere secum invicem, and to say among themselves a verse or a prescript prayer unto Christ as unto God, and to bind themselves with a sacrament, (or oath) not unto any mischievous deed, but that they should neither commit theft, nor robbery, nor adultery, that they should not break their faith, that being called upon, they should not deny the pledge committed unto them: which things being done it was their manner to departed. Whereby it plainly appeareth, The order of the divine service in the primitive Church that both their custom was, not always to have a sermon at the receiving of the sacrament, which it should seem Pliny aimeth at: & yet that in their public prayers, they used some ordinary prescribed form among them. Tertullian in the end of his book De velandis virginib, hath these words: How great chastisement shall those virgins deserve, which among the Psalms, or in any mention of God, continue uncovered? do they not worthily, yea, & that in the prayer, lay gently a welt, a hair or any thread upon their brain, & imagine they are covered? By which saying, (though in mocking of those women) again it appeareth, that not only the men, but women, and maidens, & all, did say or sing psalms, & were present at some form & order of public prayers. Which, though he set not down the form, yet the chief points he reckoneth up, in his apology against the Gentiles, ca 39 where defending the assemblies of the Christians, against the slanders of the heathen, he saith: I will now myself set forth the businesses of the Christian faction, that as I have refuted the ill things, (to wit, the things that the heathen slandered them withal,) I may show the good things. We are a body of the conscience of religion, and of the truth of discipline, and of the covenant of hope. We come together into an assembly or congregation, that praying unto God, * V● ad Deu● quasi fact● praecationi●. amb●sanu● or●anie●. we might by prayers make suit for deeds (or good works). This violence is acceptable to God. We pray also for the Emperors, for their Ministers, and powers, for the state of the World, for the quiet of the affairs, for the prolonging of their end. We are gathered together to the commemoration (or rehearsing) of the divine scriptures, If that the quality of the present ●imes do enforce as either to give forewarning, or to reacknowledge them. Verily with holy voices (or sayings) we feed our faith, we erect our hope, we fix our trust. Notwithstanding we thicken (or close fast) with inculcations (or often repeating) the Discipline of our teachers. There, also, are exhortations, chastisements, and the divine censure, she meaneth Excommunication. And before, cap. 30. Cap. 30. The Christians looking thither, (to wit, up to God in heaven) with their hands cast abroad, because they are unhurtful: with their head bare, because we blush not▪ to conclude, without an admonisher, because we pray from the heart: we are all always praying, for all the Emperors that they may have a long life, a safe Empire, a sound house, strong armies, a faithful senate, a godly people, a quiet world, and what soever are the desires of man▪ and of Caesar. etc. Whereby we may well perceive, that they had both in behaviour, and in matter, some certain usual forms of public prayers. Especially by that he saith, justin mar●. in oratione ad Antoninum pium▪ they needed no admonitor of them. Which seemeth to cut of this, that all their prayers depended on the pastors conceiving. Which also we may well gather, of that we heard before out of justine, how they brought him that was baptised unto the Brethren, where the assemblies were. That we might pray (say they) as well for ourselves, as for those that are newly illumined, whereby we might be found through true Doctrine and good works, worthy observers and keepers of the commandments, that we may obtain eternal salvation. Such were the ordinary forms of public prayers in the most ancient Churches. Bullinger upon 1, Tim. 2.1. Concerning the ancient form of public prayer writeth on this wise. Bul. 1. Tim. 2 And least in this matter I should dissemble any thing, the Ecclesiastical assemblies before a 1000 years ago, were on this manner. The people flocked together into the holy house to the intent to worship God. But while they were entering into the Church, certain psalms in some Churches were sung of those that were already come: in other, The ancient form of public prayers before a 1000 〈◊〉 agone. they were only recited until the whole assembly was fully come together. And this beginning of the Divine service they called the Introit of entering. Now, when the Church wa● come together, all of them cried with one consent K●riele-eison, Lord have mercy. To the which was added of some, the hymn which is called the Angels, whose beginning, Glory be to God on high. This hymn pertaineth to gratulation or to deprecation. This being ended, some minister of the Church recited the Collect, the same was a kind of prayer, wherein the desires of the whole Church, and their necessities collected together, were recited unto God. Then was there red beforehand of the more learned Deacons, some place either of the prophetical books, or of the apostolical Epistles, chosen out according to the consideration of the time, of the place, or of the people. This being finished, the Bishop assembled into a higher place by steps, to preach the Gospel of Christ. The people in the mean while, with a song conceived, called upon the grace of the holy ghost, which (of those steps) begun to be called the gradual. But here the Bishop did read the Gospel before with great authority, and then interpreted the same: at the end of the holy sermon, he recited the Creed that they called the Apostles, or else the Nicene, or that which secondly was made. The age succeeding the primitive Church. Moreover he invited the whole Church unto mercy, that every man according to their abilities, should put somewhat into the poore-mens' box. That portion of the holy (sermon) they called the offertory. And Pontius Paulinus teacheth, that a table was wont to beset in the Church, for the refection of the poor, which also they called the lords Table, and placed of the Lord, In this manner (I say) with these ceremonies and rites, did the ancient exercise their prayers and sound doctrine. How beit, this custom was not by all points common to all. For some began the holy assembly not with the psalms but with the crying together, Kyrie●leison. They that so did, had not in use either the Angels hymn, or the collects, or the Graduels' verse. To this again other sung the hallelujah of the hebrews: as in another place Jerome showeth. Among some, the bishop himself without all these things, both beginneth with the sacred sermon, and public prayers added thereunto, and dismisseth the assembly. But no Church was compelled to swear into the rites and ordinances of another, so be, that the prayers, and the holy sermons were entire, and exercised holily and always the best being contented with most few, employed the chiefest parts to doctrine, and to prayers. Moreover in the mystical supper, The manner of their ministering the lords supper. this rite was observed well near of all Churches. The priest came forth into the assembly. The mystical table stood in the sight of the people, furnished with bread and Wine. He standing at this table, blessed the people saying, The lord be with you, & the people answered, and with thy spirit: Then he stirring up the people unto the most high matters and preparing the minds of every one of them cried, Lift up your hearts: the people answered, we have them (lifted up) unto the Lord. For, Cyprian in his sermon of the Lords prayer, saith: Therefore the priest also making a preface before the prayer, prepareth the minds of the brethren, saying: Lift up your hearts, while the people answereth, We have ●hem (lift up) unto the Lord. That they might be admonished, how they ought to think on nothing, but on the Lord, Thus saith Cyprian. Cyprian. After this the priest moving them to thanksgiving, saith, Let us give thanks unto the Lord our God. The people answered, it is meet & right (we should so do,) here said the priest, It is very meet and just, right and healthful, that we should at all times, & every where, give thanks unto thee O L. the Lord, the holy father almighty eternal God through jesus Christ our Lord For almost all these things doth Aug. also in his book De bono Perseverantiae, mention, cap. 13, saying: That therefore which is said in the sacraments of the faithful, that we should have our hearts lift up to the Lord: Augustine. it is the gift of the Lord. Of which gift they are of the Priest admonished, to give thanks to our God, unto whom after this speech, this is said. And they answer, It is meet and just, etc. But after these words the priest said, who the day before he suffered took the bread, gave thanks, broke it, and gave it to his Disciples, saying, take, eat, this is my body which is given for you. and the residue which are read in the Gospel. These things with great religion being accomplished, the Lords prayer was said. Which also Jerome testifieth in his 3. book against the Pelagians. But also it is vulgarly received, Jerome. that the apostles did consecrated (i celebrate the mystical supper) at the prayers only of the L. prayer, after the L. prayer the people received the holy mysteries, & by the communion of the sacraments of the body and blood of the Lord, they grew together into one mystical body, whereof Christ is the head. To conclude, all these things being orderly accomplished after this manner, How near our form cometh to this ancient form. the assembly was dismissed. Thus writeth Bullinger, not to confirm, but to confute the Popish Mass thereby. And is not here a plain prescribed form of the divine service, both for the manner of their public prayers, and of the administration of the holy communion: yea, almost even the very self same form of order & words, that our book prescribeth unto us? and although some Churches differed, yet, every Church kept always some one certain form or other, which every Minister might not alter, at his pleasure. The reformed Churches form & order. But because after these times, corruptions began to alter these ancient and holy prescribed forms, of public prayer and of the sacraments: Let us now come even to our days. What Church reform is there now, where they have not some form of public prayers prescribed & ordinary among them? and yet if there were nothing else, but our brethren's own book set out, called, the book of the form of common prayers, administration of the sacraments, etc., agreeable to God's word, and the use of the reformed Churches: It is enough sufficiently to prove this point, that there ought to be a prescribed & ordinary form of divine service, and public prayers, & not that the pastor should be the only maker and conceiver of the public prayers, and the people only to approve them and say Amen, to such prayers, as the pastor at that instant maketh or conceiveth. Which conceptions of our brethren, if they were suffered: great inconvenience might grow thereon. For either the people, which perhaps understood not his terms and phrases, should rather stand marking and weighing his words (if they did so much as mark them: The inconveniences of the pastors only conceiving of public prayers. ) and hover in suspense of any as●ent, till they understood the full drift of them: than have themselves any devotion, all the mean time unto God, so much as in hart & silence to join with him, till it come to the parts of closing up their Amen, unto that, wherein their hearts were not in full assent before joined unto him. Which when they have marked attentively & understood, yea, & finally assented (with their Amen never so frankly) may rather in the end be called an a●sent unto him, than any public or private prayer unto God with him. So that, that which they say here of public prayer, as it pertaineth to the pastor to conceive public prayers: The people's speeches. so it is the duty of the whole church in the name of the whole church, to join in heart with the pastor in the same prayers, that they knowing and understanding what he hath prayed may in the end give their consent by answering, Amen: This (I say) bangeth not together, for any prayer wherein they join with him, for their assent comes not jointly with his prayer, but in the end, when all is done, than they join with him, not in praying, but in liking or consenting to his prayer: and so, it is not their prayer, nor properly public prayer. Besides also the danger even in this assenting, and saying may times Amen, they can scarce on a sudden tell to what. And perhaps, now and then (God wots) to frivolous petitions. If not in some places under holy terms, glorious speeches, strange phrases, and long circumstances, when any pastor were not in all points sound, (as now and then it happeneth) they might so colour perilous opinions: that the people not perceiving it, but thinking all is well, might say Amen to that, which if they knew, they would openly protest that they detest it. And therefore to avoid all those inconveniences they have a public form of public prayers, by those that are sound and godly persons, drawn forth and collected, perused, approved, and ratified, by the supreme authority of the Prince, and of all the states of the realm and Church of England: prescribed to all the ministers to use, for the public order of the divine service: Which prayers are so plain, so short, so pithy▪ so sound and effectual: that the people not only most easily may understand them: but in continuance, be so well acquainted with them, that they may assure themselves, they be good prayers, and such as if they shall hearty power forth to God, they may safely reckon, that they are acceptable to him, as tending to his glory, and to their benefit: And so indeed he may go before them and with them too, in such safe and orderly sort that when the pastor pronounceth these known, allowed and ordinary public prayers in the name of the rest, and of the whole Church: the rest and the whole Church, may safely both in silence pray with him, and openly also; besides their answering Amen, in the end unto his prayers. But this is the second thing that here they would have forbidden, to wit, that the people should not join with the pastor in the saying or pronouncing of any public prayer, but only to pray with him in silence, & in the end to answer Amen, For, say they, as it were a great confusion & uncomeliness for every man to make his several prayers in the public assemblies: so is it orderly, for one to pronounce the prayer, in the name of the rest, & the rest to pray with him in silence and to answer Amen. That this is well done, we do not deny: no more than we do, that a learned pastor, may now and then also make and conceive some public prayers. But, without prejudice or derogation to the ordinary usage of them, that are all ready made to his hands, and conceived by others, and prescribed by order unto him: but that he only should so say them all alone: this is too precise a prescription, and too unnecessary a fear of confusion & disorder. The people may join their voices with the Minister in some public prayers and are not tied only to silence save in saying Amen. For, as it is appointed with us, they may say many things altogether, with or after the Pastor orderly well enough, without any confusion or disturbance. And where ●o our brethren find any perpetual rule, prohibiting the poople to join their voices altogether, so that disorder and confusion be avoided? We find indeed the like order that our brethren here prescribe unto us, appointed to the Levites. Deut. 27.14. etc. The Levites ●hal stand and say unto all the men of Israel, with a loud voice Cursed be the man that shall make any carved or molten Image, etc. & so proceedeth with 12. solemn curses, and at the end of every curse is added this precept, And all the People shall say, AMEN. But was this rule so precise, that the congregation might never speak more or other words altogether at once, for fear of confusion and disorder? Did not the people speak orderly enough, Exod. 19.7. Exod. 19.7. When Moses called for the Elders of them, and proposed unto them all these things which the Lord commanded him. And the people answered altogether, and said: all that the Lord hath commanded, we will do. And in the next Chapter, ver. 18. etc. And all the people saw the thunders, and the lightnings, and the sound of the trumpet, and the mountains smoking: And when the people saw it, they fled and stood a far of: and said unto Mos●s, Talk thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God talk with us, Exod. 20.18. etc. least we die: Which words Moses in Deuteronomy repeateth more fully, saying: Deut. 5.23, etc. Deut. 5.23. etc. When ye heard the voice out of the midst of the darkness (for the mountain did burn with fire) them ye came to me all the chief of your tribes and your elders, and ye said, behold the Lord our God hath showed us his glory and his greatness, and we have heard his voice out of the midst of the fire, we have seen this day that God doth talk with man, and he liveth. Now therefore why should we die? For this great fire will consume us, if we hear the voice of our Lord God any more, we shall die. For what flesh was there ever, that heard the voice of the living God, speaking out of the midst of the fire, as we have, & lived? Go thou near, and here all that the Lord God saith, and declare thou unto us, all that the Lord God saith unto thee, and we will hear it and do it. Here was a large speech of all these Elders of the people And could they speak all this without disorder or confusion? What said he to this? Then the Lord (saith Moses) heard the voice of your words, when ye spoke unto me, and the Lord said unto me, I have heard the voice of the words of this people, which they have spoken unto thee. They have well said, all that they have spoken. He did not upbraid them with confusion. Likewise, when josuah gave his charge unto all those Israelites, that possessed the other side of jordan, josh. 1.16▪ 17: and 18. They answered josuah, saying: All that thou haste commanded us we will do, The people's prayer and whether soever thou sendest us we will go. As we obeyed Moses in all things, so shall we obey thee, only, thy Lord thy God be with thee, as he was with Moses: whosoever shall rebel against thy commandment, and will not obey thy words in all that thou commandest him, let him be put to death. Only, be strong and of good courage. Was here any disorder and confusion in these the people's speeches? When josuah before his death, had made his exhortation, and given his charge unto all the tribes of Israel assembled before him, josuah 24. verse 16. etc. The people answered and said, God forbidden that we should forsake the Lord to serve other Gods, for the Lord our God he brought us and our Fathers, out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage, and he did those great miracles in our sight, and preserved us all the way that we went, and among all the people through whom we came, and the Lord did cast out before us all the people, even the Ammorites: which dwelled in the land, therefore will we also serve the lord, for he is our God. etc. Was this also a disordered and confused noise and yet the speech of all the people? For, we read not here of any speaker in their names, nor any necessity driveth, so to imagine. If it be replied, these were not public prayers. What of that? were they not the public speeches of the Congregation? and could these public speeches of all or many, without confusion be orderly uttered, The public prayers, psalms and responses may be said of all the people together. which perhaps were not before premeditated: and can not much better without any disorder or confusion, some such public prayers, Psalms, or short responses, as they are often acquainted withal, or, as their books lead them, if they can read, or, as their Pastor saith before them in brief sentences? But, for public prayers too: how often is it mentioned in the book of the judges, that the children of Israel, when they were oppressed of their enemies, They cried unto the lord? jud. 3. ver. 9 & 15. jud. 4 verse 3. jud. 6. verse. 6. & 7. Were these cries, no prayers? or were these prayers, not as well public as private? Or did God refuse to hear them, as a confused noise? or rather, did he not like these cries as a sweet harmony, and sent them helpers? But, that their cries were not lamentations only, but confession of their sins and prayers it appeareth. jud. 10. verse 10. Then the children of Israel cried unto the lord, saying: we hau● sinned against thee, even because we have forsaken our own God, and have served Baalim. And when God laid before them, how often he had delivered them, & bade them, Go & try unto the God; which ye have chosen, let them save you in the time of your tribulation. ver. 14. & 15. The Children of Israel said unto the lord, we have sinned, do thou unto us whatsoever please thee: only, we pray thee to deliver us this day. Which public prayers of them▪ with the deeds following in putting away their Idols, were such orderly and effectual prayers, that God raised them up another helper. Likewise, jud. ●1. 2. When they had almost destroyed the tribe of Benjamin for their wickedness The people came unto the house of God, & abode there till even, before God, & lifting up their voices & wept with great lamentation, & said, O Lord God of Israel why is this come to pass in Israel, that this day one tribe of Israel should want. Again, when Samuel, had showed the people their sin in ask to have a king, 1. Sam. 12.19. 1. Sam, 12. And the Lord had sent thunder according to samuel's saying, ver. 19 All the people said unto Samuel, pray for thy servants unto the L. t●y God, that we die not, for we have sinned in ask us a king, besides all our other sins. And how often doth David in his Psalms, stir up all the people, not only to sing, but also to confess their sins, & to call upon & to praise his name, and to declare his works in the Congregation, and in these actions to join all their voices together? and would he not exhort them, if it were a disorder and confusion? When Solomon made his prayer in the temple which he had new builded, Solomon's prayer. & besought God to hear the prayers that should be made in the same, among other things he saith. 1. kin. 8.37. etc. When there shallbe famine in the land, when there shall be pestilence, when there shall be blasting mild●we, grasshopper, 1. King. ●. 37. or Caterpillar, when their enemies shall besiege them in the Cities of the land, or any plague, or any sickness: then, what prayer and supplication soever shall be made of any man, or of all thy people Israel, when every one shall know the plague of his own heart, and stretch forth his hands in this house: hear thou him in Heaven. etc. Wherein he speaketh not only of the private prayer of any man, but of the public prayer made by all the people. Hear thou then in heaven their prayer and their supplication, and judge their cause. If they sin against thee, for there is no man that sinneth not) and thou be angry with them, and deliver them unto the enemies, so that they carry them away prisoners, into the l●nde of the enemies either far or near, yet if they turn again which their heart in the land to the which they be carried away Captives and return and pray unto thee, in the land of them that carried them away Captives, saying, We have sinned, we have transgressed, and have done wickedly. etc. Then hear thou their prayers, and their supplication in Heaven thy dwelling place, and judge their cause, and be merciful unto the people that have sinned against thee, etc. For they be thy people and thine inheritance, which thou broughtest out of Egypt, from the midst of the iron furnace. Let thine eyes be open unto the prayer of thy servant, and unto the Prayer of thy people Israel, to hearken unto them in all that they call for unto thee. etc. So that he speaketh not here of any one man, praying in the name of the people: but both of every one whosoever, and jointly of all the people's prayers unto God. Which if they had not used so to pray, or he had thought GOD would have accounted those public prayers that all the people jointly withal their voices made, a disordered and confused noise: The people's voices in public prayer. he would never have made this solemn prayer for them. What confusion and disorder of voices was this, at the prayer of Elias. 1. Reg. 18. verse 39 All the people when they saw the fire to fall from heaven, and consume the burnt offering, fell on their faces and said, 1. Kin. 18.39. the Lord is God, the Lord is God. It may be thought, that at the re-edifying of the Temple, in this number of voices, there was then some confusion of them. For when as in the first of Esdras, the third chap. verse 1. it is said, that, the people assembles themselves as one man unto jerusalem, 1. Esdras. 31. etc. It followeth verse 10. etc. And when the builders laid the foundation of the Temple of the Lord, they appointed the priests in their apparel with Trumpets, and the levites the sons of Asaph with Cymbals, to praise the lord after the ordina●●e of David king of Israel. Thus they sang when they gave praise and when they gave 〈◊〉 unto the lord. For he is good, for his mercy endureth ever towards Israel. Where withal we see, the former point, of the prescribed form of Prayers. And all the people shouted with a great shout, when they praised the Lord, because the foundation of the house of the lord was laid. And many also of the Priests and Levites, and the chief of the Fathers & ancient m●̄, which had seen the first house, when the foundation of this house was laid before their eyes, wept with loud voice. And many sho●ted loud, for joy: so that the people could not discern the sound of the shout for joy, from the noise of the weeping of the people. F●r the people s●owted ●ith a loud cry, and the noise was heard far off. Here indeed was some confusion of voices, because some of them shouted, and some wept, and some of them praised to GOD, and some sang his praises, and some blewe the Trumpets: and yet GOD accepted this confusion, as a most sweet conceit and harmony. In the tenth Chapter, Es●ras. 10.1. etc. after the Prayer of Esdras in the name of himself, and of all th● people, verse 1. Whiles Esdras prayed thus, and confessed himself weeping, an● falling down before the House of GOD: there assembled unto him of Israel, a very ●reat congregation of Men and Women, and children, for the people wept with a great lamentation. Then Shecaniah the son of jehiel, one of the sons of Elam, answered and said to Esdras: we have trespassed against God. etc. Here one speaketh in the name of all the people: but in the next assembly, it followeth after, When Esdras had exhorted the people: all the Congregation answered (Verse 12.) and said with a loud voice: So will we do according so thy Words unto us, but thee People are many, Vers● 12. & ● and it is rainy weather, and we are not able to stand without, neither it is the work of one day or two, for we are many that have greatly offended in this thing. Marry voices joined in the new Testament Let our rulers therefore. etc. And in the 8. Chapter of Nehemias', he saith, verse 1. And all the people assembled themselves together, in the street that was before the Water gate, and they spoke unto Esdras the scribe, that he should bring the book of the l●we of Moses, which the Lord had commanded to Israel. Nehemiah. 8.1. etc. And Esdras the priest brought the law before the congregation ●●th of men and Women, and of all that could hear and understand it, in the first day of the seventh month. And he red therein in the street that was before the water-gate, from the morning until the Midday, before men and women and them that understood it, and the cares of all the people hearkened unto the book of the law. And Esdras the scribe stood upon a pulpit of wood, which he had made for the preaching. Here again is the plain reading of the Scripture, so that the people may understand it, called Preaching. And Esdras opened the book before all the people, for he was above all the people, and when he opened it, all the people stood up, and Esdras praised the Lord the great God. And all the people answered, Amen, Amen, with lifting up their hands, and they bowed themselves, and worshipped the Lord with th●ir faces toward the ground. And here is even that our bre. speak of, where the minister praiseth God (which is a part of prayer) and the people hearken and answer, Amen. But yet immediately it followeth, that this reading was not done all by one, but a great many Levites are reckoned up, which caused the people to understand the Law, and they read in the book of the Law of God, distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading. And also the notable prayer, that followeth in the next Chapter, was pronounced upon stairs not by one, but by eight or nine of the Levites pronouncing the same before the people. Thus we see at large in all these ages, the manner of the Church of God in their congregations and public Prayers, both for the Levites parts, and for the peoples, how they joined their voices together, not only in saying Amen: but in their petitions, Confessions, and thanksgivinges. And this was counted no disorder nor confusion, but used of all Godly men, and always acceptable unto God. And so, as we may further perceive by the Apocrypha, and other histories of their public prayers, thus practised and continued till Christ's coming: Neither was this done so much in respect of the ceremonial, as of the moral Law of God among them. But to confirm all this, with the practice approved of Christ in the New testament: The voices of many without confusion, in the new Testament. Luke. 2.13. read we not, Luke 2. verse. 13. Even presently after the birth of our Saviour Christ, that when one ●ngel of the Lord had declared unto the shepherds, the joyful tidings of his birth: And strait ways saith Luke) There was with the Angel a multitude of heavenly soldiers, praising GOD, and saying: Glory be to GOD on high, and in earth peace, and towards men good will: and was here also confusion and disorder, in the multitude of the voices of the Angels that said these things. And likewise, when jesus a little before his death, came riding to jerusalem, Mat. 21. ver. 9 etc., The people that went before, Math. ●1. 9. and they also that followed, cried, saying; Hosana, the son of David, blessed be he that cometh in the name of the Lord. Hosanna, thou which art in the highest. And when he was come to jerusalem all the City was moved, saying who is this? and the people said, this is jesus the Prophet of Nazareth in Galily. True it is, that there were some, that thought this a disorder and confused noise. For it followeth, vers. 15, etc. Verse. 1●. But when the chief priests and scribes saw the marvels that he did, and the children crying in the Temple, and saying, Hosanna, the son of David, they disdained and said to him, hearest thou what these say? and jesus said unto them, yea, did ye never read, by the mouth of babes and sucklings, thou haste made perfect thy praise? Doth Christ here forbidden them to cry out these public prayers, as a confusion and disorder? And what was the manner of the Apostles prayers, concerning this point? Act. 1.14. Luke saith: They all continued with one accord, in prayer and supplication, with the Women, and Marie the mother of jesus, Act. 1.14. and with his brethren. Indeed here is not mentioned, that all their voices were joined together, but one accord: which rather signifieth the consent of their hearts, than the consent of their voices. But very well doth calvin note hereon, saying: So far as respecteth the concord of their minds, it is opposed to the dispersing of them, calvinus in Act. 1. which the fear had brought. Howbeit withal, generally we may gather hereupon, how necessary it is in praying. Which Christ commandeth, every one to pray for the whole body and in common, as though it were in the person of all: Our father, Give us. etc. Mat. 6.9. Whence cometh this unity of the tongs but of one spirit? Wherefore Paul Rom. 15.6. When he would deliver to the jews & Gentiles, a rule of praying well, removeth far off all dissembling. That we might glorify God (saith he) with one mouth. And verily that God may of us be called upon a Father, it behoveth us to be brethren, & to consent brethen-like. But to show this more plain, Luke declareth Act. 4.23, & 24. How that after Peter & john, Ac●. 12.5. assoon as they were let go, came to their fellows, & showed all that the high priests & elders had said unto them, when they heard it, they lift up their voices to God with one accord, & said, O Lord, etc. And though their prayers be not also described, Act. 12. 5. When Peter was kept in prison: yet in that he saith: But earnest prayer was made of the Church to God for him: we may easily conjecture, that it was not made only with their assent, but with all their voices in their so earnest prayer for him. Chrysost. time. And although the visions in the Revelation that Saint john saw and heard, be referred to further mysteries: yet the analogy that is proportionable between the signs of things, and the things themselves, manifestly proveth, that the multitude of voices joined together in public prayers, was not then, either of God or man accounted, a disorder or confusion in the Church. Apocal. 4. verse 8. etc. Apocal. 4.8. etc. And he four Beasts had ech● one of them six wings about him, and they were full of eyes within, and they ceased not day nor night, saying: Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God almighty, which was and which is, and which is to come. And when those beasts gave glory, and honour, and thanks to him that sat on the throne, and worshipped him that liveth for ever & ever, the 24. elders fell down b●fore him that sat on the throne, & worshipped him that liveth for evermore, & cast their crowns before the throne, saying: thou art worthy O lord, to receive glory and honour, and power, for thou haste created all things, and for thy wills sake, they are and have been created. And in the next Chapter, verse 8. The four and twenty Elders fell down before the lamb, having every one haps and golden Viols full of Odours, which are the prayers of Saints, and sung a new song, saying: Thou art worthy, etc. And also verse 11. Then I beheld, and I heard the voice of many Angels round about the Throne, and about the Beasts and the elders, and there were thousand thousands, saying with aloud voice: Worthy is the lamb that was killed to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, & strength, and honour, and glory, and praise: and all the creatures which are in Heaven, and under the earth, and in the Sea, and all that are in them, heard I, saying praise ●nd honour, and glory, and power, be unto him, that sitteth upon the Throne, a●d unto the lamb for evermore. And the four Beasts said Amen. etc. The Revelation hath many more of these visions. All which, though they have a mystical understanding, yet if those mysteries had been figured by things disordered and confused, it had both been a discredit to the intendment of them, neither could Saint john have well perceived and understood them. But that this was the practice of the primitive and ancient Church succeeding, Iusti●●● in ●ras. ad An●●ninu● poino. it may appear by justine, in the foresaid Apology. But how we have dedicated ourselves to God (saith he) being renewed by Christ, we will now declare, lest we might seem to dissemble any thing maliciously: So many as being persuaded do believe these things to be true that we do teach, and do promise to live after the same manner: before all things they learn with prayers and fastings, to ask of God forgiveness of their forepassed sins, we joining together with them the prayers, and the fastings. So that all these that were converted from idolatry, and were to be baptised, with the Ministers that did baptise them, joined, as their fastings, so their prayers altogether, and then within a little after, followeth that which we have already cited of their public prayers, when they are brought to the assembly of the faithful, to join also with them in the Communion. After which public prayers, when they had saluted one another with a mutual kiss, and that the chiefest of the brethren, was (with his prayers and thanksgiving) consecrating to God the mysteries of the lords supper: after the prayers (saith he) and the Eucharist (or thanksgiving) all the company singet● Amen. Here is again the chief Elders prayers & thanksgiving by himself, and all the companies Amen. But as he declareth afterward, before these prayers and thanksgivings, that this chief person maketh alone, which is the consecration of the bread and Wine, to the which the people singeth, ●men: When the Exhortation to prepare themselves, to come worthily to this Table was finished: After this (saith he) we arise all of us together, and offer our prayers: which done, the bread & wine &c. (as is aforesaid) is brought forth. So that, here are some prayers made of all the people together, with the Minister, and some prayers only made by the mouth of the Minister in the name of the whole Church, as our● brethren say, and the whole Church joining in heart with the People in the same prayers, and praying with him in silence, in the end they gave their consent thereto, by answering Amen. Cyprian Ser. 6. De Orat. Dominica. saith, We say not, Cyprianus in serm. 6. de oratione dominica. My father which art in heaven: neither, Give to me this day my bread: neither doth every one desire that sins should be only forgiven to him: or desireth for himself alone that he should not be led into tentation, & should be delivered from evil. It is a public & common prayer unto us. And when we pray, we pray not for one, but for all people, because we being the whole people are one thing. The God of all peace and master of concord, that taught unity, would thus have one to pray for all. Even as he himself did bear all in one. This Law did the three Children keep, being enclosed in the furnace of fire. Agreeing in prayer, and concording in consent of spirit. Which thing the faith of the divine scripture declareth, and when it teacheth how such prayed, it giveth an example which we in prayers ought to follow, that we might be such as they were. Then saith (the scripture) they there did sing an hymn, as it were with one mouth, and did bless the Lord: They spoke as it were with one mouth, The joint praising and praying to God, of all at once. and Christ had not yet taught them to pray and therefore to them that prayed, their speech was able to obtain and effectual: because the quiet and simple, and spiritual prayer was acceptable to the lord Thus saith Cyprian of the prayers wherein all the people joined their voices publicly together: and that the Apostle followed this manner, he citeth Acts 1. as is aforesaid. So that this prayer with one mouth in the name of all, was not so, that one only spoke it, & the other only gave the Amen and consent thereto: but they all spoke it with such a concord, as though it had been spoken with one mouth, which was spoken with the mouth of every one of them. Even as every one saith the Lord's prayer in the name of all, and not on● alone saith it for them all. And yet in those public prayers which the pastor speaketh only in all the people's name, The people's responses to the Minister. the people now and then did give their responses in their courses, as if may appear by that which Cyprian afterward saith. But when we stand to prayer (most dearly beloved brethren) we ought to watch, and be intentive to the prayers with all our heart. All worldly and carnal cogitation must go from us: Neither must the mind think then of any other thing, than of that only which it prayeth. Therefore the Priest also giving forth a preface before the prayer, prepareth the breath. minds, in saying: Lift up your hearts, & when the people answereth, We have them (lifted up) unto the Lord, they may be admonished, that they ought to think on no other thing, but on the lord So that the people said not only, Amen: but had other answers also unto the Minister, as may appear further in the Litanies and Liturges of the ancient Churches. And to show, how far the people joined their voices with the Minister, even long after, when the Ministers had gotten a great part of the prayers to their own pronouncing in Chrysostom's time, but yet before the blasphemies, Idolatries, and superstitions of the Mass began, or the praying in a tongue unknown to the people, or in secret muttering that all the people, heard not: it is worthy the observing to this purpose, that which Chrysost. writeth upon the last verse of the 8. chap. of the ●. epist. of S. Paul to the Cor. Homil. 18. Chrysost. in 2. Cor. 8. Homilt. 8. Wherefore, show ye towards them and before the churches, the proof of your love, & of the rejoicing that we have of you. Now (saith he) receive ye them even as indeed ye love us: Declare ye, how we not simply nor rashly do rejoice in you. This shall ye do, if ye shall show forth your love towards them. And afterward he maketh his speech more dreadful saying: In the sight of the churches, for the glory (saith he) of the churches, for their honour: for if ye shall honour them, ye shall honour the churches that sent them For it shall not be only their honour, but also theirs that sent them & chose them: & before all, it shall be to God's glory For when we shall honour them that minister unto him: the glory stretcheth to him. For th● community of the churches: but this also shallbe no small thing for great is the power of a synod, that is, of the churches. The prayer of them loosed Peter from his bonds, opened the mouth of Paul. Their suffrage or voice not a little beautifieth those, that shall attain to the spiritual principalities. And for this cause, he that shall give orders, calleth then for the Church's prayers. And they give their sentences and give their cry thereto. Which thing, they that are to enter into the Ministry do know. For it is not lawful to them, that are not entered into the ministery, to disclose all things. But there is that thing, wherein the Priest differeth nothing from him that is under him. As when the dreadful mysteries are to be partaked, for we are all holden a like worthy to partake them. Not as it was in the old law, the priest did eat a part, & the people a part, & it was not lawful for the people to be partaker of those things, whereof the Priest was partaker. Howbeit, now it is not so, but one body is brought forth unto all, and one cup. Yea, and in the prayers a man shall see, that he offereth together with them the full cup, both for those that are possessed with unclean spirits, and also for those that are the penitentes. For the prayers are made in common both of the Priest and of them. And all of them say one prayer, a prayer full of mercy. Again, when we have shut out from the priests circuits, those that can not be partakers of the holy table, another prayer is to be made, and we all lie upon the ground alike, and we arise all alike. Again, when the peace is to be communicated, we salute one another all alike. And again, even in the same most dreadful mysteries, the Priest prayeth for the people, and the people prayeth for the Priest. For when they say; and with thy spirit: it is nothing else than this, those things that are of the eucharist, that is to wit, of the giving of thanks, are all of them common. For neither he giveth thanks alone, but also all the people. For, having before their voice, & then, they being gathered together, that this thing might worthily and justly be done, he begins the eucharist▪ (or thanksgiving). And what marueilest thou if the people speak, with the Priest? Whereas in deed they sound out those holy hymns in common, even with the very Cherubins and supernal powers. These things verily are spoken of us, that all those also which are governed, might be sober, to the end we might learn, that we are all one body. Only having among us so much difference, as members have from members. And that we should not cast all upon the Priests, but that we also even as for a body that is common, should thus bear the charge of the universal Church etc. By these words it manifestly appeareth, that the Pastor in the administration of the divine service, said not all the public prayers alone, The people joined with the Ministers in many public prayers. though in the name of the whole Church, and the rest joining in heart with him in silence, to avoid confusion and disorder, answering him only with Amen; but that they had many responses, and many whole prayers, that they prayed all together in common even in the same manner as he did, without any disorder or confusion. Thus we see, both that in the whole tenure of all the scripture, and in the practice of the primitive and the ancient Church succeeding, they stood not thus precisely, as, neither for the prescription of the form of public prayers, so, neitther for the manner of the utterance of them; but that often they joined all their voices with the minister, Several prayers in publ. assemblies. or followed him, or answered him with many more words than with a bare Amen, which giveth nothing but (as our Brethren confess) a silent consent unto him, which is rather an approbation of his prayers for them, than properly any prayers of theirs joined with him. How far several prayers in public assemblies may be used of the people. The third thing, that I would have here further considered in this matter of public prayer, is, that our Brethren say: it were a great confusion and uncomeliness for every man to make his several prayers in the public assemblies. Indeed if every man did make his several prayers, in the public assemblies, at such times as the public prayers are openly made by the minister in the name of the whole Church, and did neither openly pray with him, nor in silence give assent unto him, so be they could hear him: I confess, it were great confusion and uncomeliness. But, if the ministers voice were so low either by nature or infirmity, that in a great assembly all could not well hear him, and yet, it were confusion and uncomeliness, to perch themselves higher than their calling would withal tolerate, that they might hear him better: or perhaps the same defect might be in their own not so quick hearing: then, if any such persons were borne withal, to give themselves to their several prayers, even while the public prayers were in saying, so it were done without disturbance, or offence to the public assembly: there might be no confusion nor uncomeliness in so doing. But our Brethren urge this point so precisely, that without any consideration of the persons infirmities, or any mention of the time, they would have no several prayers at all in the public assemblies. Which is too strait and too nice a point to stand upon. Was not that a public assembly, when all the children of Israel were by the read sea, and Pharaoh with his host followed upon them, and the Children of Israel cried unto the Lord; and when Moses had comforted them; though we read not of any one word that he spoke to God: yet, the Lord said unto him, Exod. 14.15. Exod. 14.15. Wherefore criest thou unto me? Was not this a several prayer in the public assembly? And how often times doth Moses make several prayers in the public assemblies? Moses prayers. For what is several prayer, but either prayer for some several persons, or matters that are not public: or that the party which prayeth maketh not jointly with the assembly but by himself, without the assemblies joining with him, either in the words of the prayer, or in th● saying of Amen unto him? And may no such prayers be made in public assemblies? Was not the place where the Ark was placed, and where the Priests were attendant on the offerings, and afterward the temple, the place of the public assemblies, and therefore called the house of prayer? And yet, did not God appoint the Levites, that when any several person came to offer, or to pray to God for his several estate, Several prayers. that not only the party himself might make his several prayers, even as he gave his several oblations for his several trespasses, or several necessities, or several benefits: and that the Priest also should make several prayers and oblations for him, besides the public prayers, although it were even in the public assembly? 1. Sam. ●. 11. etc. Did not Annah make her several prayers, when with her husband she went up yearly to the house of the Lord? And she vowed a uewe, and said, The prayers of Annah. O Lord of Hosts, if thou wilt look on the trouble of thine handmaid, and rememb●r me, and not forget thy handmaid, but give unto thy handmaid a man child: then I will give him unto the Lord all the days of his life, and there shall no razor come upon his head, and she continued praying before the Lord. Eli marked her mouth, for Annah spoke in her heart, her lips did move only, therefore Eli thought that she had been drunken. And Eli said unto her, how long wilt thou be drunken? Put away thy drunkenness from thee? Then Annah answered and said, nay, (my Lord) but I am a woman troubled in spirit: I have drunken neither wine nor strong drink, but have powered out my soul before the Lord. Count not thy handmaid for a wicked woman, for of the abundance of my complaint and my grief have I spoken hitherto. Then Eli answered and said, Go in peace, the God of Israel grant thy petition that thou hast asked of him. 1. Sam. 1.11. etc. By which it appeareth, that the godly in their afflictions made sometimes their several prayers even in the public assembly of the high Priest and other Priests and Levites assistant about him, besides the other people assembled in the lords house. And for that notable prayer which at the presenting of her son Samuel, she openly made, and is set down in the Chapter following, though it comprehend also some general matters: yet was it but her several prayer, in the public assembly of the Priests and people. And are not many of David's Psalms several prayers, Dauid● Psalms. containing his several dangers, helps, & thanksgivings? And yet as he made some of those several prayers in publ. assemblies, so though he set them forth to be used publicly, in the public assemblies: yet not so, but that even in those assemblies, any several person might use and apply the same, to his several & like occasions. And that notable prayer of Solomon, which though it were openly made, salomon's prayer. and some part thereof for the public state of the Church, and for their public prayers, yet, was the same both his several prayer: and he prayeth for the acceptation of any such also as should make their several prayers in the public assembly of the Priests and people in the temple. And as the godly mentioned in the old Testament, used thus not only to make their public, but their several prayers also, in the public assemblies: so in the new Testament likewise. Luke 1. ver. 8. Luk. 1.8. etc. etc. speaking of Zacharie john Baptistes' father: And it came to pass (saith the Evangelist) as he executed the priests office before God, as his course came in order according to the custom of the priests office, his lot was to burn incense. When he went into the temple of the Lord, Zacharies prayers. and the whole multitude of the people were without in prayer, while the incense was burning, then appeared unto him an Angel of the Lord, etc. But the Angel said unto him fear not Zacharias, for thy prayer is heard, and thy wife Elizabeth shall bear thee a son, etc. What prayer this was that the assembly of the people made without, while the Priest was burning of the sacrifice within, the Evangelist noteth not. But I take it, that every one of them all that while, did make in the public assembly his several prayers. But for the prayers that Zacharie made, it appeareth even by the Angel's words unto him, that although for the contents of them, some part were public, as by the law he was bound to pray for the people: yet some part of them was several for himself, and for the obtaining of a child. But for the action and manner, it is most apparent (whatsoever other prayers he made beside, in the hearing of the public assembly) the prayer that he made, when he went into that holy sanctuary, or, as other take it, into the temple, where they burned the incense, to wit, the second division of the temple where the morning and evening sacrifice was offered, was a several prayer: for the people might not enter there, nor join with him, but tarried without in the great base Court of the Temple, called the porch of Solomon, because there Solomon made his prayer aforesaid. Marlorate out of calvin noteth upon these words of the Angel, Thy prayer is heard: Marlorate calvin and Bucer on Luke 1. it may seem that Zacharie did evil, and contrary to the manner of his office, if entering into the sanctuary in the name of the whole people, he prayed for the obtaining of a child, as a private man. For the Priest having put on a public person, as one forgetful of himself, aught to conceive prayers for the common health of the Church. If we shall say there is no absurdity therein, because Zacharie having accomplished the chief part of his praying, did in the second place think of himself privately: it shall not be an unfit solution. And this answereth Caluines other answer, that he might have so done, at other times. For, I like as well of his former solution, both being not unfit, and serving directly to this purpose; and namely, Marlorate confirming the same out of the scripture, and Bucers' testimony, saying: For the high Priest, when he entered into the holy of holies, is said Leuit. 16. d. 17. to have prayed for himself, and for his own house, and for the universal assembly of Israel. The words of Moses in Leviticus, are these. And there shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation, when he goeth in to make an atonement in the holy place, until he come out, and have made an atonement for himself, and for his household, and for all the congregation of Israel. And whatsoever we shall account of Simeons' hymn in the Temple, Simeons' prayer. Luke 2. what shall we say to that which is said of Anna the Prophetess? Luke 2. ver. 37. Annaes' prayer Luke 2. And she was a widow about 84. years, and went not out of the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day. What were those Prayers that she continually did there make? Were they public prayers, or were they several? Or, were there no public assemblies in the temple all that while? If we desire Christ's confirmation of all this: first, what shall we think of that parable that he setteth forth, Luke 18. ver. 10. etc. Two men went up into the Temple to pray, the one a Pharisee, and the other a Publican. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself: The Pharisees & Publicans prayer Luke. 18. O God I thank thee, that I am not as other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this Publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithe of all that ever I possess. What? and shall we allege this, to prove several prayer to be allowed of Christ in public assemblies? Yea verily, why not? Doth Christ condemn him, because in that place of the public assembly he made his private and several prayer? No. For then he had condemned the publican too. For it followeth: but the Publican standing a far off, and would not so much as lift up his eyes to heaven, but smote his breast and said: O God be merciful unto me a sinner. Was not here also another several prayer, and that in the public assembly, as much as the other? And yet saith Christ (setting down his resolution of them both) I tell you, this man (to wit, the Publican) departed to his house justified, rather than the other. And what is Christ's reason? For every man that exalteth himself shallbe brought low, and he that humbleth himself shallbe exalted. So that although Christ, in the 6. of Matthew. ver. 5. & 6. do forbidden us to do as the Pharisees did: and when thou prayest, be not as the Hypocrites, Math. 6. for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues, and in the corners of the streets, because they would be seen of men: verily I say unto you, they have th●ir reward. But when thou prayest, enter into thy chamber, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray unto thy father ●hich is in secret, and thy father which seethe in secret, shall reward thee openly: yet, doth not Christ here either condemn public prayers, or any private and several prayers in public assemblies: but condemneth the pride & vain glory, that the Pharisees and such hypocrites had. Otherwise, both this parable, yea, and this place doth manifestly confirm and approve such several and private prayers, as are not only made in private and several places, but in public assemblies. Calvin. in Mat. 6. calvin upon these words of Christ, saith: we are bidden in many places, to pray or give thanks to God in the solemn assembly, & confluence of men, and before all the people, and that both because of testifying our faith or thankfulness, and also to incite other by our example to do the same. Neither doth Christ withdraw us from that study, but only warneth to have God before our eyes, so often as we prepare ourselves to prayer. And therefore these words, enter into thy chamber, are not to be urged, as though he bade to flee from men, and that he denied we should pray rightly, except witnesses were removed: for he speaketh comparatively, signifying that we must rather seek a secret place, then covet that the multitude of men should behold us praying. For God would have those that are his, by all means to flee ostentation. If thou shalt from thy heart shun this, and that in praying it shall suffice thee only to please God, thou hast rightly prayed in thy chamber, although thou shalt have prayed in the greatest assembly of men. Musculus upon the same precept of Christ, saith on this wise: First in that they prayed in the synagogues, it had not by and by the note of hypocrisy. Musc. in Mat. 6. For the Apostles also & the other faithful prayed in their assemblies: & the Temple of Jerusalem was erected principally to this purpose, that it should be the house of prayer. Therefore he saith not simply: for they pray in the synagogues: but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they love to pray in the synagogues For in secret they will not pray. For we must not think that they prayed so in the synagogues, as for the most part the godly do; to wit, simply, silently, without ostentation: but this they regarded that they might pray more manifestly and with a clear voice & in opener places. In this manner than doth Christ approve secret several prayer, although it be made in public assemblies. Yea, Christ himself gave often example hereof. I speak not of many persons, that in public assemblies he suffered and allowed, Christ's own several prayers in publ. assemblies. that for many seveuerall occasions made their several prayers to him in public assemblies: but of his own several prayers not only in places severed from all company, but in most public assemblies, as Matt. 11.25. Math. 11.25. At the same time jesus answered and said, I give thee thanks, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wi●e, and from men of understanding: and hast opened them unto babes. It is so O Father, because thy go●d pleasure was such. Likewise when he fed that great and public assembly with five loaves and two fishes. Matt. 14.19. when he looked up to heaven, M●t. 14.19 and blessed (or gave thanks) was not this done with some several prayer which is not expressed? When Christ raised Lazarus in a public assembly, Saint john cap. 11. ver. 41. etc. saith: joh. 11.41. And jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee, because thou hast heard me. I know that thou hearest me always, but because of the people that stand by, I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me. Moreover, when he road unto the Temple with a great assembly of people about him, & that certain Grecians desired to see him, anon after, john 12. ver. 27. he prayed & saith, joh. 12.27. Now is my soul troubled, and what shall I say? Father save me from this hour, but therefore came I unto this hour. Father glorify thy name. Yea, the whole 17. Chapter following, joh. 17. what is it else, but that several and most singular prayer, that Christ maketh unto his father, in the assembly of his Disciples, partly for himself, though most especially for them and all his elected? Last of all, his several prayer even on the cross, not only praying for his enemies: Father forgive them they know not what they do, Luke 23.34. but also when he cried with a loud voice saying: Luke. 23.34.36. Eli, Eli, Lama sabachthani, that is my God, my God, why had thou forsaken me. Mat. 27.46. and Luke 23.46. when also he cried with a loud voice and said, Mat. 27.46. Father into thy hands I commend my spirit. And as Stephen did consummate his Martyrdom, Stephen's prayers. imitating his Master Christ with the like several prayer: The Apostles prayers. so the Apostles frequented the Temple, the synagogues, and other places, where the people were assembled to make these their several & public prayers, and to hear the law read, taking often occasion thereby, to preach the gospel unto them. And by S. Paul's often protestations of making his prayers, S. Paul's prayers. Rom. 1. ver. 9 God is my witness whom I serve in spirit in the Gospel of his son, that without ceasing I make mention of you, always in my prayers, etc. and to the Phil. cap. 1.3. I thank my God having you in perfect memory, always in my prayers for all you, praying with gladness▪ and to the Colloss. cap. 1. ver. 3. We give thanks to God even the father of our L. jesus Christ, always praying for you and to the Thess. 1. Epist. cap. 1. ver. 2. We give God thanks always for you, making mention ●f you in our prayers without ceasing, etc. Now S. Paul frequenting wheresoever he came the public assemblies, of the faithful: it argueth, that either in all places he made some solemn mention of all these several Churches, which hath no likelihood: or else, that in those public assemblies of public prayers, he made some secret and several prayers in his mind or memory for them Eusebius out of Clement's sermons, S. james his prayers. recordeth of james the brother of the Lord, that he gave himself to such continual prayer in the Temple, that his knees with kneeling grew to be as hard as Camels knees, Eccl. Hist. Lib. 2. cap. 23. which were it true: Euseb. Eccl. Hist. lib. 2. cap. 23. it plainly argueth, that for all the often and public assemblies there made, he ceased not (as before we heard of the holy widow Anna) to continue often his several prayers in the public assemblies. All which premises well considered: we can not justly call it confusion and uncomeliness, How and when several prayers are not to be made. if several prayers be now and then made, of some, though not of every man, in the time and place of the public assemblies. If our Brethren had said, that they may not be made, at or during the time of uttering the public prayers, by all those that may well hear them: this saying had been allowable. And yet, Abuses in the divine service. to make no short and earnest, secret and several prayers, petitions or wishes of the heart, or thanks giving to God at all, while pauses fall out between the making open confessions, the pouring forth public prayers, How several prayer may be made. the reading of the Psalms, the hearing of the Lessons, the rendering of thanks and praises, the marking of the sermons, and the celebrating of the sacraments: that between these distinct actions the people may make no several prayers, nor any private motions of their hearts secretly to God, all only because of the public assembly then present: were to bind the people's conscience too too strictly, without any prohibition of the Lord: yea, rather having all these examples, as a warrant in such cases, to the contrary, where neither the public prayers, nor the public hearing of the word, nor the public assemblies, nor any man's several or public edification, is disturbed any ways or hindered. These three points being thus far forth, and not otherwise, to be granted unto our Brethren: let us now proceed to the other matters that they find fault withal. The learned Dis. Pag. 64.65.66. Wherein (say they) there is great abuse in our Churches. For as though it were not enough to keep out preaching by long prescribed forms of prayers: these prayers are so pronounced by the Minister, that a great number, and some not of the worst disposed people, think it pertaineth not to them, to give ear or consent of mind unto them. We speak not here of such insensible readers, whose voice either can not be heard, or else can not be understood, whereof there be great numbers: nor of the unfit place prescribed for the Ministers standing at prayers in the east end of the house, when the simple people shall stand often times 40. or 50. yards off in the west end: or of the confusion of voices whilst all speak at once: besides screens of Rood lofts, Organ lofts, Idol cages, otherwise called chantry chapels, and high pews between them. Which although they do manifestly hinder edification, yet may they not be removed in many places, for defacing the beauty of the material houses, whereas S. Paul so much esteemeth the building of God's spiritual house, that he commandeth the glorious gifts of the holy Ghost to cease in the congregation, ● Cor. 14.28 when they do not help to edification. But we speak of this that a great multitude think they have well served God: if they have been present at common prayers, or any part of them, as they were wont to think in Popery, although they be never so vainly occupied in the Church, some in walking, some in talking, in gathering of money, not only for the poor, but for other contributions, etc. And they that think they do best, are occupied in their private prayers, or in reading of books, while their minister pronounceth public prayers. Bridges. Our Brethren do here sharply challenge the Church of England for many great abuses, Long prescribed form of prayers. by reason of our divine service and publ. prayers Howbeit, thanks be to God, first and in general for all these great abuses here reckoned up, we may safely affirm, that there is, no, not one of them, Our Brethr. complaint of diverse great abuses. which can justly and directly be ascribed to the order in the communion book, for the form of public prayer prescribed: but may well enough be helped and redressed, both the Eccl. state of government, and the appointed order of the divine service remaining still in force, any thing here found fault with to the contrary notwithstanding. They pretend first, Long prescribed form of prayers. that we keep out preaching by long prescribed forms of prayer. For the avowing of prescribing forms of prayer, till our Brethren have somewhat more to allege to debar it, than hitherto they have brought forth: or till they can infringe those proves that we see it sufficiently warranted by; yea, till they can show with what good reason and authority, their selves being without authority, can set out a book prescribing forms of common prayer, & yet the whole estate of the church of England can not so do: I trust that may suffice for that point, which we have already spoken thereon. And as for long prescribed forms of prayer, they have as long prescribed forms, as our book prescribeth in any part of the common prayer to be used, yea, by many odds far longer. Have we any of all our publ. prayers prescribed in our communion book, that is but a quarter so long as some of the prayers are that they have prescribed in their book of common prayer, being some of them above 200. lines a piece. And how can our Breath. then for very shame, find fault with our long prescribed form of prayer? Neither is this true, that preaching is kept out by long prescribed forms of prayer. All the forms of prayer that are prescribed in any part of our ordinary divine service, may be soberly and with decent pauses uttered forth, either for the ministers or for the people's part, in the space of little more than one hour, yea, the lessons, and all the rest of the divine service, within one hour & a half, even where the service is longest in saying, though also much and solemn ●inging do protract it. And yet are provisions of purpose made, for contracting some parts thereof, at the ministers discretion, for the longer continuance of the sermons, or of the reading of the Homilies: so that, this is but a picked quarrel, and yet not true. They complain further, that these prayers are so pronounced by the minister, that a great number, & some not the worst disposed people, Default in pronouncing of the prayers. think it pertaineth not to them to give ear or consent of mind unto them. What kind of pronouncing this so pronounced, should be, our Breath. pronounce it not. And therefore, till the abuse be plainer pronounced of our Breath. we can neither denownce what fault it is, nor find in whom it lies: whether in the pronouncer, or in the hearer, nor how to help it, that we might renounce it, till we know better what they mean. Ill pronouncing and reading. If they mean, that the minister so pronounceth the prayers that they can not be understood: ●hey make that to be another fault, severed and excepted from this, saying afterward: we speak not here of such insensible readers, whose voice either cannot be heard, or else can none be understood. But then, the fault is in the pronouncer of the prayers, not in the prayers so pronounced. And if the minister do not his diligence so to pronounce them, as he ought to do: yet, must they do their diligence so to mark them, as well as they may. For, howsoever he pronounce them, yet cannot they rightly think that the prayers pertain not to them. Which if they do, though our Brethren say, they be some not of the worst disposed (in which words, whom they aim at, is as darkly pronounced as the other:) I am sure, they be not of the best disposed, and indeed too bad disposed, that so think. And not only the ministers that so pronounce, but also those not of the worst disposed that so think, the one, for his pronouncing, if he pronounce not well that which is good: and the other, for his lewd opinion, in thinking those good prayers pertain not to him, are both faulty, and punishable. And I pray God, none of our Brethren their selves, being (I grant) not of the worst disposed, think it pertaineth not to them, to give ear or consent unto them. For, what can we think that they think better of them, that thus write against them, and would have them clean taken away? Though here (for fashion sake) they find such fault, that they are not so pronounced as they should be, which is indeed to allow them, if they were well pronounced. Whereas their drift is quite contrary, that they should neither so, nor so, be pronounced at all. Their next complaint is this: We will not here speak of such insensible readers, Insensible readers. whose voice either can not be heard, or else cannot be understood, whereof there be great numbers. Of this they say, they will not here speak. And why will they not here speak of it? I hope, it be not, because they like it. Or, do they reserve it to another place? Or, do they count it so trifling a thing, that it is not worth the speaking of? Or, do they count it a fault, and would conceal it, or, not have it looked unto and punished? Or, do they speak it Rhetorically, they will not speak of it, but they do? And good reason too, that they or any other, wheresoever such unsensible readers are, both lawfully may, & dutifully should, both speak and complain of them: If they will speak and complain, as they ought to do, not by the way of public defamation: for, that (even where the matter is true) is slanderoous: but by orderly presentment and humble petition, unto those that have authority to oversee, that no such insensible readers be permitted. Neither doth any law (now in force) allow of them. And therefore, I do the hardlier believe, that (which is here avouched) there be great numbers of them. But if any such here and there be, especially, if it be by sickness, The Minister's place. or any such accidental infirmity growing on them, (as from which, even the best of our Brethr. are not free): yea, be it that such an ignorant Pastor were in some odd corner crept in, as could not sensibly read the public prayers: yet, what letteth this, why there might not be provision made, upon orderly complaint and proof before the ordinary, to place other sensible readers, that both can be heard and understood, and the people devoutly moved to join in prayers with them. Nor yet (say our Brethren they will speak) of the unfit place prescribed for the ministers, standing at prayer in the East end of the house, The place of the minister while the simple people shall stand often times, 40. or 50. yards off, in the west end. This complaint for the standing of the Minister, in the most fit and convenient place of the Church, need the less indeed to be spoken of, by our Brethren, since other having authority thereunto, have before them both spoken & considered thereupon. And where (upon view) it hath been found, that the Minister stood not in a fit place: another fit place hath by authority been appointed for him. As it is apparent in most places, s●ue where the Ministers voice may be heard and understood easily enough, o● those that list to listen thereunto, except any be thicker of hearing, and those may draw nearer if they please, or by the licence of the parish, so far as the decency of their calling doth permit. And it were fit of the twain, that such did rather remove themselves to hear better, than that the Minister unnecessarily for every ones private occasion, (which may otherwise be helped) should remove from his place appointed. Besides this, our Brethren say, they will not speak, of the confusion of voices, while all speak at once: All speaking at once. This also they spoke of before, more than needed, as we have heard; and therefore (I grant) it might now the better, have not again been spoken of at all But speak thereof, (and tell us they will not speak of it) as oft as they will: as we allow of no confusion, so if all the congregation speak at once, and do it orderly: for my part, I dare not call it a confusion. But call it what they please; so long as God liketh of it, (as we have seen) me thinks no good man should mislike it. And why may not all speak at once: as well as all sing at once without confusion? And if they all speak at once: how do they speak (speaking in their mother tongue) and not understand what they speak? And if they all understand: where is become our insensible reading? So that, it is not heard nor understood, when they speak it, with, or after the Minister, all at once? If this deserveth to be called confusion: it is a good confusion, and no hindrance but furtherance to edification. chantry chapels. etc. Besides (say our Breath.) that they will not speak of Scrines of Roodloftes, Organ lofts, Idol cages, otherwise called Chantry Chapels, and high pews between them: Screens, of Roodloftes, Organlofts, Idol cages, high pews. which although they do manifestly hinder edification, yet may they not be removed in many places, for defacing the beauty of the material houses. Though, they will not speak of these things, yet have we both spoken of them, and those that have authority thereunto, have caused these things to be surveyed: and where any such things, as do manifestly hinder edification, have been found: I doubt not, but they have been removed. At the least, I am sure, if any yet continue, and can be proved to be such manifest hindrances to edification: they may at all times be altered or removed. Yea, laws and orders are set out for that purpose. This therefore is not well said of our Brethren, that none of these things may be removed in many places, for defacing the beauty of the material houses. For, although these words imply their grant, that in some places, these things are removed: yet if those many places, wherein (they say) they may not be removed, should be well examined: I think, there should not be found very many: but contrary, very few; yea (I believe,) no, not one place in all England, where for this reason, of the beauty of the material house, these things stand, being found such manifest hindrances to edification, but that they are either so removed or altered, that they be neither manifest, nor not manifest hindrances to edification. But what mean they here, by the standing of chantry chapels, which they call Idol cages? Idol cages. Except they would not only deface, but also pull down the material parts of the Churches, if not the whole Churches by the same reason? For, they may as well bestow that term, on all the Churches: which in the Popish Idolatrous times, & some of them perhaps before in the time of the Pagans, were fraught with Idols, which now (God be praised) are clean removed. And yet the Churches or chapels stand, & may well serve to good uses, without any hindrance at all to edification. But our Brethren go further, pews and all if they be high pews, pews. must be removed. If they say not all, but only those that are between them, to wit, between the ministers voice and the people's hearing: we grant, that if they take away the hearing of the ministers voice, they may be amended. But where shall we find in a Church such pews as are compassed in so high, and specially coming between the standing of the Minister and of the people, that they take away his voice from their hearing? And much less do the Roodloftes, Roodloftes. if any upon any considerations be left standing; as for the most part, they be removed already, having only a decent & small partition, between the queer & the body of the Church, whereby, the Ecclesiastical persons, pews and Roodloftes. (as it was in the ancient Church before the time of the Popish superstitions) were severed from the residue of the people, and yet with such a partition as letteth not the people's either hearing or seeing. Yea the Rood fit itself, when it stood up whole, was so high, that it commonly hindered, neither the sight nor the voice of the minister. And least of all the Chapels, were they chantry chapels, Country chapels. or other Which were not between the people & the ministers: but in side Isles, & out parts of the walls, and as it were buttresses of the Churches, & therefore less hindrances to the people's edification, the Idolatry and superstition of them, being (as, thanks be to God it is) clean removed. And all other manifest hindrances to edification, were they never so much a beauty to the material house of the Temple, The beauty of the material and spiritual building. they have been defaced, yea and removed, in respect of the building and the beautifying of God's spiritual house. And therefore, this is not charitably, nor truly spoken of our Brethren in this matter: that such things as manifestly hinder edification, may not be removed in many places, for defacing the beauty of the material houses. And yet I hope, that where the building and beauty of the spiritual houses, is still preferred: they would not have the beauty or the building of the material houses, being the houses of prayer, to be unnecessarily defaced, and much less pulled down and removed. But, if this be now to be observed of us, that our Brethren say here, S. Paul commanded the glorious gifts of the holy ghost to cease in the congregation, when they do not help to edification: then by their leave, some of these our Brethren● prescriptions, Some of our Brethr. prescriptions may well cease by their own rule. for the discipline & regiment Eccl. may cease well enough, which although they had been in practice even in the Apostles times, yet, since they have no commandment of necessity & perpetuity, & are not of the material substance of edifying or building of the Church, and having so long time utterly ceased, and the Church having now this good while been begun prosperously to be repaired & beautified without them, and that the bringing in of them would hazard to overthrow the reaedifying of the same, as we see by experience, what an unnecessary disturbance and hindrance the attempt thereofhath bred: why may not they also cease, as well as those other gifts might? And yet the spiritual building and beauty of the spiritual house of God, continue and prosper as (God be praised) it hath done, and doth, and much better might, although this point of Discipline and Eccl. regiment cease, or at least, be not so contentiously called upon. But because our Breath. say they will not speak of these things: we have the less need to stand longer in answering of them. Let us come therefore to that which they will speak upon. Walking talking & Collecting. But we speak (say they) of this, that a great multitude think they have well served God: if they have been present at common prayers, or any part of them, The learned disc. Pag. 65. & 66. as they were wont to think in popery, although they be never so vainly occupied in the Church, some in walking some in talking, in gathering of money, not only for the poor, but for other contributions, etc. And they that think they do best, are occupied in their private prays or in reading of books, while their minister pronounceth public prayers. Bridges. To be vainly occupied in the Church, some in walking some in talking: is (we grant) a fault. Neither is it by any law or order allowed, that the people should so behave themselves in the time of the common prayers. Walking & ta●king in the Church. If any break the laws and orders in that behalf, they are to sustain the punishment of the law, and officers are appointed, to look unto them and present them. But how then shall those of our Brethren be holden excused, that to avoid walking and talking in the time of common prayers, will not come at all to hear them, confirming by their contemptuous absence, the Popish recusantes, besides the great offence unto their Brethren. Contributions and collections for the poor, and for other Ecclesiastical orders, Contributions and collections for the poor. be such things as were done in the primitive Church, at the time of their Ecclesiastical assemblies, as may appear, Act. 2. ver. 42. Act. 4. ver. 35. Act. 6. ver. 2. Act. 11. ver. 29. & 1. Cor. 16. ver. 2. whereupon saith calvin, upon one of the Sabbaths etc. that is, upon that day wherein they made the holy assemblies, calvin in 1. Cor, 16.2. etc. Moreover, the holy assembly where the communion of the Saints is celebrated might add a spur unto them. Upon the first day of the week (saith the Geneva note) which the scripture calleth the lords day, The Geneva note. others, sunday, they accustomed not only in the Church, but at home also, according to every man's zeal, to lay up some piece of money, towards the relief of the poor brethren. And of the like matter Paul writeth, 2. Cor. 9 etc. Which order S. Paul saith▪ that he used, in the Churches of Galatia, Macedonia, Achaia, and other places. To the which accordeth the order of celebrating the communion, that we heard before out of justine: that so soon as ever the communion is ministered, the collection is made for the poor, and then follow other prayers and thanksgivings▪ So that, these collections and contributions for the poor, etc. may be still done in the Church well enough▪ if they be made between while, at such times, as the public prayer is stayed, although many good exhortations, and sentences exciting the people thereunto, may not amiss be read, even in the very time of making the collection, or they may give themselves to their several prayers all that while. And if any for their gathering of money for the poor or other contributions, disturb the edification of the people, Private pra●er or reading. in the common prayer, and celebration of the divine service: they may be well reproved and put back, or complained upon and punished. These disturbances being thus removed, if now a great multitude have been present at common prayers, or at so great part thereof as they could conveniently come unto: I see not why, our Breath. should make this their most especial point to speak on, and to find fault withal, that they should think they have well served God. But to think this, (say they) is, as they were wont to think in Popery. Our Breath. think too hardly (I dare not say, rashly & uncharitably) of their Brethren, Our Brethr. unbrotherly misliking their Brethren. to think that they think so, as did the Papists in the blindness of Popery. For, the Papists stood altogether on their intention, and of their opus operatum, the work wrought; though they could not tell what they did or said; and yet, they thought all to be done so well and sufficiently; that they did think it meritorious before God. Whereas, no Protestant doth, or can so think. And all that is set forth in the divine service & common prayer, is to the clean contrary. Which being good, and the true service of God: why may not our Breath. so recomfort themselves, when they have orderly joined themselves, in devout calling upon God at common prayer, and reverent hearing of his word; that they may well and sa●ely think, (without any thinking of the merit of their work wrought, but as becometh humble Christians, though of themselves all unworthy to approach before God, save that they wholly rely on his acceptation, in and for jesus Christ's sake) that they have well and truly served God, and though they deserve it not, yet that God will both accept it, and reward it. As concerning private prayers, on which our Brethren here again do speak: we have spoken also before sufficiently, Private prayers. till that be answered. And as for reading of books, Reading of book●s in the time of the divine service. if it be the reading of the same prayers that the Minister publicly pronounceth: the same answer serveth: or, if it be the same Chapters that he readeth, or, to turn their books, when the Minister citeth any text, or story out of the scriptures, in his sermon, homily, or exhortation. Which is a point that our Brethren do allow, and call upon the people to do, and therefore, I see not why, our Brethr. should so strictly, at the time of the public prayers and divine service, prohibit all private praying or private reading, and that without exception of any such persons, as perchance be deaf or hard of hearing, and for order sake would come to the Church, The learned disc. pag. 66. that no such person may privately pray nor read, doing the same without prejudice or offence to others. Thus as preaching is neglected, upon colour of public prayers: so public prayers by private exercises, Private prayers. are made altogether unprofitable to a great number. For who knoweth the right use of public prayer, but they that are taught by the word of God? Let us therefore establish public preaching, and public prayers will follow of necessity. But if we continue to uphold formal prayers, that preaching be neglected, it will come to pass, that neither shall be regarded. Bridges. We allow not that preaching should be neglected upon colour of public prayers. For both may in their orders be continued. But sith we have not the one so ordinary, Neglect of preaching under colour of praying. because it can not so ordinarily be had: shall we therefore have no ordinary of the other, which we may easilier have, and in no case we may discontinue? Did not the jews continue the ordinary courses and times of their public prayers, and readings of the law, of the Psalms, of the Prophets: though they had not th● like ordinary courses and times of preaching, and of interpreting the same among them? Neither are public prayers, though there be no sermon, (so they be used as is aforesaid) made altogether unprofitable to them. Public prayers made unprofitable. But they are so, (say they) to a great number. I grant, to a great number, what may not be made unprofitable, both prayers private and public, sacraments preaching and all? Howbeit, they are not directly and of themselves made unprofitable unto them, but by the parties own default and abuses of them. I confess, none knoweth the right use of public prayer, but they that are taught by the word of God. And may we not so say likewise, of private prayer? God's word joined with public prayer. Tell them this, that suffer not the word of GOD to be taught among them, but to have the people in the divine service to hear and to pray they wot not what. We are (thanks be to God) as careful that God's word should be sincerely and plainly taught, as that public prayer should be made. And therefore we join these together, both where preaching is, & where preaching is not, that yet the word of God should be taught withal, whensoever we assemble to make our publ. prayers, that we may not only speak to God, but may hear God also speaking in his word to us, and teaching us. Hereupon our Brethren seeming to wish us well, exhort us saying: let us therefore establish public preaching, The establishing of public preaching. and public prayers will follow of necessity. This seemeth to be a charitable motion of our Brethren, but see how slenderly it is grounded upon charity. For where they exhort us to establish public preaching, as though already it were not established among us, but suppressed, or altogether neglected: what can they say of us, (if preaching be established among us) more uncharitable and more slanderous? Have not their selves before confessed that we have had rest and peace this 25. or 26. years with the the free preaching of the Gospel. Pag. ●8. Formal Prayers. And in their preface that the true & holy faith concerning the substance of religion is of us publicly maintained. And that in our profession and preaching we have hissed out the heretical opinion of the papists, that the sacraments confer grace of the work wrought, etc. pag. 62. And, if they would not confess these things, would not all the world cry out shame on them, Who are admitted to be public preachers. in a matter so apparent, that the very public adversaries of us cry out against us for nothing more, than that public preaching is among us established? indeed, not so public that every publican, nor, every pharisee neither, may be established a public preacher, but good reason he should be tried and authorized thereunto, before he take upon him public preaching. And so perhaps may a number be suppressed, or rather by their factiousness & busiosity repress themselves, & are their own causers that they be not permitted. But yet is public preaching so far forth established that not only all that are lawfully called & thought sit, (though they have but the meaner gift of preaching) are allowed: but also the meanest of all, if he be otherwise answerable to his calling, is assigned publicly to read both the word of God, and the preaching of it. For what are else, the homilies and other sermons, though written by other, and publicly read by him authorized thereunto, but a public preaching alsoof God's word? and when public preaching is all these ways established, yea even where a learned preacher is not, nor can be always present: can our Brethren rightly affirm, that public preaching is not established? But, say they, Let us establish public preaching and public prayers will follow of necessity. And (God be praised) so they follow. The establishing of public prayers. And that also argueth, that we have established public preaching. For, if the prayer follow on the preaching and teaching, as the Disciples desired Christ to teach them how to pray, Luke 11. verse 1. And we have true and Godly public prayer, which followeth of necessity on true and godly public preaching: It is a good argument from the effects to the causes, that the word of God is truly and Godly taught and preached publicly amongst us, and that the public preaching of it is established. So that, while they cannot deny, but that he have established among us the effects, which are by their own saying public prayers: will they, or nill they, they must needs yield, that we have established already the thing, that they exhort us to establish Sith public preaching must of necessity go before, if public prayers do of necessity follow. But (say they) if we continue to uphold formal prayers, that preaching be neglected, it will come to pass, that neither shall be regarded. Hear our Brethren turn all again to formal prayers, and what are these formal prayers? are they not public prayers, whereof they spoke before? or else, how speak they to the purpose? and may they not be formal and public too? what, would they have them unformall and deformed? or, do they mean, they be but pro forma tantum? If they do so, they offer not only great injury unto those public prayers, but also unto many good men, that with hearty devotion, in true faith & humility, do publicly power them forth with their Minister unto God. And what if some abuse them, using them only for an outward formality, without inward affection? Do not they as ill, that thus openly contemn them? albeit their selves set out (and that in much like form) other formal prayers too: Our Brethr. own formal prayers. yea, some of them, the very same formal prayers that our public formal prayers are: except here and there, (in very deed, pro forma tantum) a word or phrase, or sentence a little transformed. And should their public formal prayers too, only because they are formal, be thus formally flouted and rejected? or must we receive and uphold their formal prayers, & may we not continue to uphold ours? And here by the way, if we continue to uphold them, than we have them. Which confirmeth that I said before, that then have we much more also, and do uphold and establish the public preaching, which their selves say, is the antecedent and cause of them. Yea, but if we continue to uphold them (say they) that preaching be neglected: Public prayers to be upholden although preaching were neglected. and should we not uphold them, because preaching may be, or is neglected? I think we have cause rather to uphold them, and to fasten better hold on them, that preaching may not be neglected but upholden. For, if publ. prayer follow public preaching: yea, now & then go before preaching. We hope also it will often join with it, and will always help to uphold & establish it. And that so long as Aaron and Hur do continue to uphold, or to hold up Moses hands: the true Israelites that fight with God's word, shall prevail and uphold themselves, against Amalek & all the enemies of God's church. What? have our brethren forgotten this, that they granted unto before, pag. 55. to be the best means to uphold and increase preaching? Especially, considering the greatness of the harvest and fewnes of the labourers, by praying earnestly the Lord of the harvest, in this great necessity of ours, to thrust forth labourers into his harvest. And is not public prayer as effectual hereunto, Public Prayer the means to further public preaching. where 2. or 3. yea, the whole congregation is gathered together in the name of Christ, to beg this among other things, of our heavenly father, by their public and formal prayer, as well as private? But (say our brethren) preaching is neglected. Not by public & formal prayers (say we) but by some other means. But, if we contnive (say they) to uphold it, that preaching be neglected: it will come to pass that neither shallbe regarded. Indeed, if we should continue or uphold it to that purpose: than it might so come to pass, that neither of them should be regarded. And may we not say as much on the other side, The popish public Prayers. that if we should continue to uphold preaching, that public & formal prayer be neglected: them it might also come to pass that neither prayer nor preaching shall be regarded? And our Brethren are more earnest here, to have the public and formal prayers neglected: than are we to have preaching neglected. So that their selves go nearer than we do, to have neither of them both regarded. As for us, we hope that either of these, Our Brethr. would have our public prayers neglected under pretence of public preaching. both the public preaching and the public prayers, which they in scorn call formal prayers, may be still continued, upholden, regarded, & established, without any neglect or prejudice, yea rather, with mutual help and establishment the one of the other. And I like better of that our brethr. said before, that as we are taught by the word of God the right use of public prayer: so by public prayer when we are taught it, the establishment of the word of God, which is taught, is the better continued & upholden. And if prayer discontinue & be neglected: the neglect of preaching will follow of like necessity. As when Moses heavy hands fell down, the Amalekites prevailed against the Israelites. And therefore, we may rather conclude, that if we continue to uphold public & formal prayer, that public preaching shall more formally proceed, and be the less neglected, & both prayer & preaching be more and better regarded. But our brethren will confute our form of public prayer, by this instance. For what did thrust out preaching from the Romish Church, but long prescript forms of reading, of singing, of praying? The learned Dis. Pag. 66. and 67. so that their ordinary was enough, and too much, to occupy the whole day, though there were no sermon. Whereas contrariwise, there would be no ordinary public prayer without preaching. This instance non facit ad idem, it serveth to prove a clean contrary matter. Have our Brethren in such contempt and despite our ordinary and prescript form of public prayer, that they can allege against it no ●itter example, than the long prescript forms of reading, of singing, of praying, in the Romish Church? True it is indeed, they did thrust out preaching, being such an evil reading, singing, and praying, as besides the length thereof, their form was so fraught & poisoned with false doctrine, errors, lies, Idolatries, superstitions, blasphemies, etc. that for very shame they durst not show their faces, but were masked in a language unknown to the vulgar people, although even that also (the stuff being no better) might be some benefit, The corruptions of the popish pub. prayers. with the mo●e danger. For as their treacheries might be the harder espied, so, the less be learned. Which corruptions & ignorance so transformed their reading their singing, & their praying: that as they had been far better not read, nor song, so deserved they not the name, of any true private or public prayer at all, but were far worse, than the Pharisees vain lip labour. So that, Length of Prayers. these readings, singings, and prayings, being clean contrary to the word of God: no marvel, though they thrust out preaching. For what fellowship is there of light with darkness? 2. Cor 6.14. And shall now those formal prayers, (that were indeed no true form of prayers at all, but had a form and name of that they were not) be brought for an instance against our formal public prayers, that in all points are agreeable to the proportion of faith, to the rule of life, to the acceptable will of God, and to the great edifying of all the Congregation, and clean void of all false doctrine, errors lies. Idolatries, blasphemies and superstitions, either of the papists or of any others? Is this a charitable or a true exemplification? If our Brethren say, they do not resemble our Public prayers to theirs, for any of these points, but only for the long prescript forms of reading, of singing, and of praying. So that their ordinary was enough and too much, to occupy the whole day. And is the only length then the only cause, The short time of our public prayers. wherefore the prescript forms of reading, of singing, & of praying in the Romish Church, should be compared unto ours, or ours to theirs? but this length as they have oftentimes before complained on it: so, have we sufficiently answered, that, as ours are most free from all their other dangerous corruptions: so are they nothing like in length to theirs, as all the world may soon see, by conference of them. If their ordinary was enough and too much to occupy the whole day? Who seeth not, that neither the reading of the Lessons, and other exhortations and sentences now prescribed, nor the saying or singing of the hymns or Psalms, nor the praying and making any supplications or thanksgivings, in our ordinary public prayers, will hold us passing two or three hours of the whole day at the most▪ accounting both the morning and the evening prayer. But so often as they complain upon the long prescript forms of reading, of singing and of praying, and therein compare our Churches to the Romish Church: May we remember our Brethren, of their own long prescript forms of reading, Our Breath. own prescribed forms of confessions and prayers longer than ours. of singing, and of praying? are not the confessions that they read in their prescribed form of prayer, a great deal longer than ours are? Their first confession to be 〈◊〉 being above thirteene-score lines, besides their Chapters. Our Ordinary having but two, where as they say in their book of Common prayer. Page 22. upon the days appointed for the preaching of the word, when a convenient number of the Congregation are come together, that they may make fruit of their presence, till the assembly be full: one appointed by the Elderishppe, shall read some chapters of the Cannonicall books of Scripture, singing Psalms between at his discretion. And this reading to be in order as the books and chapters follow: that from time to time, the holy scriptures may be read through. In these words, Prayers. they prescribe so indefinite a number of chapters to be read, and of psalms to be sung, that we may easily conjecture they do, or may do at their liking, occupy more time, than all our prescribed reading or singing need to do. And as for their Prayers (as we have showed already, and they are easily to see) some one or two of them being as much as 20. of ours, besides the prayers that they leave unto the minist. voluntary, as the spirit of God (they say) shall move his heart, framing the same, according to the time and matter, which he hath entreated of, Pag. 46, So that, he may be as long or longer in his not prescribed prayers, as in the other that are prescribed to him. Besides also, that even almost half, if not the more part of the Sermon itself, is tranformed into conceivinge of unformall prayers. Do not all these long prescript forms of prayer, and long prayers without form and not prescript, thrust out also a great part of the preaching? Ha brethren, even reckoning (they say) makes long friends. Look on your own dealings in this matter, and see if they may not for the length of reading, of singing and of praying, be aswell compared to the long prayers of the Romish Church, as ours may. But, they think that whatsoever length of time of their prayers do occupy, all is well if they have a Sermon. And for this also they accuse the popish prayers, that they were enough and too much, to occupy the whole day, though there were no sermon: where contrariwise (say they) there would be no ordinary public prayer, without preaching. The length of our public prayers no hindrance to a sermon or homily. If the Papists prayers were enough and too much, to occupy the whole day without a sermon: and ours with a sermon and all (being no longer than a short sermon) are little enough to occupy two or three hours of the whole day: I ask no better acquittance of ours, from resemblance of the long prayers of the Romish Church, than this our brethren's own testimony. And if there were no sermon nor yet homely read in the place thereof, the time was all the shorter. Yea, but (say our brethren) it should not for all that, be so short. For if it were used as it should be: there would be no ordinary public prayer, without preaching. What do ye say, my learned brethren? should there be no ordinary public prayer without preaching? No, ye say not so: but there would be none. And what mean ye by these speeches, there would be none? Whether ordinary public prayer may be made without preaching. Do ye not mean, there should be none? I trow ye mean not, as ye said before of the Sacraments, pag. 63. that where there is no preacher of the Word, there ought to be no minister of the sacraments: and so, where there is no peacher of the word, there ought to be no Minister of the ordinary and public prayer, Preaching without Prayer. and if there be, it is unavailable, a worldy, a dead, a beggarly prayer, and what else but sacrilege? do ye mean so? but ye temper here this speech somewhat more artificially for prayer, that although plainly enough it might so seem to any, that should read or here the same: yet, (if ye were pressed with it) when it cometh to scanning, ye say not so, but only, that there would be no ordinary public prayer without preaching. The Will of God herein And by whose will would there be none? by your own will? or by the will of God? and by what will of God? For, if ye mean by his will, such an absolute will, that he would so have it of necessity, & to be none otherwise: then indeed, it is a wicked thing and contrary to his good pleasure, to have any ordinary public prayer to be made at any time without preaching. But if ye mean of God's will▪ approving the same only, as but more convenient, where it may be orderly had: we will also hold with you therein, and likewise would it were so. The understanding of the word preaching. Or, if ye understand by preaching, any edidifying manner of teaching and setting forth the word of God, in some while between the ordinary public prayers: we would the same also as well as you, yea, praised be God) we have it so already. But if ye speak of that kind of preaching, that is such free, extemporal & voluntary exhortation, and exposition of the word of God, as God shall move the heart, & open the mouth of the learned preacher, to declare: & that ye urge, this kind of preaching, to be as necessary unto ordinary public prayer, as ye did before to the administration of the sacraments: we should then shortly be in a proper pickle; except ye could with all devise better means, than heretofore ye have done, that every congregation where ordinary public prayer is to made, may likewise be presently furnished with such preachers. Otherwise, we should not only for the mean time, lay aside the Sacraments: but cease from all public prayers also. If ye say, ye speak not of all public prayer, but of ordinary public prayer: I pray you, of what could ye have spoken it more inconueniently? sith extraordinary public prayer cometh but now and then, upon extraordinary occasions. And therefore (me thinks) that preaching were of the twain more requisite, in extraordinary public prayers than in ordinary. And yet, that also were very hard, so absolute to bind extraordinary public prayers, that they might not be made without preaching. The ordinary course of the sacram. & public prayer, not to be omitted for want of preaching. But so to bind the ordinary public prayers, or else to cease them: that is yet a great deal harder, and more inconvenient than the other. I speak not this, but that we with preaching, where and when and how it it may conveniently be had, as much as any of our Brethren do. But, if it may not so ordinarily be had, we must not therefore intermit the ordinary course of the Sacraments, and much less the ordinary course of Public Prayer, but rather use it so much oftener. And where do our brethren find any such commandment of Christ, prescribed, that Public prayer, (be it ordinary, or extraordinary,) can not be made without a sermon preached? It were yet more requisite of the twain, that no Sermon were ordinarily preached, without some ordinary public prayer. Howbeit, we read of divers Sermons both preached by Christ himself, and by his Apostles, when neither he nor any other then present, made any ordinary or extraordinary public prayers. And also of ordinary and extraordinary public prayers made, without any sermon preached at the making of them. Our saviour Christ preached often times without any public prayer at his preaching, that either we find written, or may conjecture. As, at that sermon contained, Mat. 5.6. & 7. Chapters. Math. 5.6. and 7. chap. Yea, although in the same Sermon he taught the use of Prayer. Likewise Math. 13. and so the most part of all his ordinary sermons, Math. 13. except that which he made, john 17. and as for the Apostles, the first Sermon indeed that Peter preached, Act. 1. had a Prayer following, Act. 1. because of the particular occasion of electing an apostle. But of the next sermon that Peter prescribed, where so many were converted, Acts 2. Act. 2. We read of no Public Prayer at all made thereat. Only this afterward we read, ver. 24. that (as we have seen before) it is said: they continued in the Apost. doctrine, & fellowship, & breaking of bread, and prayers. But this argueth not, that they ever continued in a joint exercise of all these things, but continued in doing sometimes the one, and sometimes the other. And this appeareth better, especially for Public prayer, in the next story. For after that Peter and john, Acts. 3.1. were gone up together to the temple at the ninth hour of prayer, Acts. 3. and likely enough, even to pray there also: for, that they preached there at the same time, it fell out extraordinarily. But when they had been cast in prison for that their preaching: then (saith Luke) as soon as they were let go, they came to their fellows & showed all that the high priests had said unto them. And when they heard it, Act. 1.23 they lift up their voices to God with one accord, & said: O Lord, thou art the God which hast made heaven and earth. etc. ver. 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, & 30. Here was a Public Prayer of all the assembly, & so effectual, that saith Luke. verse 31. And when as they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together, & they were all filled with the holy ghost, and they spoke the word of God boldly. But this bold speaking importeth not Preaching at that instance & place, there was no sermon by any of them, that we find at that time preached. But these words referred to their bolder preaching afterward to the people. Also Acts 8.14. Act●. 8● Now when the apostles which were at jerusalem, hard say that Samaria had received the word of Go● they sent unto them Peter and john, who when they were come, prayed for them, that they might receive the holy Ghost. Here again was public prayer▪ and no sermon that we read of at that time, either by them, or by any other preached. In the tenth Chapter▪ Peter preacheth before Cornelius and his assembly, making no public prayer at his sermon. In the 12. Chapter when Herod had caught Peter and put him in prison, verse 5. saith Luke: So Peter was kept in Prison, but earnest prayer made of the Church unto God for him. Act. 10. Here again was public prayer without preaching. Act. 13. Acts. 13. Paul preached without making any public prayers. Except we shall say the public prayers of the Antiochians, being then in the synagogue, did serve that turn. But in the 17. he had no such occasion, preaching to the heathen Philosophers of Athens, without public prayer. Though in the twentieth, preaching to the Elders at Miletum, verse 36. Luke saith: And when he had thus spoken, Acts 17. he kneeled down and prayed with them all. But in 21. he entereth into the Temple, (which is the house of public prayer) and there was purified after the jews manner, and so, it is most likely, he used as well their public, as his own private prayers, and yet he preached there at all no sermon: as for the Chapters following, they mention only his preaching, without any public Prayers that he made. Ordinary and extraordinary praying and preaching. Whereby it manifestly appeareth, that this our brethren's rule, there would be no ordinary public prayer without preaching: (If we should precisely follow the Apostles practise therein) is no truer, than was their other rule before, Pag 63. Where is no preacher of the word, there ought to be no Minister of the sacraments. Neither doth this word ordinary, escape all these examples. And yet if extraordinary public prayer may be without Preaching, much more may the ordinary be sometimes without it, though sometime, with it. Yet at all times, if it may conveniently be had, we grant it would be better with it, than without it. But when preaching itself may be aswell extraordinary as ordinary, so well as public prayer may be: though, it were to be wished, that the public prayer and the public preaching did concur more often: yet, if at any time they do not concur, as we must not make void and unavailable the public preaching ordinary or extraordinary, if on occasion it be without the public prayer, as we have seen the clear examples: so may we not account the public prayer ordinary or extraordinary, to be frustrate and uneffectual, if (on occasion) it be without preaching, as these plain examples also do lay it forth. Now upon this wrong instant of the Popish abuses, our Brethren say: The learned Dis. Pag. 67. Which terrible example of the practise of Satan in the man of sin, Fear of the Papists example. should make us afraid to give any like occasion of such inconvenience hereafter to come. The application of the practice of Satan in the man of sin, and in the Romish Churches abusing the ordinary prescript forms of public reading, Bridges. singing and praying, being alleged no farther forth than thus, to be a terrible example to make us afraid, Example to terrify us from like occasion. to give any like occasion of such inconvenience hereafter to come: is not to be misliked. For so, it may be applied to our brethren, and to all other, as well as to us. In which sense S. Paul 1. Cor. 10. having reckoned up many terrible examples of the Israelites wickedness, in their lusting after evil things, in their Idolatry, in their fornication, in their tempting of Christ, in their murmuring, and of the plagues and destructions that came upon them in the 11. verse he saith, Now, all these things came unto them for examples, and were written to admonish us, upon whom the ends of the w●rlde are come: 1. Cor. 10.12. wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall. So that this, take heed, is a fair thing (as they say) Foelix quem faciunt aliena pericula cautum, Happy is he whom other men's harms can make beware. But S. Paul meant not, that all we upon whom the ends of the world are come, do commit the like offences, and that our doings should be compared by the way of resemblance, unto theirs. As for our ordinary prescript forms of public prayer, they be so clean contrary to theirs, that the professed Papists of all other things in us, can least abide them, as daring rather adventure, How contrary our form of public preier is to the example of the Papists. to give the hearing of our preaching the gospel; than to come to the Church, and but so much as to hear our ordinary prescript forms of public prayer, bethey long or never so short. And therefore we need be the less afraid, that they should ever give the like occasion, of such inconvenience hereafter to come, as did the practice of Satan in the man of sin, by thrusting out preaching from the Romish Church, with long prescript forms of reading, of singing, and of praying. Although Satan by the man of sin had thrust out preaching before (as I rather think) and then brought in his so long & so naughty prescript forms of reading, of singing, and of praying to occupy the whole day, and the whole people withal, in ignorance, superstition and Idolatry. Howbeit, we are not too sure to take warning, nor any thing is so good but it may be abused. And so (we grant) may our ordinary prescript forms of public prayers. It is good therefore to beware, that our Prayers degenerate not so far. Which (of his great mercy) God forbidden they should. And we trust in God, they shall not. And we pray to him, they may not. And thanks be to him, as yet they have not hitherto done, nor at this present do. And by his grace, we shall not need to fear, that they will ever give any like occasion of such inconvenience, Public prayers giving place to a Sermon for the time to come hereafter. But our brethren, to terrify us with this terrible example, (as those that are already grown into the danger of the Romish Church abuses,) do apply their example, saying. For, is not this opinion already grown into a great many men's heads, The learned disc Pag. 67. that the Service may not give place to a Sermon: no though the time be not sufficient for both? And are there not many, that had much rather here a chanted Matins and evensong, than a godly and learned Sermon? yea, they frequent the one, & refuse the other. These things (me thinks) are spoken a little too captiously (if they will pardon my too plainness on the other side, Bridges in this term) that the service (meaning the divine service or public prayer) should give place unto a Sermon. Public prayers more needful at some times than Sermons. For the time and occasion of danger may be such, that there may be more need of public prayer to those that are already grounded in faith, which at other times before they heard out of the word, than of hearing a Sermon at that instant. But, if there be no such necessity, to employ the time wholly in Prayer, as the Apostles did, when Herod had caught Peter, and put him in prison. Act. 12. ver. 5. and when the Israelites in their afflictions, did so often cry upon God to send them helpers. I do not think that this opinion is grown into a great many men's heads, (meaning the Protestants) that the Service may not give place to a sermon, The Protestants slandered as con●emning preaching in respect of publ. prayer though the time be not sufficient for both. For although they do well, zealously to love the divine service, devoutly to make their public prayers unto God, & religiously to hear his holy word, which also at the same time is publicly read unto them: yet, if they may have withal, a godly learned sermon, there are no good Protestants, but they would wish with all their hearts, if the straightness of the time (as our brethren here say) be not sufficient for both, that some part of the service should be left off, and give place to the preaching and hearing of the godly Sermon. And there are such provisoes in the book of common prayer already provided for that purpose: provisoes both for preaching & pub. prayer. yea, though there were no other Sermon but an Homily. But our brethren not content with this, that the divine service should be cut the shorter, to the end, that the Sermon might be the longer would have the divine service to give place to the sermon, that is to say, the one coming in the place of the other, the divine Service should be thrust clean out of place, that all the place and all the time might be taken up of the sermon. If they mean not so then will our provisoes sufficiently serve the turn, and the Sermon shall have place and time enough and welcome whensoever it cometh, yea the service also will give some place and yet not be turned out of place. For, provisoes for giving place to sermons. howsoever it may fall out at some odd times, in which also the whole service gives the whole place, and resigns up all the time: yet ordinarily there is time and place so sufficient for both, that the one need not shoulder out the other. And a sober Preacher will modestly tarry his due time, and let the public prayer and divine service proceed on a God's name, till it come to his convenient opportunity to preach. As S. Paul and Barnabas accustomed to do. Which appeareth Act. 13. ver. 14.15, The duty of a discrete pastor. Act. 13. The reverent order of the Antiochians & modest demeanour of the Apostle. etc. When they departed from Perga, they came to Antiochia, a city of Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the Saboth day, and sat down. And after the lecture of the Law and the Prophets, the Rulers of the synagogue sent untothem, saying: Ye men & brethren if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on. Then Paul stood up, and beckoned with his hand, and said: Men of Israel, and ye that fear the lord, harken, etc. By which it appeareth, not only that they had an ordinary form of the divine service, and public prayer: and a reading of the law and the Prophets, although ordinarily they had no sermon: and yet were ready to hear one, whensoever any such fatherly men came among them, which appeared unto them to have the gift of God to expound his word unto them, and to give them some comfortable exhortation thereupon: yet as they stinted not this ordinary exercise of the divine service, though no such extraordinary Preachers came unto them; so, when they admitted them, and desired them, as glad of them: yet they made not their divine service to give place to them, & ceased their ordinary public prayers, or the lectures of the Law and the Prophets. But after these things done, than they offered them licence to preach, and requested them to give them exhortations. And even as they used this moderation & order in the hearing of the divine service, & of the Sermons: so S. Paul tarrieth while their public prayers, and their Lessons out of the law and the Prophets, were ended, and then he satisfieth their request, and so entereth into his sermon. And if all our brethren Preachers would marhe and follow this example, all good men would like better of their modesty. And perhaps the rashness & undiscretion of some, to cut of all the divine service and ordinary form of public prayers, and so to bring the same into contempt, to have themselves heard in the Pulpit, might breed such an opinion in many men's heads. Although this opinion also might be grown into a great many men's heads, on other occasions, that the service may not give place, to a sermon: no though the time be not sufficient for both. But is their infirmity (be it a wrong or right opinion) a sufficient reason, to take the public prayers and the divine service clean away, or that there should be no form thereof at all: or, being rightly used, & with a moderate time, & the time also sometime abridged: to give the more place unto the sermon: may that be truly said to thrust out preaching. Chanting of matins & evensong As for chanting of the Matins and Evensong, if to chante be that which in latin is Cantare, in English our proper word is to sing: and the Psalms and Hymns and other joyful or doleful ditties, (as our brethren their selves do use) may be sung: Chanting of matins and evensong and Matins and Evensong, are but the usual terms, of the matutine (or morning) & evening, ordinary & public divine service: them is it not unlawful to hear even a chanted Matins and Evensong: so that the chanting or singing of them, take not away the edifying by them. Especially, when no other kind of matter is sung or chanted: but such as our brethren cannot deny (if their own senses be not enchanted) but may be chanted well enough. As for the Lessons, they are read: the confessions, the collects, or brief public prayers, in the Matins and Evensong, they are said. But our brethren demand, Are there not many, that had much rather here a chanted matins and Evensong, than a godly and learned Sermon? A slander of protestāns verily in my opinion, to answer upright, I think there are not many, nor any (meaning godly zealous protestants,) learned or unlearned that so had rather. I grant, of other sorts there may be many, that so had rather. But doth this follow hereupon, that although there be many which had rather hear the one than the other? that therefore we should take the one or the other clean away? may they not rather, (sith both of them in their degrees, are lawful and good) hear both the one & the other too? or if they can not come to hear the one, should they therefore refuse the other also, & so hear neither. But this is that which they charge them for. yea, (say our brethren) they frequent the one, and refuse the other. If any so frequent the hearing of the divine service, that he refuse to hear a godly and learned sermon, when he may come to the hearing of it, he is greatly to blame. But then, let our brethren look to it on the other side, how they their s●lues will escape blameless, which when they may hear both the ordinary divine service of public prayer, & a godly learned Sermon too, will under pretence of hearing the sermon, refuse to hear the ordinary divine service of the public prayer. Now, for proof hereof, that many among us are faulty, in frequenting the divine service, and refusing the sermon, they say: The learned disc. Pag. 67. Bridges Let Cathedral Churches etc. be an example, where you shall see a great number, that tarry while the Service is sung: but depart as soon as the sermon beginneth. To prove these instances alleged, Cathedral Churches must be the example. For what place they mean, by this etc. we may rather conjecture, than they dare utter. And it may be that some do so. And yet, if their so doing be so ordinary, that they be noted thereof: noted thereof: they are called into question for the same. Cathedral Churches. But howsoever it may be in some, it is not so (I am sure) in all Cathedral Churches but rather the clean contrary. The departing of some from the sermon that hear the service. When they come to the Cathedral church not so much to hear the Service, as the Sermon. For they heard the Service before in their Parish Churches. Which done, they come to the Cathedral church, (& that almost after the Service done there also,) unto the Sermon, which at the least, every sunday, is there preached. And this (I take) to be the order, in the most part of Cathedral and Collegiate, The order of frequenting the sermon in the Cathedral Churches. or such other principal Ch. or chapels, throughout the Realm. Where ye shall not see many at the Service song: but towards the ending of the service, or so soon as the sermon begnnieth in flocks they draw thither: yea there is order taken, if they would not, that they should. And therefore, this is quite contrary. But our brethr. (to help their forth) proceed to the Organs. The learned disc Pag. 68 Bridges While the Organs pipe, some are drawn with the sweetness of music to come up: but while the preacher crieth out, continue beneath: and in laughter or brawling, be louder than he often times. If the piping of the Organs draw them with the sweetness of the music to come up to hear the divine service: Organs. then is there yet some good use thereof, except it be better to drive them from it, than to draw them to it. If they continue beneath while the Preacher crieth out, then in the most cathedral Churches, as likewise generally in Parish Churches, the Preacher (for the most part) coming down unto them: they may hear him, not the worse, but the better: and he may cry, not the louder, but the lower, the most part of the Sermons, being preached in the body of the Church among the people. And if in some fewer places he preach in the Quyre: then shall ye not lightly have many beneath in the body of the Church, especially of such, as come to the Church to hear divine Service. One Church indeed there is, that I have seen, and which (I take) our brethren especially mean▪ where many resort, partly but for a thorough passage, and partly to walk up and down almost all day long, spending the time beneath in talking, or bargaining, or other worldly matters: but these do so, as much at the divine service, as at any Sermon in the queer above. But commonly there, the sermon is preached in the Churchyard: and that, with a great assembly of other Parishes, where they had no Sermon: yea, though they had a Sermon many of them in their own, or in other Parishes beside. And all that while that the Sermon is in that churchyard, none is permitted to walk or to abide in the Cathedral Church. And if the Sermons that are in the Church, were so provided also (I speak but my opinion and under correction) that they were made in the body of the Church, and the walkers up and down, by some good particular order were prohibited: there is no good person, that frequenteth the divine service but would as well like of it, Comparison to the Mass. as our brethren. And good preachers th●t are conformable and obedient to the Ecclesiastical government, & laws established of the Church of England, and that say their selves the prescribed form of public prayers, and divine service, have oftentimes called on the reforming of it. Which, if it were done, yet may all this Ecclesiastical government, superiority of Bishops, office of Pastors, administration of sacraments, and prescribed form of divine service, continue, notwithstanding as entire and forcible, as it doth. And yet, the body beneath of the Cathedral Church, is so separated from the Quire above: that the actions and assemblies in the Choir, neither at the service, nor sermons, nor Lectures is disturbed, by any passengers beneath: save that their unnecessary and idle walking all that while, is offensive, & (I hope) it willbe remedied. But in general, for all Cathedral Churches, Collegiat, Paroeciall, or any other, if any in laughter or brawling be louder or use any voluntary misdemeanour whatsoever in the Church, especially to the disturbance of the divine service or of the sermon: as they were better away than there; so there are laws & penalties already provided, for the chastisement of such disordered persons. If they be not executed, the fault is in the officers. And me thinks our brethren their selves, would become better officers, & fit to be made, Churchwardens, Sidemen, or Sextens, to look to the execution of the Laws, that in this behalf are already made, than that they can, or do set down any better new laws to mend this matter, in this their Learned discourse of Ecclesiastical government. But now, upon these abuses, where any such are, (thinking utterly to deface our public form of divine service,) they here disclose the effect of their meaning, in their former examples from the popish service, saying. So, that which was wont to be said of the Mass, Missa non m●rde●, the Mass was a gentle beast, The learned disc pag. 68 and did bite no man, and therefore was so well beloved of many; may rightly be verified of our ordinary service. For, therefore a great number can so well away with it, because it doth not sharply reprove them of their sins, nor disclose the secrets of their hearts, but that they may continue still in all kind of voluptuousness, and all other kinds of wickedness. Bridges. Our Brethren begin now more apparently, to open their stomachs against the book of common prayer, and the ordinary celebration of the divine service, Our brethren too passionate comparing our divine service to the Mass. that so expressly compare it, to the Popish Mass, which so expressly is contrary to it. All the world may see, this proceedeth more of the overflowing of choler from the gall, than from the deliberation of judgement in the brain. If they say, they compare it not unto the Mass; for any such johlatry, superstition, or any error contained therein, where with the Mass was farced. If they do not, and yet will campare it thereunto, as resembling the same: The masses biting. it appeareth not for any goodwill they bear it, but for that they can find no such corruption in it, nor can lay the least suspicion of any such Idolatry, superstition, or error to the charge of it. But this notwithstanding, they will compare it thus, So, that which was wont to be said of the Mass, Missa non mordet, the Mass was a gentle best, and did bite no man, and therefore was so well beloved of many: may rightly be verified of our ordinary service. What (I pray you my brethren) may rightly be verified of our ordinary service, which was wont to be said of the Mass? What? that it was a gentle beast, & did bite no man? Now surely, How gentle a beast the mass was, & how it did bite no man. this is somewhat too beastly a term & and too ungentle and biting a resemblance to bestow upon the true Service of God. Prove it false, & then spare it not. If it be true, for shame let not men, and wise men, and learned men, and men that pretend love of God's truth, afford so beastly a term on God's service. And how then may this be rightly verified? yea, and how may this be verified that our brethren here say of the Mass, the Mass was a gentle beast, and did bite no man? Do they speak this in the Masses commendation? or, do they think this a sufficient proof hereof, that they say here, it was wont to be said, Missa non mordet the mass did bite no man? No did? Yes, & that with a most perilous, and venomous tooth, which many felt, that were bitten and stinged with it. But, put case it did not, or could not, or it would not; would God that had been the worst fault in it, that it was a gentle beast, and did bite no man. Is that of itself so great fault to be gentle, and to bite no man? What, do our brethren like of or delight in biting? indeed it might so be thought by these sayings, but especially by all the tenor of this, and of all their discourses, both in writing, & in the pulpit. For they bite often, and that sore, not so much their adversaries, as their brethren: yea, How our brethren delight in biting. both the Eccl. & civil Magist, nor spare to bite any, yea, they fall to biting one another: as though it were good, biting, & a necessary thing. Not remembering that S. Paul warned the Galath hereof, Gal. 5.15. If ye bite & devour one another-take ye heed lest ye be consumed one of another. But our Brethren speak not here of biting one another, but of the masses not biting of a man. And would they have the mass if it did not bite men, to fall a biting of them? If they had spoken of no barking, The Masse● did bite and not bark. it had been somewhat to the purpose. For the mass did bite, and yet not bark, and therefore indeed, it was a perilous, & a shrewd biting beast, and not a gentle beast, that bite no man. True it is, there may come no small, if not more danger even by that, that biteth not, but seemeth gentle when it is abused to palliate greater vices. As the, Syrene● sweet song: as the flatterers false tongue: as the Harlot's smile beauty and embracements, as the Hypocrites shéeps clothing, The Mass. gentleness and cruelty. fasting, praying, alms, etc. and yet the harlot of Babylon, besides that she was arrayed in purple and Scarlet, and bedecked with gold and precious stones, & pearls, and had a cup of gold in her hand, full of abominations, & filthiness of her fornication: yet was she drunken with the blood of the Saints, and with the blood of the Martyrs of jesus. The Harlot of Babylon a shrewd Quean Apoc. 17.4. & 6. and therefore, Apoc. 17. she was a cursed and shrewd quean, and not very gentle, but could both bite men's flesh, and drink men's blood. And the beast on which she sat signifying the state of Rome, which chief beareth up the Popish Idolatry as it was also a s●●rlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy: and had seven ●eades and ten horns: so this beast likewise, could both bite and fight too. I grant, the Papists alured and deceived many, with their jolly enticements, that they decked their Mass withal besides their other baits attendant on her, of hospitality, bounty, alms, &c: and at this day, as in times pass, The popish baits attendant on the mass to allure the simple. the monks and friars, so the jesuits now, do more hurt by their counterfeit show of holiness, learning, humility, fair speeches, and all their policies, to allure the people to them, as the Angel of darkness transfiguring himself like an Angel of light, than if he should show himself like a Devil in a horrible figure. And therefore the day of the L. should not come till that general defection should first come, & till the man of sin should be disclosed, The jesuits practices. even the son of perdition, which is an adversary, & exalteeh himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, so that he doth sit as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. 2. Thes. 5.2.2. & 4. But when the mystery of iniquity, and the wicked man shallbe revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall abolish with the brightness of his coming. ver. 7. and 8. than shall this adversary shows himself as he is an open adversary, and this gentle beast the Mass, and all her friends for her, will tooth and nail, both bite and fight. And I saw the beast (saith S. john Apo. 19.19.) & the Kings of the earth, & their warriors gathered together, to make battle against him that sat on the Horse, & against his soldiers. The Mass therefore was not a gentle beast, no more than are his cruel and tigerlike Massmongers, that for the maintenance of the Mass as the mother of all their Idolatry, make these unmerciful massacres and manslaughters. The Mass was called an unbloody sacrifice, but many men's blood was and still is sacrificed to maintain it. The bloodthirsty nature of massmongers. They therefore that said the Mass was a gentle beast, and did bite no man: if they were no favourites of the Mass, did not perhaps mean it simply and in all respects, but as Christ said, Luc. 11.21.22. Luc. 11. When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, the things that he possessed are in peace. But when a stronger than he cometh upon him, and overcometh him-he taketh from h●m all his armond, wherein he trusted, Apoc. ●3. and divideth his spoils. The Dragon was quiet enough, and the beast also, to them that worshipped him, and had the mark of the beasts Image: but Apoc. 13. ver. 7. it was given him to make war with the Saints, The mildness and sharpness of our service. and to overcome them. and ver. 15. And it was permitted to him (that is to an other false beast, representing these false Priests, these Monks, these Friars, these jesuits) to give a spirit to the image of the beast, so that the Image of the beast should speak, and should cause, that as many as would not worship the image of the beast, should be killed. So that, these beasts, Gentle not of nature, but of Hypocrisy. were but gentle in a counterfeit sort. For, to them that withstood them, they were beasts indeed or rather flends and furies of Hell. That they were gentle therefore, it was not of their nature, but of their hypocrisy. For seeing that gentleness is good, Satan's practice. and that men like it better than austerity; the Devil that was a murderer from the beginning took upon him the shape of the lowly poor worm, and golden skinned subtle serpent, to speak fair, and wish wisdom, and not to s●ing, or hiss, or bite our first and innocent parents, when his purpose was to destroy them and all their progeny. The like practice hath he often used since, by his devilish Ministers and instruments: and so did he by the Mass. The Mass like to the goodly Trojan Horse, to Helen, & jesabel. Which is of some called well the Horse of Troy, that had so many fierce and bloody Captains even within it: and the Helen that was the cause of all the Cities, and so many people's destruction: or as we may more rightly call her, the very jesabel of the Romish Achab, that painted her face, and trimmed her head, using her whoredoms & witchcrafts, with the murdering of so many saints and Prophets of God. and yet forsooth she did bite no man, and can our brethren now rightly say, that this may rightly be verified of our ordinary service, that was wont to be said of the Mass, Missa non mordet, it was a gentle beast, and did bite no man, being a cruel beast, and did bite so many men, though it so falsely deceived them, with whom our brethren say, it was so well beloved, that being bewitched in love with it, they felt not the sting and biting of it? As for our ordinary form of public service and prayers, unto the Lord: that it is ●ylde and gentle, proceeding from the unfeigned and true gentleness and mildness that is in our Lord and Saviour jesus Christ, and the sweet comfort of his holy Gospel. If therefore it be well, or better of many or any of us beloved; it is all the better, nor any blemish to us that love it, or to it that deserveth to be loved. Neither may this rigtly be upbraided as a fault, that it biteth no man, How it ●yteth not. if it help and heal all men that are bitten, which come for comfort thereunto. For in our ordinary service, consisting most part of public prayers, made by the Minister & the congregation to the Lord our God, though we humbly acknowledge (as those that are bitten and stung with sin, and lay open before th● L. our wounds and guilt, which are grievous unto us, and ever against us: yet always we so flee to the throne of grace, that (reposing our trust in the rich mercies, The mildness and sharpness of our diu. Service. and sweet promises of our heavenly father, in his son our Saviour Christ, through the pledge and earnest of his spirit.) we cast the anchor of hope, on the rock of Faith, which shall never confound us, but work a strong and assured consolation and help unto us. And in this respect here is no biting. And yet in respect of other necessary parts, in our ordinary service of the Lord, What kind of biting it hath. there is a biting too, in a sort, but a good biting, if it may be so called. As Christ likened the Gospel unto the mustardseed, that hath a kind of biting (as we term it) but such a biting, as draws no blood. And as the merciful Samaritane powered in the sharp wine, into the bloody wounds of the man that was fallen into the thieves hands, though it were smart and biting, the better to cleanse them, even so well as the sweet oil to comfort and close them. Of which nipping (rather than biting) tartness, and much more than any beastly biting with the teeth, though there may be some fit resemblance, and more profitable use: yet doth this biting, in what sort soever it be, more properly belong to the respect of the Law, than directly it doth to the office and consideration of the Gospel. How the law is joined to the gospel. And as we like not of the false brethren, called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the adversaries of the Law, as repugnant to the Gospel. So our ordinary service is not without this part also of the Law. For both among the Psalms, (whereof a portion every day is read) diverse dreadful threats, and imprecations to impenitent sinners, are pronounced: beside the terrible examples and warnings of God's judgements, contained in the Lessons, both of the old and new Testament: besides sundry other admonitions, and reprehensions of vices, so well as exhortations unto repentance, & newness of life: with prohibitions of the unworthy to participate and receive the holy Communion: with Comminations, and denouncing the curses, against the trespassers of the Law. All which things, are apparently contained in the prescribed form of our ordinary service of the lord Now though the bestial Mass had none of those true comforts, nor any of these severe judgements of God, sincerely set forth; yet, we (God be praised for it) have them in our ordinary service of God. This therefore is a very uncharitable and untrue resemblance, of the Mass, and our ordinary service: being in all these things (as we have plainly seen) the one so plain contrary to the other. Upon this most wrongful resemblance, our brethren conclude. For, therefore a great number can so well away with it, because it doth not sharply reprove them of their sins, nor disclose the secrets of their hearts but that they may continue still in all kind of voluptuousness, & all other kind of wickedness. The learned disc. Pag. 65. To away well with a good thing, it is well done, and the greater number that so do, the greater cause we have to praise God for it. Contrariwise, to take away, or to keep themselves away, The liking of our Divine Service. or not to away well with a good thing: it is an ill thing, and the greater number that do so, augmenteth the evil and the grief of it. If any away the better with our ordinary service because it doth not sharply reprove them of their sins: Bridges what sharpness herein, our eager mooded brethren can best away withal, or, The liking of our divine service is a good thing. how they expound sharpness, I am neither so sharp set to examine, nor so sharp witted for to find: Let themselves declare it. But this I am sure, and it is open to all, that our ordinary service doth reprove men's sins, in such sort of sharpness, as the Scripture doth: when it layeth before them, even the very words themselves of the Scripture: besides the admonitions there in contained; that are plentifully and directly gathered out of the scripture, And in this wise, as God's word doth, it doth disclose the secrets of their hearts, and lay them open both to God and to their own consciences. If any contemn it or mark it not, or are not moved by it, or continue still in their wickedness: the fault is their own, & not to be imputed to our ordinary service of God, but to their ordinary service of the Devil. And so, the wicked (meaning the reprobate) will continue still in their voluptuousness, and all other kind of wickedness, Our divine service reproveth men's sins notwithstanding all the preaching in the world. But how may our brethren rightly verify this, that a great number can so well away with our ordinary service, etc. that they may continue still in all kind of voluptuousness, and all other kind of wickedness? As though our book of common prayer, and ordinary service of the lord did teach them and foster them up in all mischief. The heathen raised such foul slanders on the divine service of the christians in the primitive Ch. and will our own Brethr. now break forth into such reviling of our (their brethren's) divine service? What could the papists (our professed adversaries) have said worse? yea, the most obstinate recusant of them all? Our brothers fowl slander of our divine service. how mightily do our brethren confirm them in their disloyalty. But neither the Papists on the one side, nor these our malcontented brethren on the other side, are able (or ever by God's grace shallbe) to prove any one spark of any kind of voluptuousness, or any inkling of any other kind of wickedness, to be maintained, either because, or by means, meaning directly (for indirectly what may they not also accuse) of our ordinary service, & prescribed form of public prayer. But that on the clean contrary, it is an utter enemy, & tendeth to the abolishment of all voluptuousness & wickedness, if it be duly used as it should. Now when our brethr. have thus bitterly defaced our ordinary service of the L. they return to the commendation of preaching. Whereas by preaching, their conscience is gawled, The learned disc. pag. 66. their wickedness & hypocrisy discovered their damnation threatened, they are called to repentance, & forsaking of their pleasant sins, & to holiness & innocency of life The efficacy of our divine service. And may not all this and more too, be likewise said to be effected of good, even by the ministry of our ordinary service of the Lord, if it be set forth as it ought to be, and men would hear it as they ought to do? May it not gall a sinner's conscience, that hath so gauled already the recusant adversaries, Bridges that they cannot in any wise abide to hear it, any more: yea much worse than all the preaching in the world, Our ordinary service hath all thes effects that our brethren attribute to preaching. as most contrary of all other things, to all their popish, blind, erroneous, superstitious and Idolatrous service? And whosoever shall mark the same with reverence & attention (as in duty he is bound to do) shall find our ordinary service of the Lord, not only full of sound doctrine for faith, godly precepts for life and exceeding sweet consolation of the spirit: but he shall well feel (have he any feeling of his sin) that his conscience also shall be gawled (to use our brethren's term) to consider how godly and religious a form of Divine service it is, and how unreligiously it is neglected. And withal, it layeth open unto the markers of it, their sins before them, and toucheth them with remorse thereof. So that both thereby (as our brethren here speak of preaching) we may likewise say, Our ordinary service may better be called a preaching, than opposed against preaching. their wickedness and hypocrisy is discovered, their damnation threatened, and they are called to repentance, and forsaking of their pleasant sins, and to holiness and innocency of life: so, our ordinary service of the Lord, besides our public prayers, which also are very effectual to move us hereunto, is so little to be opposed unto preaching: that it may better be called a fruitful kind of preaching. Not that we deny, but that preaching (understood in his proper kind and being well used) worketh these effects also; but we affirm this (and the experience is appparant) that these effects may be, and oftentimes are brought to pass among us, even by the reverent ministry, and devout hearing and communicating with the Minister, in the public confessions, in the public prayers, in the public admonitions, and exhortations, in the public setting forth of the appointed parts of Scripture, & in the public administration and participation of the Sacraments: all which are contained in our ordinary service of the Lord. I grant, we cannot avow all this to be done, in all them that hear● the ordinary service: no more can our Brethren a●owe, all this to be done, in all those that hear the preaching. But, say our Brethren: So that if there be any spark of the fear of God in them, hearing preaching: so often as they use to hear service, they will fall down on their faces & worship God, The learned disc pag. 68 acknowledging the great power of God in his Ministers. 1. Cor. 14.15. 1. Cor. 1. 5●1 This exception so that, was well added. and with the like exception, we dare say as much of our ordinary service, For Prayers have as effectual promises in their kinds, Bridges. to those that fear God and honour him, and call upon him: as preaching hath. 1 Cor. 14. So that if there be any spark of the fear of God in them, meaning true sparks, (as Christ speaketh for faith As much as is a grain of of mustard seed Mat. 17.20) hearing our ordinary service of the Lord, especially, hearing the service so often as we do: although they hear not preaching so often, because they cannot conveniently so often have it, as they conveniently may the ordinary service: yet will they as much, if not more, than any even of our brethren themselves, use to do at any preaching, fall down on their faces, that is, prostrate and bow down both their souls, and also their bodies, by inward dejection of their minds before the Lord, and by lowly bowing of their knees unto the Lord, before his congregation, as a reverent token of their unfeigned humility, and so, worship God: as do the other faithful Christians assembled in his name, to call upon him, and to glorify him, acknowledging the great power of God in his Ministers. 1. Cor. 14.25. and no small power of God in his Minist. is declared to the penitent even in the very front of all our ordinary divine service of the Lord, where the Minister after the confession, pronounceth in the name of God, the forgiveness of the sins of man. But our brethren apply this alonely to preaching, and in very deed, in the selfsame place, which is not the 15. but the 24. and 25. verses, S. Paul mentioneth prophesying, and he maketh the comparative opposition, not between public prayer and prophesying: The words of S. Paul 1. Cor. 14. applied not only to prophesying, but also to prayer and to the service of God but between the speaking with tongs, and prophesiing. And as he maketh this an examplification of all that went before, concerning this matter: so not only he stretcheth his whole treatise of edification, as well to prayer as to prophesying: and therefore, not only in this chapter, 1. Cor. 14. ver. 14.15.16. & 17. he mentioneth also public prayers, which he would likewise have as prophesying, to be made to edification, in a tongue known, that the unlearned may say Amen. but also before, in the 11. chapter ver. 4 & 5. he joineth praying and prophesying together: Every man praying or prophesying, having any thing on his head, dishonoureth his head. And every woman that prayeth or prophesyeth bare headed, dishonoureth her head. Neither doth the prophesying that he so often mentioneth, both in the 14. and before that in the 13. and before that in the 12. and before that in the 11. Chapters of this Epistle, signify only the function of preaching: For speaking of every man's prophesying, cap. 11. verse 4. and of woman's prophesying, verse 5 and of making Prophets distinct from Teachers, Cap. 12. verse 28. and 29. and of making the gift of prophecy, to be the knowing of secrets and knowledge, cap. 1●. ver. 2. and even here in this place, Ca 14. ver. 24. speaking of the people, which are not ordinary Ministers of the word and Sacraments, he saith: But if all do prophesy, and there come in one, etc. So that properly, he speaketh not here, The effect of preaching of the only function that is ordinarily peculiar to the Minister, and whereof our brethren now dispute: but besides the special gift of foretelling things to come, or of revealing (though things present) yet secret, as he saith here, of him that cometh in among these Prophets, that the secrets of his heart are made manifest, as Peter made manifest the secrets of Ananias and Zaphira: Prophes●ing taken in properly Or else of such exercises also, in expounding the hidden mysteries and secrets of the holy Scripture, as the gift was then more peculiar to that age of the Primitive Church, and in their courses and places, more common, than now it is to all the faithful. But, howsoever prophesying be here understood; it debarreth not the like, at least, some parts of these effects, from the reverent and attentive hearing of God's word itself, openly red in the Church by the Minister; though at that thme not expounded. And perhaps the place that is read, be plain enough to understand, and to move the attentive hearer of the same, without a Preacher. Neither debarreth it these effects, from the public and ordinary prayers of the Church, & from other parts of the divine service, if they be so disposed, as S. Paul there would have all things done to edification, although no prophesying be used, nor sermon be preached at every time when those public prayers are made as already we have at large proved. But (say our brethren) that they cannot away withal, being like unto Felix the Lieutenant of the Romans in jewry: Who, when he heard Paul a poor prisoner, The learned disc. pag. 69. that stood before him bound in chains, preaching of righteousness, of temperance, and of the judgement to come, he was weary of him, because he was a great oppressor, and an intemperate person, and therefore feared the judgement of GOD for his sin, which he purposed not to forsake. Such is the majesty of God's word, when it is preached, that either it boweth or breaketh the wicked in pieces. Saint Paul's preaching of righteousness, of temperance, and of judgement to come, Bridges. made Felix tremble, Act. 24. ver. 26. and yet that trembling came to no perfect effect in him, to his conversion. And many more heard S. Paul's preaching at the same time, The effect of S. Paul's preaching wrought in Felix. that trembled less thereat than Felix did. And yet this impaireth not the Majesty of God's word when it is preached, Not, that it wanteth power to do that, which our brethren here say, that when it is preached, it either boweth or breaketh the wicked in pieces: but that it always doth it not. For, here it neither bowed nor broke in pieces, a great many wicked hearers of it. To which purpose, our Learned brethren might have brought out far better proves. But, may not this be said also of public prayer? no doubt, we may safely affirm thus much, even of our ordinary form of the divine service, where the word of God is also set forth, with sundry admonitions, confessions, exhortations, and instructions, besides the supplications, and thanksgivings: that although not always, and every man that is present at the same: yet hath it often bowed, moved, pierced: yea, and converted many a great oppressor, and intemperate person: The effect of divine service in many hearers of it. many a blind papist, and superstitious Idolater, and won them to God, or rather God hath won them by it, if not so much, as by preaching, yet, very much by it. And many, partly by the one, partly by the other. Yea, by this, he hath so broken in pieces, the rebellious hearts of the most obstinate adversaries: that they had a great deal rather, hear many Sermons, (yea, they will come dogging after the preachers, whosoever the Preachers be, to entrap their words, as the pharisees did with Christ) than to come to any one assembly of our public prayers, The Papists had rather hear sermons many times, than any times our divine service. and ordinary service of the Lord. Wherewith in no wise they will join with us, or give the least hearing in the world, which they will not spare to give, with all observation and noting of our preachings. And have they so great fear of our divine service, and public prayers, and do our own brethren make so light account, and so little regard thereof? What an hardening of the common adversaries hearts, and occasion of utterly contemning all our profession of the Gospel, is this unto them? Our Brethren now, to close up all this part, against our Divine service and public prayer, conclude it also with a prayer of their making and say: God grant therefore, that in steed of ordinary forms of prayers, we may have preaching in all places. And in place of Amen, God forbidden say I, with an other prayer to the contrary: (if it be his good will) not so much (good Lord,) to punish us, that this our brethren's prayer should be granted. For then, not only this that now we have, but simply all other forms of prayers, should be quite and clean abolished and taken from us. If they had prayed, that they might have continued with preaching, as before they said pag 67. there would be no ordinary prayer, without preaching, that had yet, been more tolerable. But to pray, that we might have the one in steed of the other, and that in all places: what is this, but to pray that all ordinary forms of prayer should be altogether expelled, that preaching may occupy all the time and place thereof. We will not, neither dare we pray; that ours, or any other ordinary forms of prayer, should in all places be in steed of preaching: but that preaching should rather be more often than it is, and that in all places, if it would please God, that all places might be so furnished. If not, yet in as many places, as may be. But to wish all ordinary forms of prayer, to be in all places, or in any place wholly displaced, to place preaching: God forbidden it should so be, or we should so with it. Surely (in my opinion and under correction) this is either a very great overshot in our brethren, or else it savoureth of some worse purpose, than I would gladly surmise, our brethren went about. Although they not only herein go about to overthrow all the ordinary forms of prayer, that are already with us established by all the estates and highest authority of the Church of England, or any other that we can make, if there be any defect herein: but also their own ordinary forms both that in scotland, and that of Geneva, and that of Middleborough, and that which now last of all they have renewed in London: and to the which, their selves have prefixed this title: A book of the form of common prayers, administration of the sacraments, etc. agreeable to God's word, and to the use of the reformed Churches. All this book, and these their own ordinary forms of prayers, are here prayed for by these our brethren the Learned Discoursers, Our Blast prayer ●old abolish the L prayer, & all. to be as well as ours extinguished. Yea they make no exception of the Lords own Prayer, which also is a prescribed & ordinary form of prayer. But against this prayer of theirs, which we pray and hope God will neither grant, nor hear: we have already at large sufficiently seen, good evidence and warrant, for ordinary forms of prayer in God's Church. The second thing that we have to observe is this, that although we make it the duty of the Pastor, The learned disc. pag. 69. & 70. to pray in the name of the whole congregation, yet do we not so mean, but that the whole congregation with one heart, and with one voice may praise God, with singing of Psalms all at once. For, this custom hath continued in the Church from the beginning, that the congregation have praised God with Psalms, singing altogether. 1. Cor. 14.15. & 16. If the whole congregation with one hart & with one voice, may praise God with singing of Psalms all at once or altogether: then may the whole congregation with one heart & with one voice, Bridges. all at once, or altogether, make their prayers to God. For, whereon do the Psalms consist, but even of those parts that S. Paul 1. Tim. 2. v. 1. speaketh of, to wit: Deprecations petitions, intercessions, & thankesgivining. All which if they may of all the whole congregation all at once, or altogether, be sung: why may they not as well of them be said, as sung, if they be said distinctly, and without confusion? Singing (I grant) doth well, where it may be had, & where they have tunable voices, and sufficient skill to keep their notes in tune and order. But is singing more fit for prayer than is saying? I am glad to hear our Brethren to favour singing of prayers. But, can they not do, but they must overdo? all the whole Congregation can not sing so well all at once, or altogether, or perhaps many of them not at all, except they should sing a black sanctus. But, they may all at once, a great deal more easily say those prayers, or some psalms that they cannot sing, not only if they can read, but if they can follow the Minister, that saith the same before them. And yet, they be not put either to the singing or saying of all, or of half a quarter, but of some few, and short, and easy, and those that they are acquainted well withal, which if they can sing, it is well, and a good hearing. But look what they can sing, that (I think) they can as easily say, and as orderly too, if they be so disposed. But how do our brethren prove, they should thus sing altogether. Our Brethr. reason of custom from the beginning. For (say they) this custom hath continued in the Church from the beginning. Yea? and is this then, a good plea with our brethren, of such a custom as hath continued from the beginning? Then (I think) they will bethink themselves a little better, for the continuing superiority of one priest or Elder, above his fellow priests or Elders, Which also hath continued in the Church from the beginning, as we have at large before declared. And have we not seen this custom also, that the whole Congregation as well saying as singing (and that oftener saying than singing) made altogether at once, as with one heart, so with one voice, their prayers and thanksgivings unto God? Of which continuance we have seen the custom, both in the old testament and in the new, even from the beginning. As for that our Bre▪ make it the duty of the pastor to pray in the name of the whole congregation: we deny it not, that this is his duty, but, The Pastors of p●●ying in the 〈◊〉 of the who 〈◊〉. this debarreth not, but that the whole Congregation also, may now and then join with the pastor, with one heart and with one voice and so well as sing, so likewise may they pray altogether at once▪ if not in their own names, but in the name of jesus Christ, yet in their own voices, and for their own selves, as well, as the minister also to pray for them, The ●oug● d●ty of praying with 〈◊〉. and in their names. Which debar of the whole congregation so to do, more than debarring them of singing, is too nice and precise a Scruple in our brethren without warrant either of commandment, or of custom continued, in the Church from the beginning for the same. And these three parts of a pastors duty, to preach, to Minister the sacraments and to pray, The 〈…〉 70. are so necessarily required of him in the word of God, as no man may rightly execute the office of a pastor, but he that performeth all these, each one in their due time. And to this part of prayer may be referred, the blessing of Marriages, not of necessity, but of ancient use of the Church. Bridges To all these three parts of a Pastor's duty, we assent in this manner. For the first, The Pastor's duty of preaching. that it is his duty to preach, either distinguishing of the manner of the preaching, or the necessity of the duty, as we have before declared. And likewise for the other two, we grant them as necessary, as our brethren do require them, and as parts of his duty. Howbeit, as our Brethren here at length do confess, His duty of ministering S●●r. and praying. not always either these two, and much less all these three, to be necessarily executed and performed all at once, but each one in their due time. So that, although preaching (in the sense as our Brethren understand, distinct from teaching) want upon any necessary or convenient occasion at the same time: yet may the pastor rightly proceed in executing the part of a pastors duty, for his public prayers, and performing the administration of the sacraments. And though the Sacraments also, The prayers may proceed though there be no Sacra. ministered at that time. upon any occasion or necessity, be not administered: as for Baptism, if there be none to be baptised, or the people do not receive the communion at every assembly, as our Brethr. (I think) will not say it is necessary, especially in the assemblies at the evening prayers, except they will have no public evening prayers, or the communion to be received in the evening: yet, without the sacraments, may the public prayers rightly proceed. Yea, though there be neither sacraments, nor sermon at that time, yea, and though there were a Preacher never so learned, except they will in every Congregation, provide at least for two preachers, one to preach at the Morning Prayer, the other at the evening prayer, or provide sufficient health and strength for one to serve always both the turns, or else, cease the public evening prayers, and now and then Morning Prayers too, for want of the sacraments and the preaching. And although it be more requisite that public prayers should be made, both at the preaching of a sermon, and especially at the ministration of the Sacraments: yet, as public prayers may proceed without either of these, so may either of these both preaching, & also baptism (though not the communion of the L. body & blood) be administered without the public prayers, if such necessity or occasion served as we have seen sufficient examples thereof, even in the Word of God. Notwithstanding, with public prayer, (we still grant) it is always better. And when all these three parts of a pastors duty, preaching, ministering the sacraments, and praying, are joined one with another: we deny not, but it is best of all. As for referring the blessing of Marriages unto prayer, I like it also very well: But then, I would have our Brethren mark this withal, that here they say of this blessing, The blessing of Marriages referred to prayer. or praying for them, that it is not of necessity but of an ancient use of the Church. Now, if the prayer for the married be not of necessity, but of conveniency, because it is an ancient custom of the Church: what then shall we think of the administration of the sacraments unto them at the time of their Marriage, or of a sermon to be preached unto them, when the public prayer, that God would vouch safe to bless those, that are to be joined in the sanctified and honourable estate of Matrim.) is not of necessity? & yet are our Bre. herein to be again much commended; An ancient custom of the Church. that would have these prayers of blessings used at marriages, because though they be not of necessity, yet are they of an ancient custom of the Church. Which rule if they would consider in many other things, being neither wicked nor superstitions, being neither against good manners nor true Doctrine, though they be not prescribed, nor yet expressed in the word of God, nor are of any necessity, but of an ancient custom in the Church: they would not reject so many things, chiefly, not so contemptuously, as they do. The argument of the 9 Book. THE 9 Book treateth of the Church's authority in disposing matters of order, comeliness and edification, and of the church of Engl. lawful proceeding herein. Of these Discoursers disobedience and reproaches of the churches doings, and urging their own orders without authority: of the danger in contentions for small matters: and of urging and impugning ceremonies: how comeliness, order and edification are joined and separated. Of S. Paul's reproving the uncomeliness of women's prophesying and preaching, and why these Learned discoursers so especially note this uncomeliness: how their own positions infer women's preaching on necessity extraordinarily, and so, of consequence, Baptizing. How Women did then prophesy in the congregation of the Corinthians, and of our late abusage in that exercise: the confuting of Beza and others interpretations for women's prophesying, to have been but only in hearing, with the manifold examples to the contrary. How far calvin and other Protestants allow it or debar it: how calvin digresseth hereupon from women's public speaking to their public government, and with what hard terms he concludes against it. How Danaeus resumeth the same question, & followeth further upon it. Of the cause that carrieth away calvin, Danaeus & all the French writers from the oeconimicall to the political government of Women: & how requisite it is to pursue this digression, both to stand on our necessary defence in this point, and to confute all such, as heretofore, both in other countries and among us, have set forth Books against women's Regiment. To which points are first examined, the arguments that Caenalis the French chronicleo hath gathered together against all women's Government, under pretence of the Salic Law in France: with examining & conferring the law of God, the law of Nations, & the civil law. beside the examination of the often practise in France by the government of Women of the ancient state of France: the pedigrees in and before the time of Pharamund, and since. The lines of the merovingians, the Carolines, and the Capetians, or Hugonians, all from the rig●t and title of Women. The arguments for the gift of healing, and of the same also in the kings & Queens of England. The hurt and troubles that the devise of the Salic law hath bred to all Christian kingdoms. The examples, objections, & reasons, pro & contra in Daneus, & the answers unto him, with the examples of wom. government in all ages and in all the most famous peoples of the World, besides England: & chiefly in the Empire of Rome, which Daneus excepteth: & of Daneus conclusion against patrimonial magistracy & jurisdiction. Lastly, the answer to the arguments of Bodinus and of Hottomanus, against women's regiment, & for the Salic Law, with Hottomans judgement thereupon. furthermore, in those things that are necessary parts of the Pastors office, the Church hath authority to dispose them, The learned disc Pag. 70. & 71. as touching the circumstances, for order and comeliness sake: but chiefly for edification. As the days and times of preaching and administering the sacraments, the places meet for the same, and for public prayers: also the form and manner of using those things, so that all things be done comely and agreeable to order, but especially that in all things, principal regard be had to edification, which Saint Paul so often & so precisely urgeth in the 14. Chapter of the 1. Cor. For therefore ought our assemblies & comings together to serve, that therefore we may be better, that we may be taught, that we may be edified. 1. Cor. 11.17. 1. Cor. 14.23.24.25.26.31. 1. Cor. 11.17 1. Cor. 14. 23.2●.25.16.31 IF the Church have authority to dispose these thing, Bridges that are necessary parts of the pastors Office, The church●s authority to disposematters of order, comeliness & edification. as touching the circumstances for order and comeliness sake: but chiefly for edification, as the days and times of preaching, and administering the sacraments, the places meet for the public Prayers: also the form and manner of things: The Church's authority. with what authority then do our brethren take upon them, to transpose in the Church of England, that which the Church of England hath disposed? with what authority can they abrogate or alter the days and times of preaching & administering the sacraments, Our Brethr. doings with out author. that the Church of Engl. in like manner by her authority hath disposed? with what authority can they dispose assemblies, & coming together of the people, to be made in other places, than to that purpose are disposed: with what authority can they control or disobey the form & manner of the public prayers, & using those things in the ordinary service, that the church of Eng. hath disposed to be used? & yet they will not only refuse to use thosethings & the form & manner of public prayers, nor only deface & revile them as nought, but set forth & oppose against that, which by the church's authority is disposed, another form & manner of public prayers of their own disposing. Yea, if we were disposed to examine better their own positions: how standeth this with their prayer, on the other side of the leaf, pag. 69. saying, God grant therefore that in steed of ordinary forms of prayer, we may have preaching in all places? If the church have authority to dispose for public prayer, the form & manner, so that all things be done comely, The allowance of a prescribed form of ordinary public prayer. & agreeable to order, but especially that in all things, principal regard be had to edification: then, not only a form of public prayers hindereth no whit, but furthereth comeliness, order & edification: but also the church using her authority, in disposing of an ordinary form of public prayers, so well as in disposing the days & times & places for preaching: it cannot be that preaching in all places should be had in steed of public prayers, but that both of them should still continue, in their days and times, places, form and manner, by the Church's authority disposed. And what followeth hereupon? but that either our brethren must deny the Church of England to be the Church, Our brethr. duty of obedience to the Church of Eng. disposing a prescribed form. and so, not to have authority of their disposing of these things: or else, granting it to be the Church, that is to say, a particular Church, for, I think they will not say, that they mean this only of the universal church, nor yet of every several congregation, for so our Bre. assertion were not true: but speaking here indefinitely, that the church hath authority to dispose these things: they mean, every whole state of any true particular Church in Christendom. As the Church of England in Engl. the Scottish Church in Scotl. the Helvetian, the Genevian, the French and the Dutch Church, in their own states. Which being confessed: our Brethren being neither the Church universal, nor the whole state of the particular Church of England, but private members in the Church of England: and though some numbers of them here and there collected, may make some several congregations: yet are they not of sufficient authority, no not so to collect themselves, or have any authority of making any assemblings or comings together at all in any place, Disobedience. being but private persons: without the disposing of them that have authority in the Church, or of the whole estate of the church of England thereunto: then must they needs confess withal, that they do greatly offend▪ in going about to gainsay and overthrow this authority of the whole Church of England, which hath by her authority, so much as in her lies, disposed ordained, and established these things, as touching the circumstances for order and comeliness sake, but chiefly for edification, as the days and times of preaching, and administering the sacraments, the places meet for the same, and for public prayers: also for the form and manner of using those things, that all things be done comely and agreeable to order, but especially, that in all things, principal regard be had to edification. Now, when the Church of England hath by her authority, and by the authority of the supreme governor of her under Christ, and of all the governors ecclesiastical or political of her whole estate, thus disposed these things: Is it lawful for any private persons, Their offence against God. be they learned or unlearned, be they few or many, in the same▪ Church, to resist this authority? whether this be to resist even God, or no: and whether, that which Saint Paul wrote to the Romans, Chapter, 13. charging them being Christians to obey their Civil Magistrates, (though evil and Heathen,) in civil and indifferent matters, do not much more bind every particular private Christian, & all Christian subjects, to obey their Christian Magistrates, and all good Christian both Ecclesiastical and politic governors, & the whole particular estate & authority of their own church, whereof they are but private members: I refer it, to every indifferent reader's judgement, & to our Bre. own answer, on better advisement of these things. If our Bre. deny, that they have ever done, or yet do resist the Church of England's authority in disposing these things: what was all this that was last spoken of, against the ordinary form of public prayer & divine service, besides the authority itself of the ecclesiastical governors, and many other things of circumstances for days, times, places, and administrations of Sacraments, that they so vehemently impugn? If they say, The church of Eng hath not overreached her lawful authority in thosething● that herein yet, they do not resist nor speak against the Church of Engl. for her authority to dispose these things, but resist and speak against her, only for this, that the she hath abused her authority, and that she hath encroached further, than she hath lawful authority to warrant her doing: for, that her authority as touching these circumstances, is but for order and comeliness sake, and chiefly for edification: and that it is to be restrained with this limittation, So that, all things be done comely, and agreeable to order, but especially that in all things, principal regard be had to edification, which S. Paul so often and so precisely urgeth in the 14. Contentions. Chapter of the Cor. Neither do we desire to have the Church's authority in these circumstances, to be enlarged one inch further. And even so (God be praised) hath the Church of England had, and especial consideration of all these 3. points, of comeliness, of order, and of edification. If they think not so, acknowledging her to be a true Church: except they can prove it better, than hitherto they have done, and yet should they prove the same also, (if they could) with more modesty and humility than they attempt to do:) they both offer too great an injury to their true and loving Mother the Church of England, Our brethr. il demeanour towards their mother the Church of England. whose Children (if any children of the Church) they be, and bewray too great a partiality to their own opinion. And, more seemly of the twain, it might be thought to all good men, that as they confess their Mother hath authority, given unto her by their Father, of disposing these circumstances to these ends and purposes that withal, they should rather render her this honour, being known otherwise, to be a true, reverent, and chaste mystical wife unto her spouse & husband, and to be a natural and tender mother to her children, having ●●urished than with the pure milk of God's word, and brought them up to that knowledge of God which they now have, to think, that she hath used her authority well, in disposing these circumstances to these ends accordingly, and submit themselves to her disposing of them: than to accuse her to their father, or make an outcry of her to the world, that she hath abused her authority in these things, and that these circumstances are not disposed to these 3. ends, neither by her, nor by any for her, that either their father, or she, hath committed her authority of disposing them unto, except they be a new disposed, & transposed, in such order, as they the private children shall conceive, to be more agreeable to these ends. What an unnatural part were this? yea, how is it not as great fault, on the contrary as the adversaries, that extolled and honoured their mother too much, giving her equal authority with God, The adversaries honoured their mother too much, our Brethren too little. (whom they pretended to be their father) not only in circumstances, but in points of religion, and making her to alter God's commandments? thus advanced they their mother, which was and is notoriously convicted, of most manifest spiritual fornication. And we now, that profess ourselves to be children of her, whom we all acknowledge to be the true wife, and chaste matron of the L. Shall we thus on the other side dishonour her, that when we cannot deny her authority in these circumstances, we shall say, she useth them not to the end, for which they are given her▪ As for that, which Paul so often and so precisely urgeth, 1. Cor. 14. In all these verses so precisely quoted, 23, 24, 25, 26, & 31. What is there any thing in any one of all these Verses to the purpose, that here our Brethren speak of: save that only in the end of the 6. verse, Paul saith: Let all things be done to edifying? which precept I know not, nor it is yet proved, that this our mother the Church of England, in disposing any of these forenamed, circumstances, doth transgress and abuse this her authority. As for the other place here also cited, 1. Cor. 11.17. is nothing likewise to the present purpose. Now, in this (saith S. Paul) that I declare, I praise you not, that ye come together, not with profit but with hurt. Except, that it maketh more against our Brethren themselves, than it doth any whit against the Church of England, for any circumstance of these things that by her authority she hath misdisposed. True it is, the church of Corinth began to abuse and dispose amiss diverse things, which S. Paul dissuading them from, teacheth them in what comely sort, the men and women among them should pray or prophecy. Contentions disturbers of the church's orders. Which when he had declared, (preventing such contentious persons, as would unnecessarily disturb quiet, comely, and indifferent orders) he saith ver. 16. immediately before that which our Brethren allege: but if any man be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the Churches of God. Upon which general admonition, calvin saith? He is contentious, Calvin in 1. Cor. 11.16. that is, stirred up with a lust of moving strifes, neither regardeth he, that place should be given to the truth. Such are all they that upon no necessity, would overthrow pull up (or destroy) all good and profitable rites (or customs,) which move controversies of matters not doubtful, which hold not themselves contented with reasons, which suffer not themselves to be restrained into order, such are also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, those that are uncivil, or not able to be kept company withal, who with a foolish affection are carried into a form that men are not accustomed unto. Paul vouchsafeth to give those men an answer: because contention is a pernicious thing and therefore it ought to be driven away from the Churches. Wherein he teacheth, The dange● of contention against orders & the repressing of contentious men. that such froward persons and desirous of brawling, should rather be kept under with authority, than with long disputations to be refelled. For, there will never be an end of contentions, if by striving thou wouldst overcome a quarrelous man. For he will never be tired, although he be overcome an hundred times. Let us diligently therefore, note this place, lest we should suffer ourselves to be carried away with superfluous disputations: notwithstanding so that, we shall know how, to discern contentious persons. For we must not always hold him contentious, that yieldeth not to our decrees, or that dare gainsay us: but where a lust and an obstinacy appeareth; then let us say with Paul, contentions ought to be far off, from the custom Ecclesiastical. Thus saith calvin: whether it touch our Brethren or us nearer, let other judge. Paul now upon the occasion of these contentious men, saith in the next verse, which by our Brethren here is quoted: Now in this that I declare, I praise ye not, that ye come together not with profice but with hurt. F●r first when ye come together into the Church, Urging ceremonies. I hear that there are dissensions among you, and I believe it in some part. These dissensions raised among them by dissentious persons, Contentions hinder edifying in public Eccl. assemblies. (that unnecessarily disturbed the peace of God, and quiet of the Church,) hindered indeed their edification in their Ecclesiastical assemblies. And it hath not a little hindered the edification of the Church among us. For what is edifying, but the building up of the mystical body of Christ, that is, his Church? And if all assemblies and comings together aught therefore to serve that we may be better, that we may be taught, that we may be edified: do not our assemblies and comings together, (meaning of our Ecclesiastical assemblies) serve to the same purposes? If they take not always, nor in all the parties that come together in those assemblies, If our publ. assemblies be not so effectual: the fault is personal in the parties assembled▪ not in the church's orders. the effect for the which they serve, shall we blame the Churches disposing of the assemblies? Or not rather the defaults of the assembled persons, and especially these makers of unnecessary dissensions in the assemblies. Which if they were repressed with authority, and the assembled parties do their duties, as the Church hath well disposed these assemblies to serve to these good purposes: so they would be far more effectual than they be. And therefore I like better of Caluines note hereon, from whom our Brethren seem to take this saying. For (saith he) if we respect what should be done in the Church, calvin in 1. Cor. ● 1. no coming together aught to want fruit. There is the doctrine of God heard, prayers are made, the mysteries are celebrated. The fruit of the word is, that the trust and fear of God should be increased in us; that proceedings forward may be made in holiness of life, that more and more we may put off the old man, and profit in newness of life: and the other mysteries tend hereunto, that they may exercise us in godliness and charity. And also unto all these things prayers do avail. And to this it cometh, that the Lord worketh effectually by his spirit, because he would not that his institutions should be vain. Therefore if the holy comings together do profit us nothing, nor that we be any whit better thereupon, our unthankfulness is in the fault: and therefore are we rightly to be accused. For we are the doers, that those things which of their own nature, and of the ordinance of God ought to be healthful, pass away without any profit. Thus doth Calvin rightly lay the fault where it is, on our own selves, and not on the Church's authority or disposing of these assemblies. And therefore we have great marvel that some are so precise in urging ceremonies, The learned disc pag. 71. & 72. as many think much hyndering edification, but as most men confess, nothing profiting to edification, having always in their mouth that saying of Saint Paul, 1. Cor. 14.40. Let all things be done decently and according to an order, and do so little remember that the Apostle in that long Chapter, laboureth altogether to drive all things to edification, or else to drive them out of the Church. As he saith of him that hath the gift of tongues, being of itself an excellent and comely gift of the holy Ghost, and being used orderly of one or two by course, with an interpreter, might do much good in the Church. But if there be none interpreter (saith he) let him hold his peace in the congregation. To urge ceremonies either much hindering edification, or nothing profiting to edification; and to be so precise, Bridges. or to be precise at all in urging of them: although it be not to be marveled, that some do so, and that some are so: yet, is it not to be liked that any should so do, or be. Preciseness about ceremonies. But I marvel more, that our Brethren marveling at some that do and be so: do not find also that their selves do it and so be: so precisely urging the ceremonies, which they would bring into the Church; that upon this so great preciseness, they have gotten themselves the name of Precisians for it. And also for that they are so precise in driving out those ceremonies, which their selves as it should seem, dare not plainly say, or (I am sure) cannot sufficiently prove, to be naughty and superstitious ceremonies. No, nor here they say, that they are much hindering aedifycation: but, as many think, much hindering aedifycation. And yet, they their selves control this manies thinking also, & say, (as it were by correction of their former speech) but, as most men confess, nothing profiting to aedifycation. We urge no ceremonies nothing profiting to edification. But who are these many, and these most men, that thus think, or confess? Is it not only their own selves? For, if they think that other think as they think herein; they think greatly amiss, and deceive themselves. For, the most men, neither confess nor think any such thing. I speak not of the most men among the adversaries of the Gospel: but of the most men among the Protestants, and Professors of the Gospel. Neither is there any such cause or truth of matter, why they should either so confess or think of any ceremonies, that in the Church of England are now urged. But who likewise are these that so urge them? And withal, what are these ceremonies, which they urge, that many should think, are much hindering aedifycation: or, most men should confess, are nothing profiting to aedifycation? And how far forth also stretcheth this so precise urging of them? For all these points, if they had of our Brethren been plainly set down: they might have been of us the easilier and more plainly answered, But as our Brethren name not these, some: so would I gladly, and for brotherhood-sake, impute it to their modesty, in forbearing the naming of such estates & persons. Howbeit, because in these spéches, they seem not to mean any blind and superstitious adversaries, but such as are open professors of the Gospel: nor any private persons, but such as have authority to urge these things: and that they urge them so precisely: although our Brethren do the better to mollify the term, Edification that they urge them but precisely: and not that they urge them with any simple & absolute necessity, as themselves before did urge preaching, at every time of administering the sacraments, and of pyblike prayers: yet are our Brethren not a little to blame herein, thus to gléeke at the Magistrates, or at any other their Protestant Brethren, with such apparent slanders, that they urge such hindering or nothing profiting ceremonies, and that they urge the same so precisely. Whereas, first no ceremonies are at all urged, (that is, as I take it by authority commanded: What, and how ceremonies be urged. ) but such as we can, and shall at all times, (when any such shall be named,) clearly prove, not to hinder, but to further edification. And then, that (being whatsoever between our Brethren and us they shallbe proved to be;) they are not urged so precisely, but only in such manner, as may well stand with our Christian liberty▪ and as toucheth not the freedom of our conscience at all, as any matter of religion: but only in respect of a civil or Ecclesiastical obedience, for comeliness and order sake, which is nothing prejudicial or hindering to edification, but furthering and profiting of it. And withal, these some that urge the same, are of such estate, calling and authority, yea, and of such a number, so many, and the most men, & besides the most, the best among us: that the some, or the many, or the most men or women among our Brethren and sisters, that think of these ceremonies otherwise, and urge the abolishing of them, as precisely, and far more precisely, than any among us do urge the retaining of them: ought rather, (if they did well bethink themselves, either of their duties and callings, or of the nature and urging of these things, ●he state & Church not to be disturbed for them. ) both to think and to confess better of the urgers of them, and of things urged, and to yield unto them, namely in such sort, as they are urged; at least wise, if they will not yield; yet, not to disturb the peace of conscience, the unity of the Church, the quiet of the state and the mutual bond of charity, with their intemperate and unnecessary striving against them. For whether, these ceremonies do or no; certain it is, that not only many think, and most men confess, but that all of us (save the common adversaries that like it, How greatly our brethren's contentions hinder the churches edifying. and laugh thereat, and blow the coals, and warm their hands at the fire thereof) must needs grant, that these contentions for these things, do not only nothing profit, but much hinder edification. Yea, and it were not more of the surmounting mercies of our good God, and the help and comfort he hath raised unto us, by his holy Handmaiden: not only the edification, but the whole edifice, had long ere this for the visible state thereof among us been quite shattered in shivers, and clean overturned. And now, whether we for the ceremonies of circumstances should rather in thankful obedience, yield unto her Majesty, and to all our Governors under God and her, and to the state already established: or her Majesty, and all our Governors, and the whole estate established, Comeliness and order. should herein yield to these our Brethren: there lies the question. And I refer it (being a question, for some certain order to be had in indifferent things) unto the determination and order of all indifferent judgements. But this is that also, which our Brethren find fault withal; that these some, which they say are so precise in urging ceremonies; are always having in their mouths, that sentence of S. Paul, 1. Cor. 14.40. let all things be done decently and according to an order. And is not this a good sentence of S. Paul, for them, The excellency of the sentence 1. Cor. 14.40. for our Brethren too, and every one of us, when we have occasion to treat of such matters, to have always in our mouths, to have always in our hearts, to have always in our actions and performance? What mean therefore our Brethren here to find fault with this, that any should always have so excellent a sentence in their mouths, for the keeping of order, especially they that with authority urge it? Doth not this sentence mightily confirm it, when it saith that all things, making no exception of ceremonies, or of any indifferent things, to be used in the Church assemblies, but, Comeliness joined with order. as they must be done in a comely manner: so they must be done in order? and can an order be kept more orderly, than when a standing and set order is appointed, by those that have authority thereunto, Orders must be ordained and not broken. and they precisely urge it, without violating the observation of the same? Would our Brethren have men to lay aside this sentence of S. Paul out of their mouths, out of their hearts, and out of their actions, and continue to break this rule: Either that all things, or that any indifferent thing, ceremony, or circumstance, should in the Church assemblies be done, without urging of an appointed comeliness, and without urging any authorized & prescribed order? But our Brethren not only find fault with them, that have this sentence always in their mouths: but say they, and do so little remember that the Apostle in that long chapter laboureth altogether, to drive all things to edification, or else to drive them out of the Church. If they have always that sentence of S. Paul in their mouths, in such sort, that they do so little remember, in their heads, this drift of the Apostle, and this his other sentence in the same chapter, ver. 26. let all things be done to edification: then do they greatly forget the principal thing, that in these matters they ought to have remembered. Our Brethr. fogetfulnes of their duty to their betters. But if our Brethren remember this, as a challenge to burden the Magistrate, & those in authority that urge these things in manner a foresaid, that they have always in their mouths the one sentence of S. Paul for comeliness and order, and remember so little the other, for edification, which the Apostle likewise laboured to drive all things unto: than their selves do so little remember their duty to their betters, and so much forget the truth: that if other had said it then our Brethren, I would have remembered them of this old sentence, oportet esse memorem they know who. Neither can these two, edification not separate from comeliness and order, but included in them. that is, comeliness & order, be destitute of this other, that is, edification. For, the name edifying, being a general name, to build and set up, or join together the mystical body of Christ: doth not the comely proportion of the edifice, not only beautify and commend the form, but the orderly disposing of all the parts thereof, contain and maintain even the very edifying of the whole frame? And therefore when S. Paul had said before, ver. 26. Let all things be done to edification: he knitteth up all his conclusion of that matter, with this sentence, that our Brethren would not have men to take so often in their mouths, Let all things be done decently and according to order: Both making either of these, comeliness and order, to stretch their jurisdictions (as far as edification) even to all things, understanding them of all such things as are to be done in the Church assemblies: and also to be as requisite and necessary in their kinds, as edification is, if not to be some principal parts their selves of edification. And if (as our Brethren say) we must remember, that Saint Paul laboureth in all that long Chapter, to drive all things to edification: why may we not as well, or rather say, when he concludeth all with the other twain, that our Brethren must also remember this, that S. Paul laboureth in all that long Chapter, to drive all things to decency and to an order? May not all those things that went before, be more properly said to be driven to that, that is the last conclusion, then to be driven to that, that is in the beginning, or in the middle of the treatise? But if this be true, that he laboureth to drive all to edification, & yet this is apparent, that he concludes all with decency & order: then, either is comeliness, & order contained in edification, or edification contained in comeliness and order. Or else, these things being not contained the one in the other, but things several: this is not true, that he laboureth altogether in the long chapter to drive all things to edification, labouring also to drive not only some things, but all things, to decency and to order as well, and as much, as to edification. But he that laboureth altogether to drive all things to one thing, doth not labour to drive them to any other: S. Paul therefore labouring to drive all things withal to these two: if they be several matters from edification, this can not be true, that he laboureth altogether to drive all things to edification, except we either comprehend the name of decency & order in the name of edification; or the name of edification, in decency & order; to salve our Breath. assertion, from conviction of an apparent untruth, Comeliness & order are their selves an edifying. so much as we can. And so indeed it may in a very good sense be understood, for there is an edifying in all these respects. Not only when the people do understand those things that are spoken, and receive instruction & comfort by them, whereby they are said to be edified, that is, in knowledge and faith to be builded upon Christ the rock: but also when any public action in the Church is done, in such sort as S. Paul in that long chapter laboureth to have it done, to wit, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, comely, honestly, or decently: and keepeth such degree of place and time, that it is done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, according to order: albeit the matter be but a ceremony of apparel, as the uncovering or covering of men's and women's heads, while they prayed or prophesied, which being no matter of doctrine, Saint Paul precisely urgeth, though not so precisely, that we should make it a matter of the substance of religion: yet, he driveth it to such a natural comeliness, and with so great and urgent reasons for Ecclesiastical order sake: that he maketh the comely order thereof, and of such other things as he there handleth, for speaking in their turns and courses, to be no little edification to the assembly. And therefore well saith calvin on this sentence, Let all things be done decently and in order: the conclusion is more general (he meaneth, Calvin in 1. Cor. 14.40. than that which was before, in exhorting them to seek after prophecy) which not only comprehendeth in brief the whole state: but also the singular parts: yea, rather it is a rule, whereunto it behoveth us to drive all things that appertain to external policy. Because he disputed scatteringly of rites or ceremonies, he therefore here would collect all into a brief sum, to wit, that a comeliness should be kept, and confusion should be avoided. Which sentence showeth, that he would not bind the consciences to the former precepts, as things of themselves necessary: but so far forth as they should serve to comeliness and to peace. The policy of the church directed to comeliness and order. Heereuppon (as I have said) we gather a perpetual doctrine, to what end the policy of the Church should be directed. The Lord hath left in our liberty external rites or ceremonies, therefore; lest we should think his worship to be included in them. Notwithstanding he hath not in the mean season permitted unto us, a varying and unbridled licence: but he hath encompassed round about (that I may so term them) lattisses (or cross bars) either else, hath he indeed so moderated the liberty which he gave, that at length we may by his word esteem what is right. This place therefore rightly weighed, will show the difference, between the tyrannical edicts of the Pope, which press the conscience with a cruel bondage; and the godly laws of the Church, in which discipline and order is contained. Besides that hereupon, we may reddily gather, that these later, are not to be held for human traditions, sith that they are founded in this general commandment, and have a clear allowance from the mouth of Christ himself. Thus notably saith calvin on this sentence. And is not this sentence then worthy, that we should have it always in our mouths, whensoever we have occasion to urge, or talk of ceremonies? Or doth not this comeliness and order stretch itself also to dification? But if we now understand it thus, to save our brethren's credit, that the one of these doth comprehend the other: our Brethren must give us leave with all, to remember those that urge these things, which having always in their mouths that sentence of S. Paul, 1. Cor. 14.40. Let all things be done decently and according to an order: do not so little remember as our Brethren charge them, but remember well, that the Apostle in that long Chapter laboureth (whether altogether or no, let that go) to drive all things to edification: S. Paul's purpose was not to drive the good gifts of god out of the Church though they were abused edification being contained in decency and order, and order and decency contained in edification. And yet we may not simply grant to this disjunctive part of this our brethren's sentence, that S. Paul laboured to drive all things to edification, or else to drive them out of the Church: for, S. Paul went not about to drive any of those good gifts of God, which in that long chapter he speaketh of, out of the Church of God, though they were by some among them then abused, and not driven to edification, comeliness, and order: but laboureth to retain them in their right use, for the time that GOD would have them used. And therefore, this example also is not so well alleged of our Brethren, in saying: as he saith of him that hath the gift of tongues, being of itself an excellent and comely gift of the holy Ghost, & being used orderly of one or two by course with an interpreter, might do much good in the Church, but if there be none interpreter (saith he) jet him hold his peace in the congregation. Hear is indeed mention made of holding his peace, till he had an interpreter: but not, of driving this gift out of the Church. And therefore calvin with more moderation saith hereon, ver. 27. he now describeth the order and setteth down the manner. Calvin in 1. Cor. 14.27. If they like to speak with tongues, let two only speak, or if not so, yet let there not be more than three at the most. And withal, let there be present an interpreter. There is no use of tongues, without an interpreter, let them therefore surcease for the time. But we must note, that he commandeth it not, but only permitteth it. For the Church may want the tongs without any incommodity, save in respect that they are helps to prophecy as at this day are the Hebrew and the Greek tongue: but Paul granteth it, lest he should seem to drive away any grace of the spirit, from the assembly of the faithful. Although this also might seem less agreeable unto reason, when as before he said, that the tongues were convenient for the unfaithful, in respect that they were a sign: I answer, howsoever a miracle may properly be set forth for the unfaithfuls sake; notwithstanding, it followeth not but that in some respects, The gifts of tongues abused. it pertaineth also to the faithful. If ye understand it, that an unknown tongue is a sign to the unfaithful, according as the words do sound of Esay: the reason that Paul here prescribeth, is different. For he so admitteth the tongues, that the interpretation adjoined leave nothing obscure. He correcteth therefore the Corinthians vice, with an excellent temperature, while he rejecteth not any gift of God whatsoever, that all his benefits among the faithful may appear: but he setteth down a manner, lest that ambition should creep into the place of God's glory; lest the gift that is of less moment, should hinder those that are the chief gifts: and he addeth a sauce (or seasoning) of it, lest it should become a mere ostentation void of fruit. Here then is no commandment of driving this gift out of the Church, no although the Corinthians did abuse it. But if now, this ceasing for the time of this gift, and other like gifts, for the abusing of them, were the driving them out of the Church, when they tended not to edification: what shall we say of those ceremonies that S. Paul there speaketh of, Our Brethr. attempts to drive out the offices and orders established, and to bring in such as are long since worn out, or rather mere supposed. and of those functions and offices, not such as they imagine, but of whom, either for the abuse succeeding, or the peerless use now long since of continuing them: both the gifts, and the offices or manner of them have ceased in the Church, so many hundredth years? And being thus clean worn out, though not driven out of the Church; have our Brethren such a warrant and authority, that they can bring in, yea, and with contention drive in those ceremonies, offices, and gifts, into the Church again, and to drive out other comely and orderly ceremonies, offices and gifts now in use, not hindering but rather furthering edification, to drive in those so long ceased and discontinued? But if the gift of tongues while it was in use, were (as they here confess) a comely gift of the holy Ghost, and being used orderly of one or two by course, with an interpreter, might do much good in the Church: how then doth not comeliness and order, infer edification? And therefore, if the ceremonies, offices and gifts of the Church of England that are now urged, be comely, and used orderly: we may well conclude, that in their kinds, they be no hinderers but furtherers to edification. But, say our Brethren: the uncomeliness that S. Paul reproveth was, The learned disc. Pag. 72. that women should preach in the Church, as ver. 34.35. the disorder, that those gifts which served least for edifying, were preferred before them that served most for edifying, as tongues before prophecy. We grant S. Paul reproveth these abuses in the Corinthians Ecclesiastical assemblies, uncomeliness and disorder. Bridges. But did he reprove none other uncomeliness in them, than that women should preach in the Church, as 1. Cor. 14. ver. 34. & 35? Did he not reprove an uncomeliness in them before, women's prophesying. both for men and women too, in the 11. chapter ver. 13. and 14? judge in yourselves (saith he) is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? Doth not nature itself teach you that if a man have long hear, it is a shame unto him? And doth not Saint Paul reprove them also, ver. 21.22. For their great uncomeliness and disorder, in the participation of the lords supper? For every man (sayeth he) when they should eat, eateth his own supper before, and one is hungry, and another is drunken. Have ye not houses to eat and drink in? Despise ye the Church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you in thi●? I praise you not. And appointing them a better order, he concludeth that Chapter with this saying, Other things will I set in order when I come. Which done, he cometh to these gifts whereof now we speak, tongues, interpreting, prophesying, etc. in the 12.13. and 14. chapters. And doth be not here also note, that they abused this excellent and comely gift of tongues, (as our Brethren call it) by their praying or prophesying in a strange tongue, though the same were not interpreted? Was not this their abuse therefore of this comely gift, an uncomeliness in them. But our Brethren have a special meaning herein, that setting aside all other, Our Brethr. do often quarrel at womensprophecying, teaching, preaching, and baptizing, whereas their selves as much or more than we do infer it. they only note this uncomeliness and say: The uncomlynes that S. Paul reproveth, was, that women should preach in the Church as ver. 34.35. And therefore I think it not amiss to consider this point better, specially that which here they lead us unto. And at this they quarreled before, pag. 62. and often times threaten kindness on us, that we maintain women's administration of Baptism. But do not they themselves (though it be the more strange to see their dealing therein) even where they go about to confute it, a great deal more confirm it, than we do? Have not they confessed, pag. 59 that whom soever God hath instituted to be minister of his word, him also hath he made to be minister of the sacrament, and that, it pertaineth to him to deliver the seal, which delivereth the writings? Look then, whether this come not nearer to the permission of women to baptise, yea, and to minister the communion, than any thing that they can gather of us. Except they will flee to this article, that here they still speak of him, not of her. But shall we thus elude the words of the texts also, even there, for proof cited by our Brethren? Matth. 28.19. Go ye forth and teach all Nations baptizing them, and is not both the Latin and Greek also, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Baptizantes illos, baptizing them, only the Masculine gender? As it is more plain in the other text, Mar. 16.15. Go ye forth into the whole world, and preach the Gospel to every creature, he that shall believe and is baptised shall be saved. What shall any say that this article, he, containeth only men, or men children, and excludeth women? Therefore that shift can not serve, but that man or woman may preach, by their saying, on some occasion. and then, look how far forth they may preach, and deliver the writings, or minister the word, so far forth, may the same persons men and women, by these assertions of our Brethren, deliver the seals, and administer the sacraments also. But now, what doth calvin say hereon, who is in this point the vehementest of them all, that I read, against women's preaching and baptizing? Doth he not say, even of these self same words that our Brethr. refer us unto, 1. Cor. 14. ver. 34. Let your women keep silence in the Churches for it is not permitted unto them to speak? etc. It appeareth that the Church of Corinth was defiled also with this vice, that there was place, or rather licentiousness, open in the holy assembly to the babbling of women. He forbiddeth them therefore to speak in public for the cause of teaching or prophesying. But understand this of the ordinary function, or else, where there is a set or appointed state of the Church. For, such a necessity may happen, which may require the voice of a woman. But Paul respecteth only what is comely in an assembly orderly composed. So that S. Paul here debarreth not absolutely all women's speaking in the Church: women's publ. speaking in the Church not utterly forbidden. for then, how should that be which our Brethren said before, pag. 70. that the whole congregation with one heart & with one voice, may praise God with singing of Psalms all at once? Are not women part of the whole congregation, so well as men? And do not the women also in their congregations sing the Psalms together with the men? And is not this singing, publ. praying? At least wise, is it not publ. speaking? And therefore calvin first limits those words of the Apostle, that women are not permitted to speak in the assembly, with this restraint: to speak for the cause of teaching or prophesying. As who say, otherwise they may publicly speak well enough. Yea, for teaching & prophesying also, he doth not simply forbid the same: but upon necessity or occasion he alloweth it even in the holy assembly of men, & maketh it requisite that a woman may teach or prophesy. Neither helpeth it, that he saith upon 1. Cor. 11. ver. 5. Every woman that prayeth or prophesieth bareheaded, Calvin in 1. Cor. 11.5. dishonoureth her head: but it seemeth (saith he) that this is superfluous, that Paul forbiddeth a woman to prophecy bore headed, when as in an other place, he doth wholly forbid women to speak in the Church, & therefore it shall not be lawful for them to prophecy, no not under a veil (or cover.) Whereupon it followeth, that it is here in vain disputed of the veil or cover. It may be answered, that the Apostle in improving the one, Caluines' insufficientanswere for women prophesying. doth not approve the other. For when he reprehendeth that they prophesied barehedded, notwithstanding he permitteth them not to prophesy by any other manner of means, but rather deferreth the reprehension also of this vice, unto an other place, that is to wit, unto the 14. Chapter. But, may any man, that shall consider the poise of S. Paul's words, (which were the words of the holy Ghost in him,) think this a sufficient answer to this question? For, doth not the Apostle speak this, as well of men that have their heads covered; as of women that have their heads uncovered? And doth not the Apostle speak it as well of prayers, as of prophesying? If therefore he approve it in the men, and approve it in the prayer: women's praying and prophesying with their heads covered. why approveth he it not likewise in the one, so well as in the other? And why may we not safely conclude? He improveth that a woman should prophecy bareheaded: therefore if she prophecy not bareheaded but covered on her head, he doth not improve it: as well as we may say, he improved that a man should prophecy with his head covered, therefore if a man prophecy with his head uncovered, he improveth it not: or as well as we may say of the other action, that in both of them he joineth with prophesying: He improveth that a man should pray covered, or a woman bareheaded: therefore, if a man pray uncovered, or a woman with her head covered, he improveth it not. And so of consequence, what he improveth not, that he approveth. If S. Paul simply did improve, and by no manner of means permit women to make public prayers, and altogether forbid them to preach in the congregation: No likelihood of S. Paul's utter improving women's prophesying, that had the gift thereof. there is no likelihood in the world, that he would have brought instances of such things, as could have no likelihood of approbation at all, were they covered or uncovered in these actions. And therefore, this answer of calvin can by no means satisfy any, that shall never so little consider the Apostles sentence. But calvin perhaps thought it would better serve against the woman, though not against the man: because the man is not in other places forbidden to speak in the Church, as is the woman. And therefore he saith, that Paul did not reprehend this fault in women here, but referred the reprehension thereof to an other place. Now although this reason (indeed being generally spoken,) cannot be improved, Though one place in the scripture be referred to an other, yet in no place is the spirit of god contrary to itself. but that S. Paul might reserve the reprehension of this or that fault, to this or that place, as it best liked the spirit of God in him, (albeit this place also had not been unfit:) yet speaking of these things in diverse places, he speaketh not in the one contrary to the other, nor in any place is the spirit of God in him, contrary to itself. But in diverse places (as we shall see anon, and that by their own confessions) he approveth the public praying and the public prophesying (whether they take prophesying properly, or for preaching) made by women in the holy assemblies. Therefore, he may not only well approve it here, (being done in such comely order as he appointeth, and to edification:) but also it cannot be utterly, wholly, and by all means improved, in any other place, as here calvin saith it is, which to say, is to make the spirit of God speak contradictions. And are not men also in other places forbidden publicly to preach in the congregation? Else, how do our Breath. allege that place, pag. 58. out of Hebr. 3.4. For no man may take upon him any office in the Church, but he that is called of God, as Aaron was. And is preaching no office? And yet we see here, that understanding this prophesying for preaching, he speaketh it of men as well as women. As Calvin testifieth himself, upon this saying, 1. Cor. 11.4. Every man praying or prophesying: to prophecy, I here take to be, to declare the mysteries of God to the edification of the audience. As afterward in the 14. chapter Even as to pray, signifieth, to conceive the form of praying, and as it were to go before the whole people. Lo, here are even our brethren's own words, pag. 64. for their Pastor's conceiving of public prayer, and the going before his flock in public prayer. And yet, doth S. Paul both 1. Cor. 11. & 1. Cor. 14. approve this prophesying and this praying also, being otherwise decently, orderly and to edification used, & apply it not only to the Pastors, but to all those among them, to whom God gave the gift of these things, though they had no peculiar and ordinary Eccl. offices that exercised the same. This therefore debarreth not, but that, How these things were forbidden and how permitted. although the ordinary public use, (as taking it upon them by peculiar office, being not called orderly thereunto,) might be forbidden, and improved, not only in women, but in men: yet notwithstanding it is not altogether, wholly, and simply forbidden and improved, but that upon such times as those were, or upon some extraordinary necessity, or occasion, (we see) that even public praying and public preaching, both in men, though lay men and in women that can do the same to edification, is approved. Yea, no better witness than calvin himself against himself, and even in the very place he appealeth unto. That is to wit, (saith he) unto the 14. chapter, Caluines better answer. here by our Brethr. noted. And have we not heard his judgement there already, speaking of prophesying, that such necessity may hap, as may require the voice of a woman? So that, he speaketh not here of old examples such as we cannot prescribe upon to do the like: but he speaketh of that which may now or hereafter happen, and as wherein, a woman's voice in the publ. assembly may be as requisite, as at any time it heretofore hath been. But what need had calvin to send us thence, to this 14. Chapter, or, we to hear him contrary himself there? When as, not having satisfied himself belike, with this former unsufficient answer, for this praying and prophesying of women, chap. 11. he answereth himself otherwise, & far better even in that place, saying: there is no discommodity in that (if he mean in that answer, we have showed a great discommodity, to the truth of the matter, & to the scriptures credit, and his own) although, neither this doth fit the same amiss, if we say, that the Apostle requireth of women this modesty, not only in the place where the whole Church is gathered together: but also in any more grave assembly either of women or of men, such as sometimes come together into private houses. Caluines' meaning Of which words, I cannot see what sense else to gather, but that, so it be done with this modesty here required, not to lay out their hears to the show, as many now adays do, especially then, when they were all bare headed: but use a Matronlike modesty in covering their heads, as was, & yet is the Greek & Asian manner: though not ordinarily, yet, on some extraordinary occasion, they might both publicly pray & prophecy yea, understanding it for extraordinary preaching also, both in the open assemblies, & especially in their private houses, though diverse other Matrons, or men also, besides their own household be assembled. If this be not here Caluines meaning: I conceive him not. But, I rather think it, because in the place that he referreth himself unto, (as we have seen) there is no ambiguity in his words. Now although, that both these words of S. Paul, and Caluines thus far yielding thereunto, be apparent enough to any that list to see it: yet when it cometh to our brethren's exposition, in their notes, on the Geneva translation: all this seems so suddenly and so easily wiped away, that we would marvel, that calvin, which was a man (in most points) of such excellent judgement, and is so vehement against this point in women, and of purpose moving and beating this question, and shaking it off with this foresaid answer, and yet in the end relenting to it, though afterward he go away from it as far again, (as we shall see anon) did not espy so easy and so ready an answer as this. But, plus vident oculi, quàm oculus, one man sees not all, and therefore it is less marvel, if so singular a man also, The interpretation of the geneva Testaments note and Bezaes' exposition of women's praying and prophesying 1. Cor. 11.4. Beza in 1. Cor. 11.4. as (God be praised) Beza is, and other that so say with him, coming after calvin, and seeing more perhaps than he, have found out a fit & fuller answer. Let us therefore see also, what Beza and these men saw & say hereon. Upon these words, 1. Cor. 11. ver. 4. Every man praying and prophesying, etc. saith the Geneva note: this is referred to common praying and preaching, for although one speak, yet the action is common, so that the whole Church may be said to pray or preach. Which exposition, our Brethren chiefly take out of Beza: every man (saith he) the universal particle taketh away the difference of orders and of age, so far forth as appertaineth to that which is treated upon, praying or prophesying. Because the Apostle treateth of comeliness to be kept in the common assembly: therefore I take these things as of the public prayer and prophecy, that is, of the treatise of the scripture. Howbeit I refer it not only unto him which conceiveth the prayer or interpreteth the place of scripture: but also to the assembly of the hearers sitting together. For although that one speak, notwithstanding the action is common, so that the whole company may be said by this means to pray and prophecy. For first of all, the reasons which the Apostle bringeth, The women's prophesying to be nothing but to hear th● mens prophesying. are common to all the men that are conversant in the Church, yea (I grant also) to them that are without the Church's assembly. But for all that, the question propounded and the conclusion of not covering the head, do show, those reasons to be referred unto the circumstance of that time and place, wherein the Church cometh together. Moreover if ye refer this to one person of the party praying or prophesying; the member opposite concerning a woman, will not agree thereto. When as the Apostle afterward permitteth not unto a woman, that she should speak in the Church, that is, in the common assembly 14. g. 34. & the reasons which he bringeth why they ought to be covered, it is manifest enough that they appertain to every one of the women that are conversant in the public assembly of the Church. This is Bezaes' interpretation and judgement on this place, and his reasons also for the same. To whom accordeth Hyperius, and in part Hemingius. Now although, in not subscribing (as our Brethren do) to thè judgement of so learned and profound a man with other, I shall more than hazard myself to the hard judgement & censure of our Brethren: yet with dutiful submission craving none other acquittance at Beza his hands, than even that here he beginning first withal, that this universal particle, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, every man, taketh away the difference of orders and of ages in praying or prophesying, that is, interpreting or treating of any place in the scripture: may be my warrant against the order of Bezaes' dignity, or the gravity of his age in this matter. And sith that he dissenteth many times, and also herein, from other, and from calvin his own Master, being free (as Horace said) nullius addictus jurare in verba Magistri, but in this respect, professing him to be our only Master, that saith unto us for one is your Master or Doctor (to wit) Christ. Matth. 23.8. and 10. and in this point he standeth not on man, but fortifieth his interpretation with his reasons: why may it not be lawful for any other, and so for me, to allege also my plain and simple reasons? Aug. contr. Maximum Lib. 13. ●a. 14. As S. Augustine saith well herein, Res cum re, causa cum causa, ratio cum ratione. Way matter with matter, cause with cause, reason with reason: and then judge who list, whether Bezaes' interpretation be a sufficient answer; or his reasons sufficiently maintain his interpretation. First he granteth, (which also I yield unto) that this prayer, and this prophecy, are here understood of public actions. Secondly, that this public prayer and public prophecy, is not to be referred to him only, that conceiveth the prayer, or interpreteth the place of scripture: but of the whole auditory sitting together. This also in some part & sense, may be granted unto him namely for publ. prayer. Because though in the conceived public prayers, they can not all conceive the same altogether, and so in conceiving pronounce it, as he doth, except they say the same public form of prayer with him, (as the Lord's prayer, or some other appointed) which they know before hand: & yet, if he make pauses, for them all to say after him, the whole assembly even altogether at once, (as we have proved) may without confusion, with one hart & with one voice, join themselves together in the publ. prayers. And this also have our Brethren granted unto, so it be done by singing, & we infer, it may as well be done by saying Or else, understanding Beza his words disiunctively; every man, that is, (saith he) the whole congregation, that is (say I) every man or any man of the whole congregation, understanding the same, of such especial exercises in those times, or of extraordinary occasion even in our times. Unto which, applying these words (as Beza saith) this universal particle, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. every man expelleth all difference of orders & ages: How every man and woman present may make publ. prayer. so in such cases all the assembly, that is, every one, or, any of the assembly, to whom God did give a special gift of conceiving a good prayer, might them, & may yet in like case, publicly make the same, yea, & in like manner have prophesied also. But these things were not done, in the conceiving of these public prayers, or in the treatises of the scripture, by every man of the whole congregation altogether at once. And in these senses, I deny not Bezaes' interpretation. But, when here upon he goeth further, and draws it to this, that this doing of every one among them was the doing it of them altogether; because that his own action was in all their names, and so they speak by the mouth of that one man, that was their Pastor, One did not all these things in all their names. or some number of Pastors among them clean to exclude all women from speaking, and all other men present being no ministers: that is both clean contrary from S. Paul's meaning, and from his apparent words, & from all the circumstances of the matter, & conference of the other sentences dependent on the same, & plain contradiction to Bezaes' own tale, & hath no likelihood but gross absurdity, if not mere impossibility in it. For, although (saith Beza) one speak, yet is the action common, that all the company by this reason may be said to pray or prophecy: True it is, the action is common, because it is done publicly, and in common, for the people's edification. But no necessity driveth this that every party that is present at the doing, or assents unto it, may be said to be the d●er of every common action. The ministering of the sacraments is a common action: The sacram. not ministered by all though common to all. therefore by this rule of our Breath. every man & woman that is present at the ministering of the sacraments, & assenteth to them, & partaketh with the Ministers, may be said also to be the ministers of them. And yet (as I have showed) this may be better said of the public prayer, than of the public prophesying. For, although S. Paul bringeth his instance of both these actions, praying and prophesying, and either of these words contain a relation in them: yet are they far unlike in the things that they have relation unto. This word Prayer, The difference between praying and prophecing. not only hath relation to the party that makes the Prayer: but hath relation also to some party to whom the prayer is made. Which party being God, to whom only all the assembly make their prayers, and not to the Minister, nor the Minister to them: it followeth, that whether he or they pray altogether, or he only pray in their name, it may (I grant) be said to be their prayer: As our Brethren said before, Page, 64. As it pertaineth to the pastor to conceive public prayers: so it is the duty of the whole Church, in the name of the whole Church, to join in heart with the Pastor, in the same prayers. etc. So that, in these public Prayers, the Minister, and they whether they speak or not, do both of them make but one party of the relation, and God the other. And not the Minister a third person, as an intercessor or Mediator betwixt God and them: and so, may his public prayers be said to be said to be theirs. Although Paul here (expressing their diverse actions good and ill, not only for the diversity of covering or uncovering of their heads, but for the pronunciation of the language showing also, how they should pray, & for the courses of them, how many, & what manner, one after another, and with an interpreter, doth plainly express his own meaning for this point clear enough, that were they men or were they Women, it was not done by the mouth of any one of their Ministers or Pastors in their names, but by their own mouths. This might likewise have been done (we deny not) for prayers by the mouths of other in the name of them, even as though they all spoke it. Though this also be but an improper praying on their parts (as we have showed) being rather but their consent unto it. But it is nothing alike in prophesying or preaching. For though all the people never so much consent unto the preaching or prophesying, yet can it not be said to be their action, as prayer might. For in prophesying or Preaching, in the relation of these two parties, the Prophecier or Preacher respecteth God, and all the people are the hearers of God, speaking unto them by him, Qui loquitur loquatur eloquia Dei. But in prophesying ●he Minister representeth one, and the people another, & therefore the hearers cannot be said to be the propheiers So that here they can be by no means be said to be all prophesiers or preachers, only because they are there present at the hearing of the Prophesying or preaching and assent thereto: for than we clean confound this relation betwixt God and his people, betwixt the Preacher and the hearer, when both the Preacher is the hearer, and the hearer is the preacher. Not that we deny, but that a Preacher may be a hearer, and a hearer may be a preacher in sundry respects, and at diue●s times. And even so it was here, when many, and sometimes all among the people prophesied or preached, but in their courses, not all at once, nor one for all, nor one in the name of all. But as S. Paul saith: Let the prophets speak two or three (meaning one after another) and let the other judge. So that, they that are the hearers represent another person, and not the person of the preacher. Whereupon saith calvin. He adhibiteth a measure also in prophesying, because the multitude (as vulgarly they say) breedeth confusion. Which is true, calvin. for daily experience teacheth it. etc. The tongues were given either to treat upon, or to pray. In the former kind, the interpreter was in place of the prophet: so was that the cheese & more frequent exercise. Only he setteth down a measure, least by glutting them, it might wax vile: and least those that were less skilful, should snatch up before their betters, the place and opportunity of the speaking. For those unto whom he assigneth the office of speaking, he would have to be indeed of the more choice persons, and ordained by the common suffrages. But none are more ready to shove in themselves, than those that are slightly sprinkled over with a mean learning. That the proverb may be made true, Unskilfulness is bold. With this evil would S. paul meet when he attributed the office of speaking to two or three. Of which evil if S Paul found the experience, while this exercise of prophesying or discussing the places in the scripture, was thus used in the primitive Church: when after it had been antiquated, and clean left in the Church so many hundred years, Our late disorders in the exercise of prophesying. and we began again to renew it, though we used it not for any of the laity, men or women never so learned, but only for the exercise of the Ministers, yet were we so pestered with this evil, that we were fain (it being but an exercise more proper to that primitive age, than that we are bound thereunto) to give it over again, when no Law nor order could restrain this blind boldness, besides other more perilous dangers that grew, by the great disorder of the same. But both our practice in renewing it, and their first practice in using it, apparently confuteth this, The hearers be the judges, not the prophesiers that one spoke not in the name of the residue, For, saith S. Paul, Let the residue judge. And no reason that he should be judged of them, if he spoke so in their name that they spoke by him. And now and then they dissented, as in the next verse: If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace. For (saith calvin) place and liberty while the matter requires it, is left unto all, so that no man rush in out of season, rather favouring himself than serving the necessity. Whom S. Paul's words meant, all might prophesy. But this modesty he requireth of all, that every one give place to another, bringing forth any better matter: and in the next vers, For ye may all prophecy one by one, that all may learn and receive consolation. First when he saith all (saith calvin) he comprehendeth not the universal number of the faithful, but only those that were instructed with a faculty. Then, The gift of tongues abused. he signifieth that the turns of them all were equal, but as it should be for the profit of the people, every one of them either oftener or seldomer, to come forth to speak, as though he should say, there is none shall lie idly perpetually, but the opportunity of speaking shall offer itself now to these, and now to those. He addeth, that all may learn. Which though it appertain to the vulgar people, notwithstanding it agreeth to the prophets, and properly these Paul pointeth out, for no man shall at any time be a good teacher, that shall not yield himself, to be taught, and is always ready to learn. etc. By all which, it is most apparent, that these prophecyinge whosoever were the speakers then, were not spoken by them in the person and name of all the Congregation, nor yet of all those that had the gift thereof: but in the person of God, whose spirit spoke in them. This interpretation therefore of Beza, clean overthroweth all S, Paul's whole treatise of these gifts. So that, the reverence reserved of so worthy a man, and of other with with him, this (in my opinion) is but a mere evasion, so far it is off from any show of a right interpretation of that sentence: every man praying or prophesying with his head covered, dishonoureth his head. And every woman, etc. Neither are his reasons (as me thinks) of greater weight, Bezaes' reasons of this interpretation. than the devise of this interpretation. His first reason is this: The reasons that the Apostle bringeth, are common to all the men that are conversant in the assembly of the Church, and also (I grant) of those that are out of the assembly of the Church: but for all that the question propounded and the conclusion the head not covered, do declare those reasons to be referred to the circumstance of the time and place, wherein the church assembleth: What can be gathered hereupon, but that the Question and conclusion of uncovering the head, do restrain his reasons to those that be in the Church's assembly, which otherwise, Bezaes' own reason overthrows his interpretation. would stretch further? and what conclusion is this, that this word praying or prophesying, either in man or woman, praying or prophesying, must needs be understood for the action of one in the name and person of the whole assembly? Nay rather, how doth not this reason, if it be any reason, overthrow Bezaes' interpretation? For, sith the Question propounded and the conclusion, is of the being bareheaded: If the Ministers prophesying, be the prophesying of all the men there assembled: then must all the men that be there assembled be bareheaded too. But this was not the Apostles meaning, nor it was not then, nor ever in custom, that all the men that hear the preacher or prophecier should also be bareheaded. Therefore this is not the true interpretation of Paul's meaning, that his preaching or prophesying is all their preaching or prophesying, and that they used no other but by his mouth. women's prophesying. His second reason is this, Moreover (saith Beza) If ye restore it to the one person of him that prayeth or prophesieth, the memmber (of the sentence) opposite, concerning the woman, will not agree thereto. And why will not that next sentence concerning the Woman agree to this sense, Beza reasoneth a petitione principii. that some one Woman also might prophesy in the assembly? forsooth (saith he,) Sith that the Apostle permitteth not a Woman to speak in the Church, that is, in the common assembly. What is this else, but petitio principij? to take that as a clear case to be beforehand granted, that all the Question depends upon, how these words of the Apostle should be understood, whether as a simple debar in all cases, or as, but from an ordinary function of speaking in the Church. Neither is the Woman's covering of her head (for that it is common to other women in the church so well as to her, that preacheth or prophesieth) any reason that she may no more speak than they do: for that is not the reason that she speaketh at all. But she speaking upon some other occasion, she is bound much more to keep that comeliness that other Women in the Church are bound unto, and so much more bound than men are, in as much as it is free for the men in the Church assembled, and not speaking, to be either covered or not covered with comeliness enough, which is not so in women, though not speaking. But by what warrant doth Beza make these, to be membra opposita, Wherein the opposition of S. Paul's sentence lieth. the Man and the woman? indeed here is an opposition made of Paul, in the covering or uncovering of their heads: But he neither makes any opposition in the persons, and much less, (but all resemblance, nay rather, one and the same action in them both) for the praying and for the prophesying. For if the universal particle taketh away the difference of orders and of age in the respect of prayer and prophesying: It less considereth the person or the sex, but the matter prayed or prophesied, and the new creature in Christ jesus, or the Spirit of God that speaketh in them. But let be the opposition in the Pastors, or in the praying or prophesying. Go to then (saith he) but if the woman pray not publicly, nor prophecy in her own person: then, contrariorum eadem est ratio, The prayer and prophesying of the man, is not in his own person. B●zaes reason returned on himself. But see now, how this reason (returned home again) doth beat his Master. The opposition (saith he) is in the persons of the man & of the woman, and in the praying or prophesying, of them. Is it so? Go to then (say I) but if the man pray or prophesy publicly, not by the mouth of another, but by his own mouth, as I have (I trust) so fully and at large proved, and if that will not satisfy, I shall God willing (being called thereto, prove it better: But, contrariorum eadem est ratio: of contraries there is one and the same order, or reason: therefore the prayer and prophesying of a woman here mentioned, and opposed to man●, is after th● same manner and order uttered, not by the mouth of another, but by her own mouth. Yea, if it were not uttered (her prayer and her prophesying) as well by her mouth, as the man by his mouth, but a third person should utter it for them both, then how must that person, The inconueniency of this interpretation. representing both the person of the man and of the woman praying or prophesying, use his head? which was S. Paul's principal conclusion? If he be covered, that is not answerable to the comeliness of the man. If he be uncovered, that is less answerable, if not more unfit, for the comeliness of the woman. What shall we here do? yea, though we imagined this third were an Hermaphrodites, that is, of both genders, Man and woman, except the same party also had two heads, the one to be uncovered, and the other to be covered. What a strange devise therefore is this? and what a number of impossible, unnatural, and monstrous absurdities, do arise, if a man would stand in examining this interpretation? I speak not this for the dishonour of them, whom I honour with good heart, as singular ornaments of God's Church in our age. And yet Luther, Beza now and then altars his own interpretation. so excellent an instrument of God's truth and glory, when he writhed some texts of Scripture by affection, more than by considerate and indifferent weighing of them, into what unnecessary misconstructions, and oppositions to the plain and easy truth, and to his own self, did he fall, and caused many (by his too great estimation) to fall with him? And therefore we must take heed, how we depend too much on Men. And if we will hold us always to God's word, so take it, that we carry not that also away after our own construing. If it be plain and easy, not to lap it in ambiguities. If it be hard and doubtful▪ to way it with other places, and consider all the circumstances, grounds and occasions. And if nothing be against the faith, to go with the best, & with the more, the better, in the sense that seemeth most probable. Which Beza here doth not, who though in many places he deserve singular praise: yet in some places he is too singular, which deserveth so little praise, that now and then he himself forsakes his former translation, and either on better advice, comes to other men's, or changeth his former translation, with another of his own, even where no necessity nor sufficient cause doth enforce him: as, even upon this place, 1. Cor. 14.34. cited by our Brethren, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And the common translation, is there true and plain enough, Mulieres vestrae in ecclesiis taceant. Let your Women keep silence in the Churches. Where not only Erasmus, but calvin also retaineth the usual derived word, even from the very Greek, in Ecclesiis: whom all the commentaries of the new writers, (that I have looked upon) do follow. And all our translations: yea, even the Geneva translation also. The word Churches nor well changed, not the word assemblies. And yet doth Beza forsake it, and translate it in Coetibus in companies or assemblies, and he altereth this again, in conventibus in meetings together, & saith that the vulgar translation, in the Churches, is not apt enough in this place, & also in the verse following. Because that a woman also is in the church, that is, of the number of the faithful, when she is at home. Neither yet is she bidden to be silent, but in the public assembly of the church. And is this a sufficient reason to alter this word in the churches? Who knoweth not (that knoweth aught) the this word church as it is commonly taken, signifieth here not only the place where the sacred assemblies of the faithful are made: but also the faithful persons so assembled? was Beza in doubt, lest if this interpretation should have stood, that women should not speak in the Churches, they should have been thought to have been forbidden to speak any where, but to be continually in every place silent, because wheresoever they be, yea, though at home, they be still in the church, that is, of the number of the faithful? The drife of Beza utterly to restrain all Women from speaking in any assemblies. What a needless fear was this? & yet, if he would have mended the translation, to stop this needles fear should he have mended it, to call it a company or assembly, or meeting together? which though it seem to give women some licence to speak, where no assembly or company, or meeting together is: yet, doth this indeed restrain them no further, than the occasion that Paul did speak on, drives unto. True it is, he afterward expounds himself, saying: they are not bidden to hold their peace, but in the public company of the church: but these words the public company of the church are in neither of his translations. For there is only said, in companies or meetings together. And yet what he meaneth by the public companies of the church, taking the church as here he calleth it: may not a woman speak in many companies or meetings together of the faithful? & if the households of the faithful be called churches also: may she not speak in her house neither, nor to the assembly of her household, for fere she should transgress this precept? if they say, that is but a private church, & Paul meaneth of the public assemblies of the church: although women then shall gain a great deal more liberty, by this gloss, then by this hard translation of the text: yet, how much better had it been, both for Bezaes' estimation, & our edification, especially for the matter & truth itself, for Beza to have left these nice points, & to have yielded to his M. calvin, that, as necessity might require, this precept of the ordinary course maketh no absolute debar to all manner of women, but that now and then, some may speak lawfully, yea, and their voice is requisite, even in the most sacred, public, and greatest assemblies or meetings together of the Churches. I confess (as I said) that other excellent men also use this interpretation: but they are more naked thereon then Beza is, nor I account them comparable to him. But neither he, nor they do so satisfy the simplicity of the text herein, as Musc. and Peter Martyr do, Musc. upon these words every woman praying and prophesying, saith▪ they ask here how a Woman shameth her head if she prophesy bare headed: when, about the end of the 14. Chapter, he commandeth them to hold their peace in the Church, because it is a shame for a Woman to speak in the Church, and 1. Tim. 2. he saith, but I permit not a woman to teach. What need is there (say they) to bid a Woman not to prophesy bareheaded▪ when she may not do it, no, not covered? I answer: he restraineth a Woman's rashness, that they should not (as oftentimes they are bablative) leap forth to teach and prophesy, being forgetful of their sex. Nevertheless in the mean season, he doth not extinguish the spirit, with the which some being inspired, did prophecy, by foretelling things to come. Such as were Philip the Deacons daughters, and many others, which did prophecy, according to the foretelling of joel, Chapter, 2. where we read this: And after these things I will pour my spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy. For such he pronounceth that they shall shame their head, if they pray or prophesy bareheaded. Of other he would give another sentence, if they had broken forth into the office of teaching, yea, with their heads covered. Thus clearly and simply doth Musculus interpret the place, although he say, that other answer this question otherwise: and so reckoneth up that, which was Caluines first answer. After the like objection Peter Martyr maketh the like conclusion, saying: we answer: in this place that vice is only reprehended, whereby Women dealt publicly being bore headed. But afterward, and to Tim. that shallbe commanded, that they shall also hold their peace: because all things are not delivered in one place. As though, the women of Corinth had offended in a double fault. Both that they went bareheaded, & that they spoke publicly. The one of these is now condemned, the other shall afterward be cut off. But Pet. Mar. seeing that this answereth not the matter: for, if they sinned in these 2. faults, & their public speech were the greater of the 2. as unlawful, which the other is not: would he condemn the less, & seem to allow that, that is utterly ill: or refer them to amend their fault at leisure by that he would afterward speak to another, & not then, but far from them, & long after? ther is no likelihood of this reason, which is that that we heard before in Calu. And therefore saith Pet. Mar. further: Other say that these things are to be taken of women, when they pray or prophesy privately, which is not forbidden them, But sith this also satisfieth not the place: he maketh this conclusion: We may also expound another way this commandment of th'apostle, that it was ordained that women should hold their peace in the order accustomed, Whereupon, no public function was committed unto them in the church, which should be ordinary & perpetual. Notwithstanding, if the spirit of the L. inspired them, it was not altogether forbidden, but that they might speak something. We know that the prophetess Anna spoke of our saviour in the temple, when the blessed virgin was purified. Deborah also sang publicly praises to God, & Mary Moses sister, & that women now & then prophesied in the old time, many places witness. Holda a prophetess was asked counsel of king josias. Hanna, the Mother of Samuel set forth a most godly Hymn. Marry also the Virgin and Mother of Christ sang an hymn. Philip also in the Acts of the Apostles had many daughters that did prophecy. And the Lord commanded Magdalene, that she should declare his resurrection to the Apostles. And it is read in the prophet joel: Of my spirit will I power forth on you, your sons and your daughters shall prophesy. Thus saith Peter Martyr, which done: he cometh in also with Bezaes', bullinger's, Hyperius, Hemingius, and our brethren's interpretation aforesaid, saying: they also slip out of this place more reddily (or nimbly,) that think these things pertained not to them only, that did prophecy or pray publicly: but also to their hearers: Bezaes' interpretation rejected. that the men should be bare headed, and the women's heads covered. But how doth Peter Matyr like of this last interpretation? Doth he allow it? no, he counteth it no better than a ready or nimble slip, and no sound answer. And so he concludes against it, saying: But the words of Paul seem not to make with their sentence, when as he avoucheth it expressly, of a woman praying or prophesying. Thus substantially doth peter Martyr answer the matter. All which proofs and examples doth Marlorate also after his collections of Calvin and others, word for word set down and approve as the true and simple interpretation. And notable are every one of these examples, if we shall examine and discuss them severally. Besides other examples both in the old and in the New Testament, whose speeches though partly they were of other matters, and not all concerning either prayer or prophecy: yet, were they spoken in the public assembly of the faithful, without note of any reproach unto them. Yea, the Law provided in what cases, the woman may claim, The woman's claim. before the Elders in the Gates of the City, (which was the place of the most public assemblies of the faithful) her kinsman to be her Husband. Deut. 27. Deut. 25. verse 7. & 9 Abigails speech and wise Oration made to David, before all his troops, is of David highly commended. 1. Sam. 25. verse 24▪ etc. The wise woman in Abel saved the City from destruction by her wise speeches and eloquent persuasion. 2. Sa. 20.18. The Queen of Saba though an heathen Woman, yet not only is approved of Solomon, whose wisdom she tried with divers Questions, and so highly extolled: 2. Reg. 10.6. etc. but Christ also giveth an honourable testimony of her so doing. The wife of Esay was a prophetess, so well as he a prophet. Esay 8.3. Neither are the testimonies of the Apocryphal Scriptures in this matter of comeliness▪ Esayes' wife. or for such points as concern good manners, to be rejected: and they are goodly testimonies also As the public prayer of Susanna: Susanna. the godly mother publicly preaching to the seven Children, to be constant Martyrs for the Law of God▪ 2, Macha. 7. The notable sermon that judith made, even to the high priest, women's speech. and to all the elders of Bethulia. But if our Brethren regard not this, as (some of them have rejected the facts and speeches of judith, even with contumelies:) Let us come also unto other examples not improved in the new Testament. What shall we say for that woman's fact, that even while Christ was preaching, The woman that praised Christ. as Luke saith, Chap. 11. ver. 27. And it came to pass as he said these things, a certain woman of the company lift up her voice, and said unto him: Blessed is the womb that did bear thee, and the paps that gave thee suck? Luke. 11.17. Did Christ rebuke her; for that she spoke thus boldly in the open assembly of the people? No, Luke saith not so. But he said (saith Luke) yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God and keep it. Whereupon saith the Geneva note: Christ gave her a privy taunt, for that she omitted the chief praise which was due unto him, that was, that they are blessed indeed, to whom he communicateth himself by his word. So that if she had given the chief praise to Christ, she had done well, and so far forth her speech is not reprehended, but the more commendable, in the greater congregation that it was spoken. And in a sort, calvin confesseth her words to redound, not a little to the commendation of Christ also. By which praise (saith ●e) the woman would extol the excellency of Christ. For she respected not Marie whom perhaps she never saw. But this amplifieth the glory of Christ not a little, that she ennobleth & maketh blessed the womb in which he was borne. Neither is this blessing of God absurdie, but according to the manner of the Scripture celebrated. For neither can it be denied, but that God choosing and destinating Marie to be the mother unto his son, vouchsafed highly to honour her. So that thus far forth, besides he● commendable constancy, and open profession of Christ, she was neither improved of Christ, nor discommended of any protestant writer, namely, for lifting up her voice being a woman, in the audience of the public congregation. Likewise the woman that had the bloody flux, The woman with the bloody f●x Matth. 9 ver. ●0. when as being a weak and bashful woman, & by reason of her disease, she durst not come openly before Christ, and in so great assembly open her voice & pray to him for succour: but came behind him and touched the hem of his garment. For she said in herself, If I may but touch his garment only, I shall be whole: Did Christ like this that she should receive this benefit of him thus in silence, because a woman might not speak in the congregation? No, saith Luke, chap. 8. verse. 44. When she came behind him and touched the hem of his garment, immediately her issue of blood staunched. Then jesus said, who is it that hath touched me? When every man denied, Peter said, and they that were with him, Master, the multitude thrust thee, and tread on thee, ●nd sayest thou, who hath touched me? And jesus said, some one hath touched me, for I perceive that virtue is gone out of me. When the woman saw that she was n●t hid, she came trembling and fell down before him, and told him before all the people, for what cause she had touched him, and how she was healed immediately. Was not this then the purpose of Christ, that this woman should speak and declare this work of God, before all the public assembly of the people? The woman of Canaan. What shall we say of that woman, Matth. 15.22. the Cananite that came crying to Christ, and said? Have mercy on me, O Lord thou son of David, my daughter is miserably vexed with a devil. Here this woman cried out in an open prayer, and spared not to speak speak aloud before all the assembly. But he answered her (saith Matthew) not a word. What? Was he angry, that she being a woman, durst make her prayer so openly, before the multitude of the people? Indeed the Disciples were offended at her importunity, and came to him and besought him. saying: Send her away, for she crieth after us. But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. So that he findeth no fault, for that she being a woman would presume to make this open prayer: but pretendeth that she was not such a woman as he was sent to help, & that if she had been such a woman, he would have liked of her cry well enough, and have helped her. Yet came she (saith Saint Matthew) and worshipped him saying: Lord help me. And he answered and said, It is not good to take the children's bread, and to cast it to whelps. And she said, Truth Lord, howbeit the whelps eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters table. Did Christ here like her replying upon him, having such an answer? Yea verily, and that most singularly well: Then jesus answered & said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith, be it unto thee as thou desirest, & her daughter was made whole at that hour. Neither is it unworthy to consider the story, so diligently described by Saint john, chap, 4. concerning the Samaritane Woman. The woman of Samaria. calvin. Not her bold talk with Christ alone at the Well: but that, verse. 29. she said of Christ unto the people, Come and see a man, that hath told me all things that I have done, is not this Christ. Yea calvin, who compareth her so doing to this saying in the Psalm, I believed, and therefore I spoke. Psal. 116. v. 10. And (saith he) this vehemency and cheerfulness of the woman, are so much the more to be noted of us, because an only small spark of faith kindled them. For she had scarce tasted Christ, when she setteth him forth throughout all the City, etc. But this (saith he) seemeth in the woman rather worthy reprehension, that being as yet rude and not thoroughly taught, she passed the bounds of her faith▪ The answer is, she should have done inconsiderately, if she had taken upon her the parts of teaching: but now when she desireth nothing but to stir up her Citizens, that they should hear Christ speak, we will not say, that being forgetful of herself, she proceeded further than became her▪ Woman's public speech. Only she doth the office of a Trumpet, or of a Bell, to call them unto Christ, And yet was this a kind of preaching to them, as Musculus calleth it, saying: The woman did so much by her preaching, Musculus. that the people of this City went out to Christ, of whom as yet they knew nothing. Yea, Aretius saith: But as concerning that she preacheth the name and the person of Christ, she testifieth by example, how much she had profited. At the beginning she acknowledged him only to be a jew; after that, a Prophet, placing him in a higher degree: at the length she perfectly acknowledgeth him to be the Messiah, and such a one unto her Citizens she preacheth him to be▪ Which also is for an example of regeneration, whereof the order is this. First to come to the knowledge of ones own self, & then diligently to search concerning the true worship of God. Last of all, to become careful of the profit of our neighbour. Thus she (wherein she profited) would have her fellow Citizens to profit also, lest she should enjoy so great a benefit all alone. Thou hast therefore a woman an Evangelist. She exerciseth the office of a Doctor or Teacher, she that came for an harlot, returneth an evangelical mistress. This is the marvelous goodness of God, choosing base & contemptuous things in the world, that he might confound the wise men of this world. Hereupon Marlorate concludeth out of Bucer: Therefore, Marlorat out of Bucer there is not so much consideration to be had of the party that speaketh, as we must ponder what is spoken to us. And Alesius the Scot hereon, making this his 16. place, doth say: The ministery of the Gospel is not tied to the ordinary power. And the doctrine of a private man, and of a woman, which bringeth forth the word of God, is to be preferred before the judgement of the multitude, and of them that take upon them the name & authority of the Church, as the Samaritans believe at the testimony of a woman concerning Christ. To conclude these examples in the new Testament, Luke mentioning Philip the Evangelist, Act. 21 verse. 9 saith: Philip's four daughters. Now had he four daughters virgins that did prophesy. But this example calvin would seem on the other side to cut off, saying: But how these maidens exercised the office of prophesying it is uncertain, except the spirit of GOD did so moderate them, that they troubled not the order of him set down. But when he permitteth not women to sustain a public person in the Church: it is credible, that they prophesied either at home, or in a private place out of the common assembly. Yea, not only calvin that would thus cut off this example of Philip's daughters, but of all the other that have been, or may be alleged for any women: saith further upon Saint Paul's precept, 1. Timoth. 2. verse. 11. and 12. Let the woman learn in quiet ●ith all subjection, women's speech. for I permit not a woman to teach, or to take authority on her over the man. After that he hath spoken, (saith he) of their apparel: he now addeth with what modesty women ought to behave themselves in the holy assembly. And first he biddeth them to learn mildly, for quiet signifieth silence, not that he would take from them the office of instructing their family, How calvin cutteth off these examples. but only drive them from the office of teaching, which GOD hath committed to men only. Of which matter we treated in the Epistle to the Corinthians. If any object Deborah and the like, whom we read to have sometimes been placed over the people, to govern them by the commandment of God: The answer is easy, that the common policy whereunto GOD would have us tied, is not overturned by the extraordinary facts of god. Therefore if at any time women have holden the place of prophesying & teaching, and that being stirred up by the spirit of God: This could he do, which is free from all law. But because this is singular, it fighteth not with the perpetual and accustomed policy. He addeth that which is next to the office of teaching: Neither let them take authority to themselves over their husbands. For this is the reason why they are prohibited to teach: because their condition doth not suffer them, for they are subject: but to teach is a matter of power or of a higher degree. Albeit the reason seemeth not firm enough, sith that the Prophets also and the Doctors or teachers, are subject to kings and to other Magistrates. I answer, there is no absurdity, but that one may govern, and also with all, obey, according to diverse respects: but in a woman, that availeth not, which by nature, that is, by the ordinary law of God, is borne to obey. For all prudent men have always refused the government of women, as it were a monster. The heaven and earth therefore should in a manner be mingled together, if women should snatch unto them the right of teaching. Therefore he bids them be quiet, that is, to contain themselves in their own order. Thus saith calvin not only of women's teaching, but also of women's government. From women's public preaching how our breath. proceed against women's public government. But now, because this may seem not only to shake off all these former examples, but to call the matter from public teaching, into a further and more dangerous question, both of our estate, and simply of the public government of a woman, which here calvin in very broad and boisterous speeches, not only aimeth at, but manifestly oppugneth, and that some of our own Brethren have not spared to write directly against women's government, and their chiefest ground ariseth from hence: therefore I think it not amiss to weigh this answer of calvin a little better. Yea, adding unto him for his further help, besides Peter Martyr and others, Danaeus also upon this the Apostles precept, as the most earnest in the same. But first, Philip's daughters. for that calvin saith to the example of the 4. virgins that did prophecy. How they exercised the office of prophesying, (saith he) it is uncertain If it be uncertain, Whether the 4. virgins prophesying, Act. 2●▪ 9 did it opē●io or no. how can he or any other determine the certainty, that they did not prophesy openly, as the other Women Prophets had wont to do? But he saith, if they should have prophesied in a public place, they should have troubled the order that god had set down. What order was that, and where, and when? he seemeth to refer us to this place, 1. Tim. 2. or to the other 1. Cor. 14. saying: when as he permitteth not women to sustain a public in person the church: and therefore it is not likely, that they prophesied in open place. I demand, whether this order were an ancient order set down and made of God before, or after? If it were made after, than it touched not these prophetesses' doings that were before. If it were an ancient order of God, made before: how toucheth it not the other prophetesses and other women speaking in public place, at leastwise, some of them so well as these? and doth not the same reason hold for all, that doth for some? If therefore, to save these 4. from transgressing the order of God, this be the only help, to say they did it in a private place: what an acquittance is this to them, th●t should accuse a far greater number of as good, if not some far better than these were? Yea, how saith calvin then, it is uncertain? may we not rather conclude thus? It is certain, that these 4. virgins observed the order of God, C●luine on Act. 2●. 0. without any disturbance of the same: But whether they did prophecy in private or public place, that is not certain: therefore there was no order of God absolutely & simply set down, concerning the place private or publ. of women's propheciing. But how doth not calvin reasoning that it was credible to be done in a private place? make it more credible to be done in public? he saith This is added for Philip's praise, that we should not only know that his house was well ordered; but also was famous and noble, by the blessing of God. For it was no common gift, to have 4. daughters, all of them endued with the spirit of prophecy. But by these means would God ennoble the beginnings of the gospel, when as he stirred up men & women, which should foretell things to come. Prophecies had almost ceased now many years among the jews, to the intent that their minds, should be the more erected, or awakened to hear the new voice of the gospel. Sith therefore after so long a time prophecy was returned on a sudden, it was a sign of a more perfect state. Notwithstanding, the same seemeth to be the reason, why within a little after, it decayed. For God did sustain the ancient people, with diverse predictions, until Christ by his coming brought an end to all the prophecies. Therefore it behoved the new kingdom of Christ, to be beautified with this ornament, that all men might know, that that promised visitation of God was come. If now by this clear confession of calvin, not only to the making noble and famous Philip's house, but to the ennobling the beginnings of the Gospel, and that these prophecies of women, so well as of men, should answer to the order of the ancient prophecies, to the awakening of men, to the confirming and beautifying of the gospel, and the kingdom of Christ: but the ancient manner of prophesying, both in the women Prophets, so well as in the men Prophets, was done for the most parts public, the more to ennoble the works of God, and the more to edify the more people, and the less to breed any suspicion of hucker mucker, or false prophesying which seeketh corners: how then was not these 4. virgins prophesying, public also? it might be that these virgins prophesied unto Paul, of his troubles then at hand, they being in their father's house where Paul hosted. As likewise other Prophets in other places had done. Whereof Paul saith in the chapter before, ver. 22. and 23. And lo now, I go up bound in the spirit unto jerusalem, knowing not what things there shall happen unto me, save that in every City the holy Ghost testifieth, saying: That bonds and afflictions do abide me. And the like prophecies were made unto him at Tyrus, as appeareth in this chapter ver. 4. And as Agabus at that present did, ver. 11. But it rather seemeth by S. Luke's words, and by this reference of calvin, to the ancient manner of prophesying that the prophesying of these 4. virgins, is not to be restrained to time only, but that they used to prophecy, & were notoriously known to be Prophetesses And although they might have then prophesied unto Paul, in their father's house, which was a private place, yet the persons being present, not only of their father an Evangelist, who (otherwise had authority over them) & of Paul being a public person, & an Apostle, and no doubt many notable persons in his retinue, besides the faithful of the church of Caesarea: there is no likelihood, but that it was done in no small assembly, though the place were private. And yet, to show the manner of their prophesying further, & to resolve us in this doubt of calvin: Eusebius lib. 3. Eccl. hist. cap. 31. (as we have heard before) citeth the testimony of Polycrates B. of Ephesus, of whom we have heard before, Euseb. on the 3. Eccle. hist. cap. 9 page 317. This Polycrates (saith Eusebius) writing to Victor B. of Rome, maketh mention also of him, (he meaneth of john the Euangeliste,) and of Philip the Apostle, & also of his daughters, saying; As we have already above inserted, that the great lights in the parts of Asia are laid a sleep; whom the L. shall raise in the last day of his coming, when he shall come with glory, and require all his saints. But of Philip I say (saith he) which was one of the Apostles, which slept at Hierapolis, and also 2. of his daughters being virgins, waxed old in that place. and another daughter of his replenished with the holy ghost, continuedat Ephesus. Whereby it appeareth, that they were Prophetesses of great and public renown in God's church: and not such as durst not prophesy but only in private places. women's public speaking. Which thing although Peter Martyr do not particularly avouch it of these 4. virgins, yet writing on the judges cap. 4. ver. 4. he saith thus: When GOD chose Deborah unto the ministry of judging, being in her kind weak, forthwith he made her renowned and noble in the gift of prophesying. With which gracious gift, and perhaps with many miracles more, she was of God consecrate & with miracles confirmed, as one that was chosen unto so great an office. Neither was this only woman endued with the spirit of prophecy, for we read also in the holy Scriptures, that other women were so instructed with the holy ghost. Marry the sister of Moses, Anna the mother of Samuel, Holda in the time of King josias, were Prophetesses. And in the new Testament (to pass in silence the virgin Mary, Elizabeth john his mother, and Anna Phanuels daughter: the daughters also of Philip) the Deacon, (as is recorded in the Acts of the Apostles) were prophetesses. Nei●her do I think that it ought to be denied, that some of these women being instructed, with the gift of prophecy, taught the people publicly, declaring to them those things that were of God showed unto them: women's public teaching and edifying the Church. sith that the gifts of God were not given to that purpose, that they should closely hide themselves, but that they should promote the common edification of the Church. In which examples of the new testament, he seemeth chief to refer this public prophesying, to this example of these 4. virgins. Now, concerning that which calvin saith on S. Paul's precept, 1. Tim. 2. ver. 11. & 12. expounding it thus: that women should not usurp unto themselves, the the courses of speaking in public: (and as he concludeth,) snatch up the right of teaching in the sacred asseblies, the ordinary Ecclesiastical office, whereof was given of God unto men only: all this we gladly grant unto, as the very meaning of S. Paul, and herein calvin doth well, to refer us for the exposition of this place, to that, which before he said. 1. Cor. 14.34. For there he made a plain exception of extraordinary examples. And therefore, to that which here he answereth to the objection of Deborah & the like women, God free & above his ordinary law. that the common policy whereunto God would have us bound is not overthrown by his extraordinary facts: if some women therefore being stirred up by the spirit of God, have held the place of prophesying or teaching. This could God do, which is free from all law. But because this is singular, it fighteth not with the perpetual and accustomed policy. This is a good answer, so that we restrain it not only to those facts which were then done, that he may not do the like now, or at any other extraordinary times: For that were to debar and limit God. But understanding it as calvin did before, that such a necessity may come, as may require a Woman's voice. So that the general rule standeth still, entire for the ordinary, Ecclesiastical offices and corpses of teaching, Teaching & governing. although extraordinarily, and in cases of necessity, a woman having the gift of God to do it with edification, may make a public exhortation to the people. As for this reason of calvin, why they should be forbidden to teach, because their condition, doth not suffer it: what condition is that? For (saith he) they are subject: but to teach is a matter of power or of higher degree. The argument is this: None may publicly teach that are subjects, or of lower power and degree, than are those whom they teach: but women are subject to men, & oflower degree: & therefore Women may not publicly teach men, First, for the Mayor of this argument, calvin himself seemeth to distrust it, & the whole reason that dependeth thereon, saying: howbeit this reason seemeth not firm, sith that the Proph. also and the Doctors or Teachers, were subject to Kings, and other Magist. If this reason seemeth not firm, than it seemeth as it is. For in deed it is a weak reason, & standeth upon infirm posts. May none teach publicly, that is a subject, or oflower degree in power, than those are whom he teacheth? But calvin saith not so. What saith he then? women cannot publicly teach Why so? they be subjects. what hindereth that? yes forsooth doth it, for teaching is a thing of power and of higher degree, & therefore none may teach, How our brethren slip from woman's publ. speaking, to woman's public government. but they must be of power and of higher degree: & over whom must this power and higher degree stretch, but over them whom they teach: Is not this then Cal. plain meaning, that none may publicly teach other: but he that is of power & higher degree, than are those whom he teacheth? If this be true, how is his own objection true, that Prop. & Doct. are subjects to Kings, & other Magist. May they not teach Princes, & their other Magistrates? Or will they exalt themselves, above their Kings & Magisttes, and exempt themselves from being subjects, because they are their teachers? As the Pope under that pretence likewise did? For, what helpeth this answer of calvin, but to overthrow his own principle? I answer (saith he) there is no absutditie, How power & teaching concur & differ. but that one may govern, and withal obey, according to diverse respects. If this his answer be good (as indeed it is) doth it not clean overturn Caluines own Mayor, that none may teach, but that is of power, & higher degree, than those are whom he teacheth? If he say, & are they not of power & higher degree, in that respect they teach? No verily, not always: even in that respect of teaching neither. No? teaching is a matter of power & higher degree. I deny that, (since we must drive the matter so narrowly to respects) that in that respect it is teaching, it is a matter of power or of higher degree. For teaching properly of itself, is but a matter of instruction and informing. What power did jetro take upon him, or superior degree when he taught Moses, how he should choose and appoint out justices, to ease him in the government of the people? Exod. 18.14. What power or superior degree took joathan on him over the Sichemites, when he stood on the top of mount Garrizim, and cried unto them, and said, Harken unto me, ye men of Sichem, & c? jud. 9.7. What power and superior degree took Sampsons' mother over her husband, when she showed him reasons, that the appearing of the Angel of the Lord, unto them, was no argument that he would kill them? jud. 13.23. When David taught Saul, how ill he did in persecuting him being an innocent did he take any power upon him over Saul, or any higher degree above him? 1. Sam. 24. ver. 10. & 26. ver. 18. When the poor handmaid taught her Mistress, Naaman's wife, by what means her Lord might be cleansed from his lepry. 2. Reg. 5. ver. 2. and naaman's servants persuaded their Master to follow the prophets commandment? Did they take any power or superior degree upon them? And when Counsellors teach their Princes what they should do; for, what is counseling but informing or teaching? When the King said to Elisaeus servant, tell me I pray thee, of all the great acts that Elisaeus hath done? when the servant showed the same unto him: did he take upon him a power and higher degree above the King, whom he informed? Doth job when he biddeth Eliphas the Themanite, teach him. give him power and higher degree above him? job 6. ver. 24. Or, when he saith to Sophar? Ask the beasts and they shall teach thee, and the fowls of the heaven, and they shall tell thee? job. 12.7. Neither letteth it, that some of these are private teachings: for, be they private, or be they public in respect they are teachings, they consider not the authority of the Teacher, but the matter taught, The power of the Teacher. or the manner of the teaching. As for the power and superiority of degree, that he hath who is the teacher; respecteth the party whose doctrine he teacheth, and the commission he hath from him. Which in this heavenly doctrine, cometh from heaven, having his authority and warrant from the Almighty God as it is said of Christ: he taught as one having power, and not as the Scribes. In which consideration (I grant) all power yieldeth, or ought to yield, when the hearers, whosoever, understand that the Teacher's doctrine is of God, and that they have authority of God to teach them. And so those Teachers do in the name of God, charge their Princes: and yet in all other respects, remain as other do, their subjects. And can these respects be thus together in a Prophet, & can they not be in a Prophetess? And how doth not this withal, overturn Caluines Minor? But the woman (saith he) is a subject: as though the man were not a subject, when he saith, Prophets and Doctors are subject to Kings and other Magistrates. But in a woman (saith calvin) this holdeth not. No doth? and why not in a woman as well as in a man? being both of ●●em, in respect of Kings and other Magistrates alike subject? for a woman (saith he) by nature is borne to obey. Teacher's subjects. What? the Kings and other Magistrates, more than those men are, which also are subjects? what meaneth calvin here, that a woman is borne to obey by nature? Doth he mean it in such sort that the woman is a servant or bondslave by nature, or of a servile nature? But that is both falseand odious. For a woman may be and is as much ingenua & libera▪ of as frank and free nature and condition, or (as we term it,) borne of as gentle blood, as the man is. And although, that the servitude of sin, and thraldom to mortality, and other calamities, coming to the man, by means of the woman: she hath lost by the law and malediction of God, that equality of honour that she was in before: being joined to the man in matrimony, with equal degree of power and dominion▪ and be now made subject to her husband's government in respect of that Deconomicall or household government, of which estate properly that law was given: and of whom S. Paul both in his epistle to the Corinthians speaketh: Of what women's subjection S. Paul speaketh. willing them to ask their husbands at home: and that which he speaketh to Timothy, that she should not usurp authority over the man, it hath a manifest relation only to her husband; as also have the words of God's law, given in penance unto her, thy desire shall be subject to thine husband, & he shall rule over thee: so that, though this law be the ordinary law of God (as calvin saith) in respect of the state of marriage: yet in other respects it is not so absolute. True it is, that a virgin in respect also of her parents, is subject in her nonage unto them, no less than the wife unto her husband: and yet, we see here these virgins for all their subjection to their father Philip, that was also an Evangelist, yea some call him an Apostle, did nevertheless prophecy, and that which is most likely, even in his presence, and in S. Paul's presence, and in the presence also of many other, notwithstanding any inferiority or subjection in other respects Yet diverse of the named Prophetesses, & other women that spoke in public assemblies, were not all widows, and so of their own jurisdiction or power, but even wives too. But calvin urgeth this, that by nature they are borne to obey. And what of that also? cometh this authority of teaching, (whatsoever authority they have thereto) or any gift of prophesying, by the law of nature or not rather by grace & by especial calling, whether it be in Women or men? but calvin himself expounds this saying, that women are borne to obey by nature, that is the by the ordinary law of God. Neither yet anaileth this exposition. For we stand not of the ordinary law of God, but, of extraordinary privileges, and (as calvin saith) upon such necessities, as wherein a woman's voice may be required. Caluines inconsiderate speech against women's government. But what now is Caluines' conclusion of all this? For all wise men have always refused the government of women even as of a monster: and therefore heaven and earth should be after a sort mingled together, if women should snatch unto them the right of teaching. Caluines ill speech of women's government As for snatching unto them the right of teaching, might perhaps be called in some sense the mingling together of heaven and earth. And so were it also, if any man should snatch the right hereof unto him, except he had some calling ordinary or extraordinary, or some necessity or occasion rather draw him, than he should snatch it unto him. And the like and much more we say of women. But if women by any respect, be called extraordinarily thereunto, or, (as calvin said before) there be such necessity as wherein a woman's voice may be required: shall we call this, snatching unto them the right use of teaching, & the mingling of heaven & earth together? and that is worst of all, shall we hereupon condemn all government of women, if by no means they might have any allowance or permission of this government, to teach or prophesy in the Church? May there no right grow to a woman of government, besides teaching? yea, Hear is other government beside teaching, whereof women may have a right. that whereunto she may be born? And can calvin then justify this conclusion, that all wise men have always refused the government of women, as it were a monster? What a monstrous saying is this to have escaped so wise & so godly a man? Did not calvin himself confess bifore, that some women were godly governors, saying: If any object Deborah and the like, which we read to have been sometimes by the commandment of God, placed over the people, for to govern them? Were there no wise men in all Israel in those days, when such women were governors? or, did those wise men account their government monstrous, or refuse it, being appointed by God's commandment? or did ever any wise man that had the true wisdom of God, or shall any such wise man among us now, account this doing of God to be monstrous? what a monstrous rebellion were this not only the against the state of them, but against God? Was it this that calvin meant before, when he said in his answer to the objection of their government, this could god do, which is free from all law? What? to set up such governors, as all wise men should refuse as monsters? Verily, no godly wise man can allow this saying: nor any excuse it or can salve it from a foul overshot and manifest untruth. And if calvin had better considered it, he would never have uttered such a sentence, or have blotted it out, or have retracted it. But thus doth affection carry wise men, and otherwise very godly men sometimes away, even from that which their selves cannot deny to be of God, How affection carrieth wise & godly men away. and not to be monstrous, but to be a godly and very gracious work of God, both for the advancement of his glory, and the great help and comfort of his people. And is this now the drift of our brethr. in this matter, to refuse as monstrous, & confounding heaven & as earth together, all women's government in gods Church? I hope yet a great deal better of Caluines' judgement in this matter, because (howsoever here he foully over shot himself and cotrarieth himself in his own tale▪ Caluines better speeches. as we have plainly seen) yet in other places, he better acquitteth himself: namely in his Epistle prefixed to his last edition of his learned Commentaries upon Esay, dedicated to our most gracious sovereign Lady, Caluines better acknowledging of woman's government in the Qu. most excellent Majesty Queen Elizabeth. where so highly he extolleth her Majesty, not oneliewith honourable words, & style of titles: To the most excellent Queen, and renowned no less by her virtues, than by her royal gifts ELIZABETH, etc. but also in his matter: declaring, that where he had dedicated the said commentaries to King Edward her majesties most godly Brother: Me thought (saith he) I should commit no absurdity, if unto the name of the most excellent King, I should also adjoin your name, no less beloved and joyful unto all good men. Yea rather: not only the occasion offered, but the necessity seemeth to require, calvin craveth the Q. majesties patronage for his commentary on isaiah that I should crave the faith of your patronage unto this commentary: at the banishment whereof I know, that a great number of godly men in your dominion, have sighed. Although my purpose is not so much to respect privately mine own labour, as humbly to beseech, and by the holy name of Christ to entreat you, that not only with your favour, all the books that are sound in faith, may find harbour again, in your England, and may be there freely conversant: but that whereas religion in a shameful manner was decayed, that you would take the chiefest care thereof. Which thing, if that only son of God do exact by his right of all the Kings of the earth: he holdeth you (O most noble Queen) bowden to perform this duty. calvin confesseth both the Queens May. right of inheritance to the Crown, & Gods calling her to the chiefest care of the Church. For whereas you being the Kings own daughter, were not free from that fearful storm, that even waightily hanged over the heads of all the godly; he marvelously delivering you safe therefrom, albeit not untouched (or free) from the fear of the danger, hath addicted you and all your studies to himself. Of which deliverance you ought so little to be ashamed, that God hath given to you an ample and plentiful matter of rejoicing, conforming you unto the image of his son. Amongst whose praises, our Prophet reciteth this, that he was exalted unto the highest height of the celestial Empire, out of the prison, and state of an arraigned person. But as it is no mean commendation to rehearse such an example: so, as often as you shall call to memory (which by no oblivion ought at any time to slip away) out of how pitiful and doubtful trembling you have escaped, God openly even (after a sort) reaching out his hand unto you; you may withal remember, that this end is set before you, that with a constancy not affrighted, and with an invincible magnanimity, God the Q. champion, and the Qu. the restorer of God's worship. you again uphold to him his right, that is your champion and deliverer. And setting aside all businesses, (whereof I doubt not, that a great heap of them, will make a stur thereat in these beginnings of the kingdom:) have you this care to restore his worship And if so be Satan with many and hard difficulties thrown in the way, attempt to cast in fearfulness or slowness: Caluines' praise of the Q. majesty. you are not ignorant from whence you should ask the confidence of proceeding courageously, which may overcome all impediments. Neither God, which with his blessing vouchsafeth the actions of private men, will leave his own work destitute of happy and wished success. Let the duty also of religion provoke thee (O Queen which art to be worshipped) sith that our Esay requireth not only of Kings; that they should be nourishers of the Church: but also of Queens, that they should be their nurses, Esaies' testimony for the confirmation of the government of Queens. and so forth, as he proceedeth in the Epistle. In which words, he doth (on better advisement) most plainly approve, and not refuse as monstrous the government of women: but account it both in her Majesty, as the singular gift & blessing of God unto his church, and also citeth isaiah in general, for Queens to be the Church's nurses. What shall we say therefore to this foresaid conclusion that calvin made: All wise men have always refused as a monster a woman's government? I would gladly salve it with expounding his words to be meant only, of the wife that taketh upon her to govern & rule her husband. But because, if it should be understood of this economical government only, than it would not make to Caluines' purpose, that women should not have authority and right publicly to teach: affirming teaching to be a thing of power and higher degree: & he bringeth in the objection of Deborah and answereth the same, by distinguishing the diverse respects, wherein the teachers obey their kings and other magistrates, and yet govern in respect of teaching: and saith, that women cannot have the consideration of these respects, because by nature, which he calleth the ordinary law of God, they are borne to obey: how therefore can this conclusion: For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 women's government; all prudent men did always refuse, as it were a monster, be understood otherwise, than of the public and civil government? And therefore, accepting calvin where he wrote truly and reverently of the matter, without any disgracing otherwise of his authority: In this place so grossly overshooting himself, and the truth of the matter, he can by no means be fully reconciled to himself, or aught of us, or of any other to be allowed. And so much more dangerous herein are these his speeches, as other over zealous among our Brethren, have gone as far and further hereupon, than he● did. And although Danaeus fetch the matter about with a greater windlasse, Danaeus concerning women's government. 1. Tim. 2.12. and with fairer speeches for our state and most gracious Soveragine: yet (as in the end calvin doth) so he also drives the matter to the same pitch, against not only the private government of women, over their husbands, in domestical matters, but also against the public government of women, in the civil and political state: Daneus of women's government. & therefore lest by any scruples in reading these men might stick in a curious mind upon this dangerous point, whereby any man might think himself not fully satisfied: let us see also & weigh all Danaeus reasons on this matter. How far Danaeus granteth women to teach And first we t●ke Danaeus his grant, that this precept of S. Paul (Let the woman with silence learn with all subjection) taketh place while women be in the public assembly: but not when they are at their own house, because they may privately instruct their family, especially if there want a Father of the household, and that they be widows, for than they both may and aught to pray unto God, & to teach their children the fear of God. And therefore in such sort as S. Paul calleth particular households, particular Churches: it inferreth, that they may teach particular Churches also. To the which I add that which Hemingius observeth hereupon. Hemingius in 1. Tim. 2. The second proposition of this Chapter containing an Ecclesiastical Canon, concerning the discipline and manners of women. In this Canon two things are commanded unto women, and two things are forbidden unto them. First is commanded that they should learn quietly without tumult, as becometh them which are thrall to the law of subjection. And then, that they should in quiet deal with their own affairs, and meddle with those things that pertain to women, not shoving themselves into the businesses of men. The first thing that is forbidden is, that women should not teach publicly: and then, that they should not usurp authority over men. These things pertain hereunto, that an order and discipline might be in the Church. Not that we should thereupon take an argument of contemning womankind: neither are they so bidden to hold their peace, but it is lawful for them to give wholesome counsels to their husbands, if at any time the matter seem to require it. Which thing the story of judith, Deborah, Anna, and of other women doth show. (Which examples infer not only private, but public counsels and authority also) yea, Abraham is commanded of the Lord, that he should obey his wives council of casting out the handmaid Agar. And also by domestical discipline to teach godliness, yea, & that they may admonish their husbands of their duty, when they cease to do it, or be sluggish. For Paul here treateth of the common discipline, the which excludeth not necessary counsels and deliberation of honest (or worshipful) women. So that, thus far forth they grant them to teach or govern, not only in private, but in public. But to come to Danaeus reasons: the first reason (saith he) which is expounded in this place, is drawn a differentia, from the difference which is set of God himself, between both sexes, to wit, the man's and the woman's. Danaeus arguments against women's government. The second is, a genere, from the kind, or general words. God would have women neither to rule, neither to teach, neither to usurp authority in viros, over the men or husbands: but he that speaketh in the Church, or ruleth and teacheth, taketh on her over men a certain government & authority: therefore women neither can, Danaeus ill argument. either aught to speak in the church. This twofold division of S Paul's reasons which Danaeus maketh of reasoning first from the difference of the sex, & then from the kind: except it had been plainer spoken, is some what intricate, & may rather seem to be all one. For what is here the sex, but the kind, & the kind, but the sex? except he take Genus for the general word, and comprehend teaching in the word governing, as though he must needs be a governor, that is, a teacher, which we have seen already, by many examples is not so. But to the argument. God would neither have women (Praeesse) that is, to be above, (or to be before, or to rule) neither to teach, neither to usurp authority upon men: At qui loquitur in Ecclesiasive praeest ea, et docet, in viros sumit quoddam imperium et authoritatem: Ergo, etc. But he that speaketh in the church (I think it should rather be) At quae loquitur, but he that speaketh in the Church, or ruleth (or is above or before) and teacheth, taketh a certain government, or rule & authority upon man: Ergo, women neither can nor aught to speak in the Church. This Ergo, neither concludeth the matter that S. Paul here avoucheth, nor any part of this argument is so plain and orderly set down, but, is so intricate and confused, that we can scarce make a good Syllogism, or almost any sensible reason of the same. And first for his conclusion, where he taketh, that for the cause or key of his argument, which in Latin we call Medium, the mean, which is repeated in either proposition, to infer & prove S. Paul's conclusion, that is, Women should not teach in the Church, Danaeus faulty argument both inform and matter. (which if he would prove aught) he ought to have proved: this he proveth not, but by this he would prove, that they ought not to speak in the church. Whereas contrariwise he should have made his key or wrest of this argument▪ to have been on speaking, and thereupon to have concluded teaching. As thus: God suffereth not women to speak in the church: but to teach inferreth to speak: ergo, he suffereth them not to teach. But, as he now turns it another way: so he so doubles it with teaching & with ruling, etc. that both he marreth the argument, & the sense of either proposition. for where he saith in the Mayor: God neither will have women to rule nor to teach, nor to usurp authority over men: he seemeth here to speak of three distinct things that God would not have to be in women, ruling, teaching, & usurping authority over men. But what meaneth he here by usurping authority over men? The mayor proposition. Is not that all one with Praeesse to rule them, or to be over or above them? If it be, then is not here 3., but 2. distinct things, that God would not have to be in women: if he make the difference to be herein, that by ruling or being over them, Usurping autho●itie over men. he meaneth good & lawful Government: & by usurping, naughty government: then maketh he a good difference, but withal he acknowledgeth some government of women to be good & lawful, and some, that is usurpation, to be naughty▪ and so I hold well with him in this partition of Government. But then, how is this Proposition true, Danaeus evil argument. that God would have neither the one nor the other? For God forbids not simply any lawful thing. If he say, that lawful government is not simply forbidden, but only to the Women: it still comes all to one pass. For, the Proposition is not of Government simply in itself, but of women's Government, whether it be simply evil, and of women's usurpation. For either both these are but all one▪ (for, if her Government be simply evil: What is it else, but mere usurpation, or if it be distinct from usurpation (which in women and men also is mere and simple evil,) what is it else but good and lawful? Besides, that this Proposition, (take ruling, or usurping authority how he will) not simply true, is not only concerning governing, nor yet for teaching. For, were it simply true: it could admit no debar of any occasion or necessity, nor any exemption of such especial persons, as were lawfully called thereunto, which we have seen at large, both by examples and testimonies of the scripture, and by arguments and plain confessions even of our Brethren themselves both for governing, and for teaching: besides that, we shall yet more plainly see by Danaeus own confession after ward. Now, as we see this confusion of these terms, in the Mayor or more general proposition: so, the Minor is far worse and clean marreth all the argument. The minor proposition For, whereas to infer his conclusion, it should have followed thus: But to speak in the Church, is to rule, to teach, and to usurp authority over men: Ergo, God would not have it, that women may or aught to speak in the Church: This had been a plain argument. But then this minor had had a plain denial. Nor Danaeus, nor all the world can ever prove it, that to speak in the Church is to rule, to teach, and to usurp authority over men. And so were all this argument most easily overturned. But Danaeus (whether rethoritically, as not bound to the straight limits of Logic, The form of the argument misformed. or to make the argument more diffuse) inverteth the minor on this wise. First, he repeateth women here again, whom he bringeth also into the conclusion, and so clean overthrows all form and nature of any argument. Besides this, (and that which is most vicious in any form of argument) he placeth, with speaking in the Church, Governing, and (though somewhat more ambiguously) teaching also. Making the fore part of the sentence, in Latin called Subiectum, as the subject matter, whereon any thing is spoken, to consist here of these thr●e. Whereas these terms to rule, and to teach, should have been placed with the third term, to usurp authority over men, & all three in the Predicatum, that is, in the thing that is spoken on the matter subject. Which three should be made the key of his argument, or cause whereupon he should infer his conclusion, and so be reserved to be repeated in the later part of his assumption, or minor Proposition of his argument, which it seemeth he would have brought to the first mode of the second figure of syllogisms. which later part of his assumption or minor proposition, Danaeus ill argument. he maketh here to be only the taking a kind of government and authority over men, which before he joined together with ruling and teaching, and now he severeth it from rule and teaching. Neither yet maketh he it to be all one with that he said before: but instead of that he called before usurping, here he cometh in with taking. And where before he spoke simply & only of authority: here he cometh in with a Quoddam imperium, a certain kind of commandment, (empire or government) and authority. Neither is it enough, with transposing and changing thus these terms clean to overthrow his own argument: but also he maketh this minor proposition as confused and intricate, if not much more, than was the other. For, if we should english this proposition word by word: At qui loquitur in ecclesiasive praeest ea & docet, in viros sumit quoddam ●imperium & authoritatem. He (or as I rather think, The very words of the argument senseless. it should be she) that speaketh in the Church or else ruleth she also teacheth, taketh a certain Empire & authority upon men. See how intricately and confusedly these words are placed. Mought they not more clearly have been distinguished: She that speaketh, teacheth: and she that ruleth taketh on her a kind of government and authority? But than had both these parts been soon confuted. For although it be most true, that she which ruleth taketh on her a kind of government and authority: yet if this taking on her, be referred to the usurpation mentioned in the former Proposition (for else also the argument hath more terms than it ought to have) which word usurping is usually taken in the worst part, for them that take government & authority, upon them having no right thereto, for that is properly termed usurping: and so indeed it is a certain kind of Government and authority, but not a right and lawful government and authority: then this part of the sentence is most apparent false. For every woman that ruleth, doth not so take (that is, by usurpation) a certain kind of government and authority, that is, a wrong title, or an usurped tyranny, as did Athalia. For, she may be specially called thereunto of God, How many ways a woman may have lawful government she may be lawfully chosen thereunto of man, and she may be lineally borne thereunto by nature, and so usurps it not. Deborah was no usurper. But we shall come to more examples all in time. And also the other part of the Proposition thus distinguished, is apparent defective: She that speaketh teacheth. Do all teach that speak? if he mean, all that speak. In that manner of speaking: what is that else, then in effect to say: She that teacheth teacheth? and indeed S. Paul speaketh not here simply of speaking, but of teaching. As we heard before▪ 1. Corin. 14.34. Where be said, it is not permitted to them to speak, which was thus expounded by Calu. He forbids them therefore to speak in public for because of teaching or of prophesying. Danaeus evil argument. So that this cause being set aside: speaking in the Church is not forbidden. No nor teaching neither simply, as we have showed both by the Scripture, and by calvin also. And yet, if Danae. had set his rest against wom. teaching in the church, it had been more tolerable. But now all his conclusion is against women's speaking in the church. The conclusion of Danaeus argu. against women's speaking. And he reasoneth thus, they may not teach in the Church: ergo, they may not speak in the Church. And in this proposition, she that speaketh teacheth. What a kind of teaching or speaking is this, a genere affirmatiuè ad speciem? she speaketh: ergo, she teacheth. And if this consequence be good: then of consequence she may teach in the Church. Sith it is apparent, she may speak: For, if all the congregation may say but Amen: if she be one of the congregation, she may publicly speak, say she but only bare Amen. And may not she say some of the responses, as may the other people that are not Ministers? and may she not say the public Confession with them? may she not be openly Catechised, and answer to the articles of her faith? may she not sing with the congregation the psalms and Hymns? And is not that also a public speaking? and must she not speak when she is to be married, and before all the Congregation confess, being straightly charged so to do, if she know any lawful impediment, why she ought not to be joined in matrimony to that man? and do not our brethren also enjoin her even in the knot of marriage, to say these words? Even so I take him before God, and in the presence of this his congregation. How therefore doth Danaeus conclude: that women neither can nor aught to speak in the Church: If he say this speaking is not teaching, & that he speaketh only here of such speaking, as is teaching: why then doth he not drive his argument from speaking to teaching? and to have reasoned thus, she may not speak, ergo, she may not teach. Rather than from teaching unto speaking, saying thus: she may not teach: ergo, she may not speak: which is again a specie ad genus negatiuè. But, which way soever he drive it, it is both apparent, that she may both speak in the Church, Necessity admitteth also women's public teaching extraordinarily. without the breach of Saint Paul's precept: yea, and her speaking may be teaching also, if she take not on her the ordinary Ecclesiastical function of teaching in the Church, which is the thing indeed, that Saint Paul forbiddeth. For otherwise, if either necessity happen, (as calvin granteth) she may extraordinarily teach also: or, if she be any way lawfully called to the authority of public regiment, not only she may both speak and teach in the public congregation: but her place (of consequence) doth often times require it. Which Danaeus perceiving, though he concludeth not his argument against women's governing: yet to prove that she ought not to speak, he taketh all his force from these two which he thus intermingleth one with another, ruling and teaching. And why doth he so? Women regiment. Is it ●●r that teaching inferreth ruling: or that, ruling inferreth teaching? and y●● which soever inferreth the other, or they be both conjoined, whereas he dr●●● it thus: Women may not publicly rule: ergo, they may not publicly 〈◊〉: Or, women may not publicly teach: ergo, they may not publicly rule: Why may not we send these arguments back again to their Master, which this reciprocal answer? Women may publicly rule: ergo, Women may publicly teach. Or, Women may publicly teach: ergo, Women may publicly rule. That women may teach, we have seen the examples and testimonies of Scripture and our brethren's own Confessions. And as for the lawfulness of women's public ruling: as we have seen the scripture and calvin, &c: Let us now see what Danaeus saith thereto, after this his argument against their speaking. For, that which followeth concerning women deacons: I stand not upon. Now upon this occasion cometh Danaeus directly to the Question of the regiment of Women, Danaeus in 1. Tim. 2.12 with the which (as we hard before) calvin, so rigorously did conclude. But (saith Danaeus) out of this place it is also among some thereupon disputed, whether it be honest for women to reign, that is, to command men, and to obtain a chief empire and right over men, and over the male-kind, which thing hath place in Spain, in England, in Scotland, and in diverse other regions. Bridges Hear Danaeus setteth down this Question plain, for the government of Wome● over men, both for the reigning in the chief and public regiment of a kingdom, and the right thereof, and whether it be honest, yea or no●? Which he maketh but a Question disputed upon by some that take occasion on this place. So that he seemeth to infer, that there is no direct and plain place in the Scripture which doth impugn it, but that by occasion of this place, some do dispute thereon. So that first, this place and much less the other 1. Corint. 14. Which accordeth with this, are not directly spoken against the reign or chief and public government of Women over men, No place in scripture directly against it. in the sovereignty of a kingdom or royal Empire. But, that rule which Saint Paul both here and there forbiddeth women to have and exercise over men, is properly of another kind of rule. And therefore, whosoever allegeth those places, as by them to draw a direct argument against the public regiment of women, in the right of a Kingdom, manifestly wresteth those places. And so consequently, wresteth all Saint Paul's reasons there used, and also the Law, Genesis, 3. Whereon he grounds these reasons. Now where Danaeus saith, that for women to reign, that is, to command men, & to obtain the chief Empire & right (or law) over men, is of some disputed upon, Wom. regiment honest and that the question is, utrum honestum fit, whether it be honest: that is, whether it be of the best kind of those things that are called good, to wit, not only fair in show, nor only profitable in the aduantag●●ut whether it be a virtuous, a just, a true, lawful, and righteous 〈◊〉, yea, or no. The contrary whereof, to wit, unhonest, is not only ●npleasant or incommodious, but vicious, unjust, false, unlawful and unrighteous. Of which sort of evil if it were: being a matter pertaining not to a few persons, but to whole estates, and of such importance as concerneth government, in their greatest and most necessary affairs: it is likely that it should be but disputed upon of some? or rather cried out upon of all, nor to be suffered in any place as contrary to the express law of God, and to the universal law of nature, if those places, Gen, 3.1. Cor. 14. and this 1. Tim. 2. be against it. Women's govern. not unhonest. And so by no manner of means to be suffered, and then indeed had Calvin said the truth, that all wise men did always refuse it as a monstrous thing, being against the Law of God and nature. But sith those places (as we have proved, & Danaeus granteth) do not meddle therewith, and much less, any other place in all the scripture, hath any appearance to condemn it, as a dishonest matter: can we think, that a matter of such moment, not only for the public state in matters of policy, in moral conversation (yea conservation) of man's life, and preservation of God's Church, and withal so often mentioned in the scripture, both for the persons, and for the office, and for the authority of princes & public governors, that it should have never directly and peremptorily been forbidden, nor have been pronounced to be a thing unhonest? yea rather, doth not this silence of the scripture, clear acquit it of all suspicion of dishonesty? Our brethe. offence in calling the honesty of women's regiment into question And in very deed, albeit some more curious and new-fangled than sober or circumspect, have called the honesty thereof in question: yet for the most and best, and wisest part of men, the honesty thereof hath not been called into question, but thought to be (where there is occasion thereof, and that the laws and customs bear it) a good, a just, a lawful, a true, a right, a virtuous & honest matter. And for proof hereof (as Danaeus here beginneth well, if he would in this point so hold out, and not yield to much to these disputers, or not rather give occasion & matter for them to dispute upon) he doth mightily (in my opinion) confirm the honesty of it, in saying, that this thing hath place in Spain, England, Scotland, and divers other regions. For, were there no more regions, where the regiment of women (as lawful, just right, true, virtuous and honest hath place) but these 3. here specified: it is enough sufficiently to enforce the honesty of it, except we shall utterly dishonest all these states, which (when such regiment happeneth,) chiefly under GOD depend thereon. As our estate doth now in ●ngland and Ireland under our most gracious sovereign Queen Eli●abeth. And should we now admit these certain or some disputers, or any other, to have it called in question, whether the state and Laws of our realm, even in the greatest matter of the government thereof, do maintain a thing that is unhonest, or against the Law of God and nature? For, if it be against these places, Gen. 3.1. Corin. 14.1. Tim. 2. or these places against it: how is not against the Law of God and nature? what a perilous matter were this, and not only most dangerous, injurious, dishonest, and dissloyall against our lawful sovereign, by whose happy government. God hath so blessed us, and doth so graciously guide us and defend us, and so many years hath done, The dangerous inconveniences of these Questionistes. and should we now call her state and right into so high question, by sums disputing (if it might not better be called dispiting) as whether it were honest or no? to her majesties more than dishonour, besides her overthrow, and withal our own destruction: but that also under pretence of the Gospel, we should maintain an inconvenience worse than a mischief, and go about to shatter all the grounds, and principles of the Law itself, both of the realm, yea, and of nature, for the right and inheritance and call in Question, even in the greatest matter of estate, (sith England maintaineth the inheritance and right of women's regiment) whether it maintain honesty or dishonesty, yea or no? and whether her Majesty and other Women princes, in our and these specified regions, have or do rather rule De facto, as usurpers, than de iure, as Godly and lawful princes? should we not herein go far beyond the very traitors, that oppose themselves only against the prince's persons? And what should drive any Questionists to this disputation, by reason of this place, the first of Timothy, the second Chap. Which is but haled and wrested to this regiment? How much better therefore is it, especialle for us whom so nearly it toucheth, Our dutiful obedience and thankfulness to God & her Majesty. that (as Danaeus confesseth) the honesty and right of women's regiment hath place here with us in England: So with all obedience, joyfulness, thankfulness, and conscience to God, to acknowledge the same. And not upon such bious occasions to undermine it, pretending a quarrel against women's public teaching, which neverthesse's must must needs follow. For, Look wherein their regiment consi●●es, therein doth an authorities of teaching even of consequence also follow. If our Brethren reply: that admitting a Woman to have supreme government over all ecclesiastical matters so well as civil: then may she preach also and minister the Sacraments. I answer, this objection which is more fit for papists ●han protestants) is but a mere cavil For we say not, Questions of women's regiment. the prince hath all the government either of all ecclesiastical matters, or civil, in his or her person to do them, or to put them in action: but the Prince hath a supreme government in his or her dominions, What supreme government, princes have ineccls. matters. next and immediate under God, only to oversee, to appoint, to give charge, and to command, that all those matters be duly executed, and orderly put in action, by all these persons, to whom of duty by their functions they appertain. And so the Prince, he or she, without the breach of S. Paul's precept, or of the law of God, may lawfully, and with authority, both speak and teach, even in the greatest assembly of the congregation. For, his or her government consisteth as much, in the authority of their lawful commandements: as in any thing else belonging to their supreme regiment. And take away the right of their so speaking (which quickeneth and giveth life unto the laws politic that they make) to wit, The princes royal speech quickening the Laws that are made. their royal assent and commanding: and overthrow all their government. And if this regiment be right and honest in England: then was it never against the law of God and nature in any land. And if it be so now: then of his own nature, and de iure, it was so ever, though it were not ever so, de facto. And we have no cause but to praise God, that Ius & factum in this government, are now joined together in her Majesty. And the right and honesty hereof having place here: it is not so only in Spain and Scotland, but it may be so (not as Danaeus saith, in divers other regions) but, quoad ius, every region, if they have not other as good municipal and peculiar laws (and those not feigned) to debar the natural right, of any Woman prince's regiment. Neither hindereth it this right and honesty, that Spain or any of these divers other regions not specified by Danaeus, have not yet received (as we have God make us thankful for it) the light and liberty of the Gospel: for neither in some of these regions, where this right and honesty of women's regiment holdeth, they have as yet received, so much as the title and profession of Christ's name. Notwithstanding as their marriages and other civil laws: or moral behaviour, may otherwise be good and honest in their kinds: so their authority of Magistracy, and the person that their Laws allow the same authority unto, may likewise be good and honest, neither against the general law of nature, nor against any special Law of God. For then, it were merely nought in all regions, and with us in England worst of all, that know the written Law of God. And therefore I conclude upon this saying of Danaeus, that if it be right and honest with us: than it is not an unnatural, wrong, monstrous, or unhonest thing in itself, or against any of these places. Genes. 3.1. Corinth. 11. and 14.1. Tim. 2. or any other places in all the scripture. What meaneth therefore Danaeus here, The Salic Law against women's regiments by specifying only of these three regions England, Spain and Scotland, restraining his generality, not to all regions, but to divers other? For if it be honest and right, in any one: except some other region have other private and special Laws against the same, such (as before I said) are godly, and not made to the injury of any princes or persons former right: then is it by the Law & right of God and nature, honest and right in all regions. But I am afraid (hine illa lachimae) that not only Danaeus, but even calvin also, did a little too much patrissare, Caluines & Danaeus inclination to the devise the law Salic. and were carried away in this matter with the devise, that of later times hath been set forth, to defeat the natural right and title of the sovereign Princes of England, by the colour of a law Salic as they call it. But because under pretence of this supposed Law, the defenders of it, took upon them, not only to maintain it and the state of their Country: but insult thereby upon all other Nations, and impugn generally the right of women's regiment, as an unlawful and unnatural state of government: therefore craving pardon not to offend any (nor so much impugning, as defending) it shall be requisite, either to remove out of the way this objection, of the said surmised Salic law: or else it would still remain as a stumbling block unto the reader, and a special argument unto all them, that not only among our adversaries, but among ourselves, by all means impugn and vnder●●●e women's regiment. And because France only, and that law Salic is so much urged: Let us only in this our so necessary defence, consider better the state thereof, and the chiefest arguments for the same. And ●●rst, whosoever shall peruse the ancient histories of the french nation, as he shall soon perceive all this devise of the law Salic to be unturue by the pedegrée of divers of their Princes: so shall he find, diverse women have had the regiment of France. that divers women have also had the governing of the realm of France, even with the Kings their husbands, and after their deceasses. As Batillidis the widow of Clodoveus which reigned together in the administration of the Kingdom with her son Clotharius, as witnesseth Aimonius de gestis Francorum. lib. ●. cap. 43. The french men do ordain Clothayr to be their king, the eldest of the three children, cum ipsa regina matre regnaturum that he should reign together with his mother. blanch the Mother of him whom the French call Saint Joys which both by the Testament of her Husband (as Aemilius testifleth) while her son was young, and after in his captivity in Syria, had the government of the Realm of France, and notably governed the same, maugre all the nobles in France that conspired against her. As for the reasons of Caenalis, in the defence of this pretenced Salic law: Cenalis' for the Salic Law. how odiousle (he being a popish Bishop) enucigheth beyond all modesty against women: is to apparent. And how fond he craketh of the french for this matter, above all the nations in the world. Whom he acknowledgeth for the most part (further than Danaeus doth) to admit succession and so the regiment of women. Cenalis' arg. for the Salic Law against women's regiment. And therefore he calleth them all Gallinaceos, dunghill cocks or hennish cocks in respect of the french. lib. 1. Perioche. 10. But most of all, how shamelessly he wresteth the scripture thereunto. For having alleged Munster to prove the Salic law from Pharamund, that the succession should not come unto the distaff, (as he contumeliously terms it) that is saith (he) women should not be permitted to be made heirs of the kingdom, to the which alludeth that evangelical sentence, Consider ye the Lilies of the field how they grow, they labour not in bringing forth, neither spin they in drawing their tasks of wool, as is peculiar unto that weak sex: whereby it comes to pass, that neither Solomon in all his glory is clothed as one of these. For, that jewish nation, were it right or were it wrong, did sometimes (will they ●il they, sustain the government of women kind. Which thing is by experiment found in Athalia, and in the issue of the Maccabees. What an impudent wresting of the Scripture is this, to prove the glory of the French Lilies, not to admit the regiment of women? And yet this bald argument, or rather impious, in wresting the scripture, doth so please the blood B. that he flourisheth again upon it, fol. 113. b. saying: Gallia in times past was Fennish, as appeareth by the arms of the toads but now it is turned into a Country adorned with Lilies, by an heavenly benefit, under Clodoveus the first Christian King thereof. Hereunto alluded Esdras, lib 4. Cap. 9 saying, Such as the Field is, such are the seeds: such as the Flowers are, such are the colours: Such as is the husbandman, such is the tilth. And the same Esdras Cap 5. Of all the Flowers of the world, thou haste chosen to thee one Lyly. The Lion is fierce, the Eagle is ravenous, the Lyly is capable of the heavenly dew Is not this a strange applying of the scripture, although this book of Esdras be not canonical? But now, where he addeth these two examples, If he had looked further, he should have found more, and far better examples in the Scripture. Especially Deborah. But it seemeth he makes all one reckoning, when he saith: were it right, or were it wrong, that women governed God's people. Whereby he seemeth to claim this, to be the prerogative of France: that whether it be right, or whether it be wrong, they will not suffer women's governmtnt. Neither is Cenalis thus content, to have thus once or twice herein abused the Scripture, but he goeth on most blasphemousely to God, and injuriously against all Christendom: and saith: in which thing that most noble Realm of the Nation of the French gauls, hath whereupon to congratulate unto itself, that by the singular benefit of God, it may worthily be called before other kingdoms, a sacerdotal or Priestly kingdom. For it hath this thing common with Priesthood, that even as the Priesthood can not pass over unto a woman: so no more can the monarchial Empire of the Salic Monarchy. What therefore remaineth, but that being mindful of the grace received of God, they break forth into these words, Apocal. 5. Thou art worthy O Lord to take the book and to open the seals thereof because thou wast slain, & hast redeemed us in thy blood out of every tribe, language, people, and Nation, to wit, whom thou hast vouchsafed to illustrat with the title of the most Christian kingdom. Caenalis' shameful wresting of the scripture And moreover, hast made us kings and Priests, and we shall reign upon the earth, to wit, being enriched with this sacerdotal dowry. Nothing therefore letteth, whereby that Nation should not be called, a holy Nation, a royal Priesthood, or (if ye had rather) a priestly or sacerdotal kingdom, a people of purchase. For the religion which afterward once it got, never intermitted, but happily & prosperously ever increased. Gallia (or the country of the Gauls) (saith jerom) alone hath wanted monsters, with the which almost the residue of Nations have abounded more than enough. Thus monstrously writeth Caenalis against women's regiment. Howbeit, I hope Calvin took not this term of monster for women's regiment, from this monstrous Popish Bishop. As for that which Jerome wrote, Caenalis' wresting of Jerome. was not against the regiment of women in Gallia, neither was Gallia in his time called Francia, nor Pharamundus borne, and so no such Salic law as yet invented. And therefore this must needs be wrested hereunto. Besides this intolerable arrogancy in the French to claim that spiritual privilege of Royal Priesthood, that is both common to all true Christian nations, and to all true Christian people, not only men, but to women also and to children. And therefore this is both injurious unto them, to take this title from them, and a gross error in a Bishop, The injury that Caenalis offereth to all Christians. not understanding what these terms do mean. For although he de●arre his Popish sacrificing Priesthood from a woman (le● him lay that hardly to Pope johanes charge) yet in this spiritual and mystical kingdom and Priesthood, that either S. Peter or S. john speaketh of, every good Christian woman, never so private or poor person, and all the elect children of God, have as good title, right and interest, as not only the French king, but as any, or all, the Emperors, Kings, Queens, and Princes in the world. Now after Caenalis hath thus craked of the French prerogative, in this Salic law, so much pretended and so greatly urged: when he cometh to the reason of the same, The Etymology of the Salic law. and of this word Salica, he showeth what diversities of opinions are thereon. Munster thinks it is derived of the word Sala a river at a village of the same name. Other, that the laws Salic are derived of the word Sala, or une salle in French, signifying in Latin Aulam a Court or Hall, une salle Au●a. as who say, the Courtly or Palatine law. Some thought the derivation of the law Salic, came of certain laws of the French Emperors, Si aliqu●. beginning: Si aliquis, or Si aliqua, and so by contraction, striking of a letter or two in the end, per syncopen, it was vulgarly termed the law Salic. Some (saith he) arise higher & more commodiously, who fetch the Etymology of the law Salic not so much out of the marrow (or pythe) of the word, as out of the bark (or rind) of the word: Sal. A Sale from salt, as by a certain allusion that they would have the Salic law to be spoken hereupon: as though it were perpetually constant, inviolable and incorruptible for all times to endure. For salt in the holy scriptures, is a token of incorruption and perpetual enduring, and moreover both of Wisdom and discretion. As is expressed in plain words, Numb. 18. and levit. 2. In the book of Numbers: The scripture foully wrested. All the first fruits of the sanctuary, which the children of Israel ●ffer to God, I have given to thee and to thy sons, by a perpetual right; it is an everlasting covenant of salt unto thee and to thy sons before the Lord. And in Leviticus, Whatsoever sacrifice thou shalt offer, thou shalt season with salt, nor shalt take away the salt of the covenant of thy God from thy sacrifice. In every oblation thou shalt offer salt. And again 2. Paral. 13. Ye are not ignorant that the Lord GOD of Israel hath given the kingdom unto David over Israel for ever, to him and to his sons, for a covenant of salt. By this it manifestly appeareth, that salt hath the tooken of incorruption. And as for the token of discretion: Let your speech (saith Paul) be seasoned with salt. And in Mark: Col. 4. Mark. 9 B●●rie offering shall be salted with salt, Sal● is good, but if so be it be unsavoury, in what will ye season it? That so ye may understand, the law Salic being sprinkled with the salt of discretion, and with the sauce of much reason, perpetually to remain in his vigour. Thus doth Caenalis seek all the shifts he can to enforce this law, not sparing thus more and more, to hale and draw these places of scripture to the same. But sense he allegeth so many originals thereof, and dare not resolve himself upon any one of them, but saith, Let every man's judgement remain to himself, for I will not upon this thing contend with any man: what certainty therefore can this law have? The very title whereof, when it is tossed and tumbled withal these diversities of opinions, and wrestlinges of the scripture, is so uncertain. But if this were such a wise and incorruptible law, that it had his name of seasoning with salt to resemble those ancient offerings covenants, and speeches in the old and new Testament: The words of the Salikel awe. than it maketh more for women than against them. For although that saying 2. Paral. 13. mention only David and his sons: yet did Caenalis himself confess before, The text of scripture that Caenalis citeth, expresseth both sons and daughters 2. Par. 13. that the Nation of the jews did admit the government of a woman. And the place mentioned Numbers 18. containeth not only sons (as Caenalis citeth it) but the very words are: to thee, and to thy sons, and to thy daughters. So that the offering, that is the salt of covenant, or incorruptible covenant (if the French can draw it to hold still incorruptiblie with them, or the resemblance of their Prince's estate thereunto) giveth the same not only to the man, but to the woman. And as for Christ's and the Apostles words, are so general: that they are apparently to be applied, to all that profess the name of Christ, whether they be man or woman. Both of them must have their speeches seasoned with salt, that is, with such wisdom as will permit no corruption. For ill words (saith the Apostle) corrupt good manners. The salt that Christ and the Apostle spoke of, is gen●rall to▪ all Christians. And all must be salted with fire, and every sacrifice (saith Christ) shall be salted with salt. Salt is good, but if the salt be unsavoury, wherewith shall it be seasoned? Have salt in yourselves, and peace one with an other. By which salt, mean he wisdom, or faith, or discipline, or the word, etc. as he alludeth to the old sacrifices, and would have ourselves to be come such sacrifices: so the ●ordes are general, and therefore (saith calvin) Christ extendeth this generally unto all, whom once God hath vouchsafed to season with his word. And exhorteth them to retain always their relish. And where the text is only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, all, or every one: the interpreter (sayeth Brentius) hath added of his own, homo, man. By these resemblances the salike law s●ould not be against women. Which word also comprehendeth woman. So that by these originals or resemblances of the Salic law, if there be but mica salis even one grain of salt to season the same with wisdom and reason from putrefaction: it can not debar women from that right of government, that by the inheritance of the law of God and nature, they are borne unto, except their own demerits, or some stronger heart than the pretence of the law salike, debar or deprive them of it. As for this law salike (saith Caenalis proceeding on among other things) hath thus. Titulo de Allodijs 62. cap. 1. Nulla portio haereditatis de terra Salica mulieri veniat, sed ad virilem sexum tota haereditas perventat. The words of the sal●k law. No portion of inheritance of the salike land, may come to a woman, but the whole inheritance should come to the male sex. If this law be that whereupon all the stir is made, first, it is manifestly against the judicial law of inheritance, in the word of GOD. For, whereas it appeareth, Numb. 26. ver. 33. that Salphahad the son of Helpher had no sons, but daughters, etc. If followeth chap. 27. v. 1. etc. Then came the daughters: The law Salic against God's law. of Salphahad, the son of Hepher, the son of Galaad, the son of Machir, the son of Manasses, the son of joseph; and the names of his daughters were these, The law Salic against the law of God. Malhah, Noah, Hogl●h, Milchah, and Thirsah: and stood before Moses, and before Eleazar the Priest, and before the Princes and all the assembly, at the door of the Tabernacle of the congregation, saying: Our Father died in the wilderness, Numb. 27. and he was not among the assembly of them, that were assembled against the Lord in the company of Corah, but died in his sin, and had no sons. Wherefore should the name of our father be taken away from his family, because he hath no sonn●? Give us a possession among the brethren of our Father. (here again women speak and plead their right of inheritance, both before the Ecclesiastical & the Civil assembly) Than Moses brought their cause before the Lord, Women in the publ. assembly plead for their inheritance. and the Lord spoke unto Moses saying: the daughters Zelophaad speak right, thou shalt give them a possession to inherit among their father's brethren, and shalt turn the inheritance of their Father, unto them. Also thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying: if a man die and have no son, than ye shall turn his inheritance unto his daughter. And if he have no daughter, ye shall give his inheritance unto his brethren. And if he have no brethren, ye shall give his inheritance unto his father's brethren. And if his father have no brethren, ye shall give his inheritance to the next in kin of his family, and he shall possess it. And this shall be unto the children of Israel a law of judgement, as the Lord hath commanded Moses. Here again we see, how God not only accepteth their speaking in the congregation, but approveth their cause to be right. And not only alloweth the inheritance of their father unto them: This law not only judicial but natural. but on this occasion, maketh a general law. Which law, is not simply one of those judicial laws, that were proper only to the jews state and policy: but is drawn from the right of lineal descent, direct or collateral in the order of nature, to the nearest of the blood, without respect (especially in the direct line) to the prerogative of the male sex in the lines transuersed. Neither is there here any respect had of the greatness or smallness, superiority or inferiority of the inheritance: but that, if the King had had none issue but daughters, This law stretcheth to the inheritance of the kingdom. the daughter had been heir to the kingdom, before any Uncles, or Cousines, never so excellent and worthy men. And if we should deny this in the inheritance of a kingdom, more than in other inheritances: how can we make it good, that our saviour Christ according to the flesh, (albeit he took it not upon him) was in right of inheritance, the true and natural king of the jews: as he was called both at his birth, and the title named him at his death, except in the right of the virgin Marie his mother, and not of joseph that was but his reputed father? Therefore, it is most clear, that this law of women's right in inheritance, stretched to the inheritance of a kingdom. And since this was God's law, and it stands on natural reason, and Christ on whom all Christendom have their name, had that right hereby: Christ king of the ●ewes from his mother. though for other considerations he abased himself, both from claiming that right, and from the open declaring of the power and glory of his godhead, for the time of that dispensation here on earth: and since all or the most part, not only of heathenness, but namely of Christendom, acknowledge the title & right of this law: what privilege have the French to exempt themselves therefrom, & to debar any Prince of this right that by inheritance accrueth to them, under pretence of an heathen law, pretended from infidel's, only for a show of antiquity, against the most ancient, most reasonable, most natural and most right law made of God the father himself, and confirmed by our saviour jesus Christ? If this law had no greater force than one of their mere judicials: had it not been better than any law, that is merely of man? And much more of blind Papists, that saw not the virtue and equity of God's law: & much far better than any law of the Infidels: as was Pharamund from whom the French pretend to fetch this Salic law, so direct contrary to God's law. But let them go. Shall our Brethren Protestants, in the Churches reform, hold with these Popish devices too? And yet pretend, that so near as possibly we can, we should draw to the judicials of God's law given by Moses? Let us therefore see also what calvin saith héereon. A story of the daughters of Salphaad of the progeny of Machir is inserted, which desired to be admitted into part of the inheritance, calvini Harmon. in Nu●. 27. because their father had no successor male. But the definition of this cause might seem doubtful, except the doubt had been taken away by God's answer. For when as in the law no name is given to women; no consideration in the portion of the land, aught to have been had of them. And verily, God prescribed this common law. But now is set down a special exception, that so often as one shall want heirs male, women should succeed, lest the memory of him should decay. God's decree should suffice to overrule all reasons that occur. I know it may be called in question, because that reasons occur on either part. But this should suffice us, that God hath interposed a decree. Thus saith calvin. And upon these words, verse, 8. Thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying: when any man shall die, and if he shall not have a son; ye shall transfer his inheritance to his daughter; calvin addeth: The conditional proposition was the occasion of making the law, The law was a perpetual and general rule. which should be a perpetual and general rule, so far as pertaineth to the right of inheritances. But although God prefer the daughters before all the other Cousines, whereas the issue male wanteth: notwithstanding, the first degree excepted, he admitteth only the males to the succession. And so he keepeth the order that is used. And verily, to exclude his heirs for the respect of the sex, should be a very wicked thing. But when he is come from those that are his, God's law of ignorance unto other being legitimate: their prerogative beginneth to consist in the males. I speak of the land of Chanaan, in the which not only the name of Abraham, but (to the end that there might be a more certain and distinct memory) the names of the twelve tribes ought to have been kept. Thus saith calvin, but how far he stretcheth this limitation, that he saith, Caluines' restraint doubtful. he speaketh of the land of Chanaan: I do not certainly understand. Except it be only to the prerogative of the male legitimate, that immediately he spoke of before. And not to restrain all this law of God, which before he said should be a perpetual and general rule, to the only land of Chanaan, or to the name of Abraham, and to the twelve tribes. For that were, neither to make it general nor perpetual. The debar of a general and perpetual rule a wicked thing. And verily, if this be a very wicked thing, (as calvin sayeth) to exclude the heir for respect of the sex: then doth this generality and perpetuity of this rule, stretch further than to the land of Chanaan, or to the jews. And it is yet to this day, and in all Christendom, as wicked a thing to debar this general and perpetual rule, for respect of the sex, as ever then with them it was. Neither do I think, the words to go so clear as calvin takes them: that if the man have no children of his own, neither sons nor daughters, that by the man's brethren, and by the man's father's brethren, the males have such prerogative given them, that they might overpass and debar all the females equal in the line collateral, and so proceed to another new line, still respecting the sex, more than the nearness of the line: but that the same respect which is to be had of the principal party, the same respect is to be had of all those male or female, that in blood are nearest to him. Only the male hath the prerogative if there be any. Sisters comprehended in the name of brothers. And that, in the name of brethren, (as in the more worthy sex) the name of all the sisters is comprised, as oftentimes woman is comprehended in the name of man. But howsoever these words here, Brethren, & father's brethren, strictly or largely may be understood: the words in the 11. verse, that for the want of the father's brethren they should give the inheritance to the flesh that is the next of the kindred (or family) mentioning neither male nor female, apparently stretcheth in the default of the male, unto the female. And therefore calvin (my dutiful reverence to him reserved) doth not so well (me thinks) anouch this saying, that where the issue male faileth, notwithstanding except the first degree he admitteth the only males unto the succession. The law of marriage in their tribes restrained to the jews judicials. As for that which followeth after cap. 36. of the marriage of such heirs females with those that were of their own tribes: that law indeed hath the reason which calvin speaketh of, for the memory of the certain and distinct tribes. And now for further proof of the woman's inheritance Boos when he married Ruthe the Moabitish woman though she were but the widow of Mahlon, Boo● had Alimeleches inheritance by Ruth. Alimeleches and Naomies son, Burgundy yet, the inheritance went with her, and came to Boos by her, the great grandsires to King David. Now, if the Salic law were made by an heathen Prince (as the french pretend) if not rather by those that pretend to be most Christian Princes, fathered in a heathen Prince's name: shall any that is a Christian Prince indeed, oppose the same unto Gods most equal & natural law and thereby exclude other Christian Princes titles, and vaunt of this their heathen law; and that worse is, not only clean disinherit the natural heir, but deface all women kind thereby, as this popish Bishop Caenalis doth? But see how he confutes himself. For, when he hath set down the Salic law, that no portion of inheritance of the Salic land, Caenalis confutes himself. may come to a woman, but that the whole inheritance should come to the male kind: Moreover (saith he) they call the Salic land, that which cleaveth indivisiblie to the Monarchical sceptre of the French, which condition they of Bourges, and of Orleans, and the Dukedom also of the Burgundians do follow. If the dukedom of Burgundy (for the other as meaner states I will not pry into) follow the same condition that the land Salic and the land adherent to the French crown doth: I would again desire no better argument, that, the inheritance of the crown of France devolveth unto the right of the heir female. For first, what is clearer than that which Otto Fresingensis Lib. 2. cap. 29. saith: Mos est in Burgundia, etc. It is the custom in Burgundy, The custom of Burgundy. (which is kept almost in all the Provinces of France) that always the authority of the inheritance of the Farther, passeth to the elder brother, and to his children whether they be males or be they females, the residue having respect to him as to their Lord. But to go to no other witnesses than Caenalis himself: doth he not confess, Lib. 1. perioche. 13. fol. 101. b? Unto Gondebaldus succeeded Sigismunde, who himself also perished of a cruel death, Burgundy descendeth to a woman. being together with his son hurled down into a pit, in so much that the kingdom of Burgundy, came in the name of inheritance unto Clotildis And the same he repeateth in the next leaf. b. who being slain (he speaketh of Gondomarus) the kingdom of the Burgundians passed unto Clotildis and to her children. And again, 105. a. the kingdom of the Burgundians is the first section, from Gondengus, alias Gondochius, or Gondebundus, until Clotildis placed in matrimony to Clodoveus, unto whom succeeded heirs surviving Gondebaldus and Gondesigillus. But to Gondebaldus succeeded Sigisimundus, The merovingians and Carolins lines. who being slain, the sceptre of the kingdom came to Clotildis and to her posterity. But when as unto Clotildis and unto her posterity succeeded a great many children: the kingdom of Burgundy flew among them with doubtful feathers, which must needs fall out that at the length the kingdom of Burgundy should come to the last survivor, which should be only called the Monarch of the Gauls. And all this fell out after Pharamundus, about the time of Clodoveus, who was the first French king that was Christened, by the means of this his wife Clotildis, from whose issue succeeded the line of the merovingians, The line of the merovingians by the woman. The line of the Carolins by the woman. of Meroveus grandfather to Clodoveus, and by affinity as Aimonius witnesseth, (that is, through title of kindred by his wife) the successor of Clodio. Pharamundus son, so that again, all the line of the merovingians came by the woman. Which line of the merovingians continued till Charles martel the Father of Pipine, and Grandfather to Charles the great. In whose stock both Burgundy, and the regiment of all France continued, until the time of Hugh Capete, who gave the same unto his brother, it being not long before abased by Lotharius, from the state of a kingdom to a dukedom, for his contumelious striking of an Archbishop. But now (saith Caenalis') after that the inheritance of the Burgundian dukedom came to the French kings: No sure footing in the Princes of Burgundy's line but by the woman. ye shall scarce find, concerning the race of the Princes of the Burgundians, where ye may safely fix your foot, even until the time of S. Joys, and that chiefly by reason of women: S. Joys had Agnes or Agnet his daughter, Duchess of Burgundy, whom not long time after, jews (surnamed Hutin) succeeding married. Philip surnamed the fair married Margaret ennobled by the ftocke of Burgundy. Then followed joane given in marriage to Philip the long. Whom straightway followed Blanch Duchess of Burgundy, joined in marriage to Charles the fairer that succeeded Philip the long. After whom Philip of Valois following, married joane Duchess of Burgundy. This Philip got the crown of France from Edward the 3. King of England. By whose means this Salic law, against the inheritance of the female was first under the name of Pharamunde devised. Upon pretence as the fame went that a certain Queen of France cast her fancy on a Butcher, The occasion of making the Salic low. (as johannes Methensis witnesseth) and married him. For detestation of which fact they made the Salic law, that no woman should after that inherit the kingdom of France. Io. Methensis manuscript. And although Gaguinus to defeat king Edward's title, allege that every one of the three sons of Philip the fair, both jews Hutin, and Philip the long, & Charles the fair had all issue, Edward 3. right. besides the other daughters that he mentioneth of Philip le Beau; yet sith it is apparent that of none of all those issued any heirs male or female: how could Philip of Valois pretend, Burgundy from his Uncle Philip S. jews son, which Philip was Father to Isabel, Edward the third his mother, to bereave Isabella and her son Edward of this right, but under pretence only of this devised law? Which law as we have seen by Caenalis own confession, taking no place in Burgundy, the Burgundians and the franks following one condition of inheritance: it followeth, that this law Salic, is but a mere devise, and that in searching the practice we find all clean contrary. And as the inheritance of Burgundy went thus, until that time that this devise was hatched: so hath it gone since. The right of Burgundy deuolues not to the French king but to Maximilian by his wife. For although Caenalis' when he cometh to Charles Carolese, or rather Careless, which last was slain by the Swissers, saith: who when he wanted an heir male, by the virtue of the Salic law, the Dukedom of Burgundy came to the kings of France even until this day: I much marvel what face Caenalis durst so constantly avouch this thing: sith all Christendom knoweth, that although the French King scambled for his share, and got a part thereof, in that time of havoc: yet Maximilian the Emperor, marrying afterward the daughter and heir, obtained by her the right and title of that inheritance. By which it is most clear, that these two estates of France and Burgundy, the one following in inheritance the condition of the other: that as Burgundy notwithstanding any Salic law, admitteth the inheritance of the woman: so should France also. Yea, and by reason of this house of Burgundy, hath title come by the woman also even to the crown of France. The which Caenalis himself can not deny. For (saith he, fol. 106. a.) speaking of Philip the long, whom he calleth the Brother (he should say, the son of Philip the fair) he succeeded his elder brother jews, surnamed Hutin, that is (as some interpret it) troublesome or brawling, unto whom Margaret the sister of Robert Duke of Burgundy was married. Of whom Hutine begat joane, which joane was married unto the Earl of Eureux, * Ebroicensi. and to the king of Navarre. Whereupon controversy arose between the Duke of Burgundy and Philip (he meaneth Philip of Valois) which of a regent was created king, about the year, 1316. by reason of which joan the Sceptre was staid to be divolued to the Duke of Burgundy, brother of joan. But the law Salic directly withstood this sentence. The law Salic not regarded when it made not for them. How beit the marriage of joan daughter of Philip, whom the Duke of Burgundy took to his wife, broke off that strife. But because this joane Hutines daughter had no issue, Edward therefore came still before the Duke of Burgundy. And yet had this Duke carried it away, even by affinity, for all the law Salic, had not the matter been otherwise composed. The Carolins from the wom●. And Caenalis reckoning up the Genealogy of the Earls of Burgundy coming from Otto he saith: Otto begat joane the French Queen, and Queen of Navarre, the Lady of the country Palatine of Burgundy, whom Philip the French king chose to his wife, of which marriage issued jews the french King, and his 2. son Philip Earl Palatine of Burgundy, etc. joane had daughter Elisa or Elisabeth, married to Robert Duke of Burgundy, about the year 1306. jews the French king and of Navarre begat the Earl of poitiers, & Palatin of Burgundy and Lord of Salinople, not long after French king. This Philip, of whom we have spoken, begat Margaret enriched with a triple Earldom, of Flaunders, of Artoys and of Burgundy, etc. Thus doth Caenalis (in prosecuting these pedegrées of these Princes) declare withal what inheritances also came to them with women, & that unto the French king besides Brittany & diverse other Provinces, by marriages of the heirs female. Inheritances coming by the right of women. Yea, what title to the French crown, himself had Pipine, but on the mother's side. As Caenalis is feign to confess (though he would turn the matter from title to election) that he came by the mother's blood of the franks. fol. 68 of whose progeny saith Volateranus, Lib. 3. fol. 17. b. Pipine therefore the King, in the year. 751. began the second progeny among the French, of whom we must speak a few things: taking his beginning from his ancestors, for they boast of his kindred from the french kings. For Ambertus being a great man begat of Hitildis the daughter of Clotarius the 8. Herkenoalde the Father of Pipine, who had Grimoalde the father of an other Herkenolde, of whom was begotten the other Pipine surnamed the short, of his short stature. etc. This Pipine begat Charles martel, who had issue Pipine that was made king, the Father of the Emperor Charles the great. So that all this boasting that Volaterane speaketh of, came of the mother. And likewise for Hugh Capete saith Caenalis Fol. 110. This one function I have chosen to myself, that out of the most certain Chronicles of Bochet, I might set before mine eyes the most renowned progeny of Hugh Capete, Hugh Caperes descent by the woman. running down from Pharamunde by Pipine, to wit, unto whom the race of the royal stock is devolved, the feminine sex coming between. And this is the order of this generation. Of Pipine the short was begotten Charles the great, of whom came jews surnamed the godly, from whence out of this generation came jews of Bavier king of the Germans. From the Bavarian proceeded Carlomanne, who of his body begat Arnulphus the Emperor. From Arnulphus sprang his daughter Luigarde. Who being joined in matrimony to the Duke Odo, brought forth Henry, which married Mawde the daughter of the Emperor jews. Nevertheless Henry married an other wife the widow of Conradus called Placida or Placentia. From whence came Otto the first Emperor of that name, The Capetians from the woman. and Bruno Bishop of Colayne, and Gerberga the noble wife of the french king jews the fourth. From whom issued Aigunda joined in marriage to Hugh surnamed the great, which by the title of Earl, obtained the royal City of Paris. Of which matrimony issued our Hugh Capete. And from hence it clearly appeareth that Hugh, of whom at this present we speak, was by lineage a Caroline, a Merovingian, and also a Trojan Sicambrian. Of whom the Sicambrians also had their name of Cambria a most wise woman the king of Britain's daughter, as Lazius de Migrationibus gentium, discoursing upon the Cymmerians from whence the franks came, doth witness, Fol. 83. Thus doth Caenalis himself fetch the pedegrée of the royal blood of all these houses even for Hugh Capete, still from the mother. And the like being showed also in Meroveus, that came to the Crown by the right of affinity unto Clodio the son of Pharamunde, (all affinity consisting by right of marriage) it followeth, that all the translations from the right line that ever have been in France, save only the intrusion of Philip de Valois to exclude Edward the third, were made only by such, as claimed the title of the royal blood by right of their mothers, notwithstanding the French Chronicles frivolous pretences of election, or of the Salic law. Now, where Caenalis would draw the reason of this pretenced Salic law, from a contrariety to the law of nature, and to the law of GOD in the state of a Monarchy: Caenalis' Lib. 1. periche fol. 66. let us likewise see the poise of those his reasons. Fol. 66. By which reason (sayeth he) the Monarchy of the French is established. Which when it reacknowledgeth not a superior, it mought of his own right make a law to endure for ever, and publish the same being made. If the reason hereof shall be exacted, ye shall find that even by the very force of the word, a Monarchy can not consist and a supreme government of things, except it be in the male kind. That the Monarchical sceptre be Guerman, that is to say, altogether manly, having nothing womanish mixed with it. For by the law of God it is apparent, not in one place (even nature itself teaching us) that a woman is subject to a man. Colloss. 3. Gen. 3. 1. Cor. 11. Thou shalt be under the power of the man, sayeth the Lord unto the woman, not so much noting her person, as her sex. And out of Paul, the man is the head of the woman. How now can it come to pass, that the woman if she govern Monarchically should not have the supreme government over the man? If the man govern, she shall not be a Monarch. Contrariwise if the woman retain the chief Dominion to herself, then shall not the man be the commander, as he that is under the woman's laws. Monarchy. For two can not be either of them in the whole, equally the Lords of one thing. Concerning that which Caenalis said before, that Burgundy followed the condition of France in this Salic law: we have showed indeed how they both follow one condition, that is to say, neither of them in their practice (save against us) have followed this law. And therefore by this means, this law Salic is not established to endure perpetually, but is broken or kept at their pleasure. If they list to put back the nearest heir, be he also never so much a man, or manly a man, if his title come by the mother, How the French use the Salic law. or if they like him not to reign over them: then out with this Salic law against him. And if they like him, though his descent be from the woman never so much: then for sooth, the law Salic can not hold: For why; then (saith Caenalis') election is above all law of succession. And thus every way they shift the matter, to establish (as they say) their Monarchy, and to set up whom it pleaseth them. But if the establishment of this law consist of this, that it was made by a Monarchy that reacknowledged no Superior, and therefore of his own right, might make a law to endure for ever, and publish the same being made: then was this law far from such an establishment; Pharamundus and his franks being so far off from a Monarchy, and from reacknowledging no superior: that they were overcome by the Romans, and tributaries to them, and when Valentian forgave them their tribute for ten years space, where they dwelled then in Hungary by the Romans licences: when they denied their tribute they were expulsed from thence (Laz. fol. 66.) and after planted themselves in Holland, and Phrisia and from thence by little and little into Germany and to Gallia. But what enfranchesing hath the French Monarchy now, (which he saith, Lazius de migrationibus gentium. reacknowledgeth no superior) that both it and all other never so high or so large a Monarchy, should not always reacknowledge the superiority of the law of God, to be above and overrule all their Salic or human laws? Neither doth the nature of a Monarchy or supreme dominion, (as here he boldly avoucheth) require to consist always in a man, and that man to be altogether a manly, or a warlike man, and admit no feminine admixture. A Monarchy may admit a woman governor. For then, not only every man child, but also many milder spirited men might be excluded from their right and Monarchies. True it is, that by the law of God, and by the law of nature, a woman is subject and inferior to a man, in respect of her sex of womankind: but as Caenalis confesseth, that the Lord spoke these words, unto the woman, thou shalt be under the power of the man, not so much noting her person as her sex: and how then doth not Caenalis' fully answer himself herein? For the word Monarch, only chief or governor, noteth not the sex, but the person. And therefore, this sentence, Monarch respecteth not the sex. not noting so much the person as the sex: is not well applied to that estate of a Monarch, which noteth not so much the sex as the person. Whereas this subjection of the woman to the man, is of the sex, in respect she is a woman: and not of the person, whereby she is a Prince or Monarch, except it be understood of such a person, as is a man's wife, & in respect of her wife-hoode subject to her husband. Otherwise, A woman superior in some respects. if she can not by any means be superior as a person: then can she not only be no Monarch over men in a kingdom: neither yet, have any Ladyship over any country, no, nor be any Mistress in her own household, if any man (though a mere servant or stranger) sojourn in her house. And if she may have a higher authority, in respect of the higher person, whereunto she is called over men servants in a family, town, or Country: then may she notwithstanding her sex, retain the highest authority also even in a Monarchy. Which distinction of sex & person, used by Caenalis himself, How the man is the woman's head, and how th● woman may be the man's head. expoundeth likewise his sentence out of S. Paul, that the man is the woman's head, in respect (I answer) of her sex and womanhood: except we shall add (if she be married) in respect also of the state of her wifehood. But this hindereth not, but that in other respects, the woman (though not as a woman) but as a Mistress▪ a Lady, or a Sovereign, may be the man's head also, that is, his lawful Governor, & director, and so his Monarch. So that, although the man retain still his natural superior power, in regard of his manhood: or his economical superior authority, in regard of his marriage: yet in other political considerations, as wherein a woman is an heir, or lawfully attaineth to any title of dignity or crown, she may be Lady, or Sovereign of any land, territory or dominion, & so, the supreme government thereof belongeth of right unto her, or to her husband (have she any) in her name & title. And being sui juris, her own woman, as we term it, having no husband to be her head: her supreme government is the less restrained. Deborah had a husband, to whom (no doubt) she was buxom & loyal, in respect of the duty of a wife: but again, The example of Deborah. in respect of the high and public estate, that God other wise advanced her unto, she governed and judged all Israel, and so, her own husband, and under God, in her judgements and commandments she was their head. And although Hester was not a Monarch, but her husband Ahashuerus, whose very name betokeneth he was the chief head: yet notwithstanding she obtained great power and authority over all the jews her countrymen, that dwelled thoughout all her husbands provinces. Yea, and her husband (chap. 5. ver. 3.) had her ask what she would, and it should be given her, even to half the kingdom. The offer made to Hester of half the kingdom was a lawful offer. Which he would not have offered her, if she had not been capable of public government. If now we grant that Hester might have such authority, though under her husband, yet over her own people & over half these Provinces, whereof one quarter is more than all the kingdom of France, and add all Italy to it: how then is not the force of Caenalis' argument overthrown? For we stand not upon so absolute a Monarchy, as admitteth superior power at all: for such a Monarch is no man neither, but only almighty God. But if a woman may have a despotical regiment to govern but a Town, or Lordship, as in the new Testament, Marie and Martha, were Ladies of Bethania, as many do expound those words, joh. 11.1. Mary & Martha Ladies of Bethanie. The Lady Lois. 1. john. A certain man was sick named Lazarus of Bethania, the Town of Mary and her sister Martha: and also (as it may be conjectured) the Lady to whom S. john wrote his second Epistle: then may she also proceed further, even to the government of a kingdom or Monarchy, for any hindrance of her sex herein. For if she may govern men at all, she may be a chief governor of them well enough. Neither is it of any necessity in public government, that a man should be the chief governor, more than a woman, for any thing contained in the quoted sentences, Colloss. 3. Genes▪ 3. 1. Cor. 11. or any other sentence in the old, or in the new Testament, as we have already seen. So that, whether the chief governor be man or woman (come he or she to their estates by godly means) the sex is no such debar at all, but that without any prejudice of their kinds, any one of them may, so far as stretcheth to this public pre-eminence, govern and direct the other. Yea, Chief governor in more than one. in some cases (although Caenalis say the contrary) I yet see not, why two cannot in some sort be equally governors both in one and like, either of them in the whole even of one state; yea, one Monarchy or Empire. as it is said of Geryon in Spain, of whom the poets feigned that he had 3. bodies and but one head: because three Brethren united themselves equally altogether in one government. And the like even in the Monarchy of Rome, diverse Emperors were. And although some of them divided the Countries and Provinces of their possessions: yet the Empire remained one among them, which Empire they governed jointly and with equal dignity, as though they were but one, & not the one over or under the other, and some of them women also, as we shall see after, when Danaeus shall call us to examples of that state. Only now it sufficeth to have seen how this Popish Bishop Caenalis useth all those reasons also, that calvin and Danaeus stand upon. And how weak all these their arguments are. The residue that followeth in Caenalis, is for the most part either but vain babbling, without any proof at all: or more fond arguments than the other. Caenalis. These things therefore (saith he, fol. 66. a.) fight with themselves to be a chief Monarch, and to be a woman. I deny this consequence. Neither followeth it on any of his premises. Bridges But (saith he) whosoever therefore doubteth in that thing: Caenalis. heareth not himself speaking, not knowing the force of the word. Whether Caenelis heard himself or no; I can not say. I rather think he heard himself too much, Bridges and bewrayeth his own ignorance of the word. For what can Monarchy else signify, but the principality or chief government of one? And what then is included in the word Monarch, of what sex that one chief governor should be? So it be but the chief government of one, and not of more. But (saith he) they that in their kingdoms claim the chief government to themselves, Caenalis. admitting the chief right of the kingdom in a woman, seem to do nothing else, than that they diminish the Majesty of the Monarchical principality. If they (that having right thereto, Bridges and be not otherwise by their demerits barred) be women that claim the Monarchy to themselves: what diminishing is this, when the Majesty of the Monarchical principality still remaineth entire in them? If he speak of men: his words have no sense. For how can they claim to themselves the chief government in their kingdoms: and withal admit the chief right of the kingdom in a woman? Except, whosoever should so do, would confess himself to be a plain usurper; confessing the chief right to be in her, and yet claim the chief government to himself. If he mean, not of any title of right in present: but right in possibility, when it devolveth to a woman: then neither he diminisheth any whit the Majesty of the Monarchical principality: nor she, when she lawfully attaineth thereunto, any whit diminisheth the same by reason of her sex, except by any her demerits otherwise she diminish it, or perhaps may lose it. But that may happen, and hath happened, to a man as well as unto a woman. Of which matter (saith Caenalis') let them look to it, to wit, Caenalis. the English men, the Spaniards, and the Sicilians, & well ne●re all other. Sith not only England, Spain, and Sicily, Bridges. but almost all other do admit this right: it argueth it is not an unlawful, and unnatural thing. Almost all Christendom acknowledgeth a woman right of regiment. Except the French would condemn the most part of Christendom for their own peevish standing on this Salic law, which they confess came from Infidels. But as we of England have good company herein: so, let the French rather look unto it, that separate themselves, for the maintenance of a Pagan law (if not rather a law mere forged) from the most part of Christendom. And is there now no Monarchy or kingdom in all Christendom but only in France? If there be, then to be a Monarch, and to be a woman, are not repugnant. And he that doubts thereof, hears not himself, nor knows the force of the word, Monarch. Other Signiories. As for the residue of Ditions or Signiories (saith Caenalis') how excellent soever they are, Caenalis the dignity of their principality being safe, (so that it be not supreme and Monarchical) they may admit the feminine sex in the succession of land. Bridges. If he make this exception of the residue of ditions or Signiories, from England, Caenalis' grant in others segnioties for women's gone. Spain, Sicill & all other, which he granteth to admit women's supreme government: then, of what other signiories he speaketh, he should have plainer expressed. But what signiories soever he mean, or what municipal laws soever they have: sith he granteth this, that how excellent soever they be, they may admit the woman kind in the succession of the soil, the dignity of their principality being safe and unblemished: and yet that dignity is annexed to the possession of that soil: how then doth he not grant, but that women may govern never so excellent a signiory dition or territory, without impairing the dignity of the principality thereof? Which if they may do: then this exception, so that it be not supreme and Monarchical, comes too late, and is a vain exception. Neither is his reason hereof any more of value to debar a woman's right from the succession of a kingdom: than of a Princedom or of a dukedom. For (saith he) there shall not want the top or sovereignty of the Monarchy, Caenalis. that with the defence of arms shall supply the frailty of the sex, in defending of or restoring her right. And cannot this be done as well and better by her own subjects, or confederates, Bridges when she herself hath the Monarchical principality? And may not men pretend as well and much easier, to take away an earldom, a Dukedom or Princedom or other inferior Signiories from her, The imbecility of a man child or weakness. as upon such pretence of defence, to take away her right of the kingdom? Yea, by this reason, n● male heir, being yet a child, can enjoy a Monarchy: because the frailty of his age, as well as of her sex, in defending or restoring his right must be supplied by the force of arms: which lies as little in him to do, as in a woman. But (saith Caenalis') in a Monarchy, if a woman govern, it should be necessary that a man should be subject to a woman, Caenalis. against all the disposing both of the holy and of the profane law. Well may it be against the disposing of this profane pretended Salic law: Bridges. but we have showed sufficiently, yea, and Caenalis hath sufficiently confessed, that it is not against the holy law of God, but that a man may be a subject to a woman, in respect of the person of her vocation, without any subjection or derogation to the superiority his sex and nature, in respect that he is a man. Caenalis. And let this reason (saith he) be in steed of all. If he mean this last reason, I may reply: The gift of healing. and let that his own distinction stand for answer of all his own reasons. If he mean that which followeth: Bridges. But also it was never heard spoken, Caenalis. that the gift of healing whereby the sick are healed of the Squinancy should light on a woman. The gift of healing the Squyn●cy. Indeed it may be, he makes this his principal reason. For afterward, fol. 110. He cometh in again ruffling with this self same reason, saying: by the same work, the legitimate issue of the Hugonians, Bridges. is from heaven approved to succeed in the kingdom of the French, by the virtue of an heavenly miracle, to wit, while it retaineth the power of healing the squinancy, (or the scrofules,) which thing is apparent, that it is not granted to the English usurper. They that have attempted contrary, have been thieves and robbers. Neither have the sheep heard them. What hath the chough to do with the harp, Caenalis. or the sow with the sweet Oil of Maioram? with this one argument all the invaders of that kingdom, are driven back from the royal sceptre of the French. These villainous terms, not answerable to the Majesty of a princes royal estate, nor seemly for any modest person, much less for the mouth or writing of a Bishop, to have uttered, being rejected: Bridges. as proceeding from one all inflamed with choler, & blinded with partiality besides popery: and likewise, this blasphamy against Christ, that his sheep will here no others voice but his, applying the same to the French king, being removed: If there remain any monument in this which he maketh his chiefest argument: Let us with more moderation than he maketh it, advise and weigh the same. And first, for this gift of healing this disease, I deny not, but that it may well be, that the legitimate issue of the Hugonians may have this especial gift. Which albeit, some think contrary, notwithstanding (being used alonely to the glory of God, and without all superstition) I take it to be more superstitious to deny it, then to grant it. The effect so apparently, though not always, (for God binds not himself to such gifts) yet, so often falling out. But now, if this be so good an argument: even as we see also, often times, by the fresh bleeding again of a dead body, whose blood, though it hath been● long cold and congealed, nevertheless, at the presence of the unknown murderer, God hath given such a miraculous contrariety of natural qualities and operations (which of the Greek is called an Antipathy▪ in english we may term it a counterpassion, whereby the malefactor is descried: so contrariwise, The secret sympathy & antipathy of nature. if God have given such a singular and excellent sympathy, or force of compassion, to the legitimate issue of that line, or such a secret and forcible antipathy to that evil or disease that by the expulsion thereof, the right and legitimate line of the French Kings should be made manifest: then, what soever power hereof the French King that now possesseth the Crown, hath in this matter, I cannot not say: but of this I am sure, and an infinite number more can witness the same, that God hath miraculously healed by her majesties hands, a very great number, and still doth. Yea, joh. Tagautius a Parisian, in his institution of surgery dedicated to Frances the first, li. 1. chap. 13. writing of the cure of this disease, doth say: Hoc unum tamen, etc. This one thing nevertheless I confidently affirm, that it is granted of God by a special gift to the most Christian king of the French, that with the only touching of his hand he should restore to health those that have the Squinancy, or the Scrofules as they term them. King Edward also (he meaneth the third) as the Histories report, was wont to heal those that had the Squinancy with touching only, given him of God, which gift being immortal, hath passed as a right hereditary to the kings following. For the kings of England, even now also by their touching with certain thanksgivings before recited, not without ceremonies do heal those of the Squinancy or swellings in the throat. Which most manifestly confuteth all the slanderous and opprobrious untruths of this blind & foul mouthed Popish Bishop Caenalis. And clearly evicteth, that as her Majesty is no less of the legitimate line of the Hugonians, Carolines, and merovingians, than Philip of Valois was: as is most apparent, Isabel being the legitimate daughter of Philip le Beaw, which also was the legitimate son and heir of Philip his Father, and Father also to Charles of Valois his second son, of whom came Philip of Valois, from whom the French kings succeeding, & he that is yet remainder, have issued: sith therefore the legitimate daughter, begotten in lawful matrimony, is by the express law of God, preferred before the Father's brother, & before father's brother's son: how can her majesties line be called or thought other than the legitimate issue of the Hugonians? & therefore this argument is either of no force to infer the title of the Crown, but only to prove the legitimation of the issue, which they cannot deny in her Majesty, nor we deny in their Princes: or else this argument doth plainly convince them, and infers her majesties right and title. But we stand not upon the lawfulness of the blood, but upon the nearness of the blood. And Caenalis himself speaking of the line of Hugh Capet (whose royal blood from the Carolines was only of the mother, as we have even out of Caenalis showed) saith, fol. 68 b. For the right of the kingdom of France, is not to be of the right every man, or of heads (because Hugh Capet had his name of Caput, an head) Sed sanguinis esse, But to be of blood And therefore, the nearer blood legitimate, the nearer right, even by his own confession. Now, as this Popish Bishop, the more he strives, the more he wrestles with himself, beating himself, and confuteth still his own reasons: so he concludes hereon. Thou seest therefore, Monarchy. how these being joined in a certain agreeable and indivisible league, Caenalis. do so defence and strengthen mutually the one the other, a Monarchy the Law Salic, and the Law Salic a Monarchy: that whether of these two thou wilt, being taken away: the other of necessity must either be changed, or perish utterly. This conclusion is as false and lose as all the premises. Bridges What such Agreeable and indissoluble league hath he proved, or have we seen, between the state of a Monarchy and the Salic Law, that they can not be severed without the utter destruction the one of the other? can not the Salic Law stand without a Monarchy? God wot it was a sorry vagrant and tributary Monarchy, when (as they pretend) Pharamunde made it, and a pretty while after. And can it not stand in other states popular or Aristocratical, as well as, yea and firmer in them than in a Monarchy? and must there needs be a Monarchy where it takes place? is the state of Bourges, of Orleans, and of Burgundy, a monarchical state? and yet, Caenalis confessed before, that they all follow the Salic Law. And on the other side, is there no Monarchy but where the Law Salic holdeth? Is not the state of England, Spain, Sicily, Scotland, Many Monarchies where the Salic Law holdeth not and many other states Monarchical, and yet admit not this Salic Law but the succession of the woman? Is France only and those fewer and meaner states, Monarchies, and not these Countries? What a false conclusion than is this that includeth all these falshoodes? But if none of all these reasons will serve: yet saith he: Howsoever it be, what is more ridiculous, or preposterous & fond, Caenalis. than if a hen should rule a cock? Wh● a ridiculous and preposterous reason is this, Bridge's from reasonable creatures to unreasonable, that have nothing to guide them but the instinct and force of nature? and by this reason, all states should not only receive the Salic Law: but the Law of God, for any pre-eminence of woman in any inheritance at all, or Government of their household, and all obedience of men children to their Mothers, especially after they be stronger than their Mothers, and of servants to their Ladies and Mistresses, is clean cut off, and should become a Preposterous and an unnatural thing, by this Cockishe or rather Cocks-comish reason, If I may be so bold as to use this term. Indeed the Gauls or French are called Galli, which betokeneth also Cocks, as in the next leaf 67. Caenalis' ridiculously and fond triumpheth on that name saying. Almost all other principalities by reason of succession, Caenalis. Gallinacei sunt, are Hennishe or Dunghill Cocks (if with the good leave of all, it may be lawful for me so to say). For that in them the woman succeed the man, Principality. and the man the woman. Gallus vero monarcha ●mnium quos tota alit Europa, minime gallinaceus est, sed virili tantum & masculus, nullo iure haereditario muliebris. But: the French man (or Cock) being the Monarch of all that Europe breedeth, is no hennish or dunghill Cock, but only mannish and Masculine, by no right of inheritance womanish. Bridges What intolerable boasting and vain words are these? verily this Bishop (whether he were a Hennish Cock or no, I cannot tell) is so crank of his comb, and so loath to have it cut, that he plays the part of a very cravine, and croweth like a Dunghill Cock, but with his arguments fighteth like a crammed Capon. And yet, were all this but a ridiculous and fond merriment, rather than an argument, to conclude so high a matter, save that he turns again to his old bious, of wresting not only the Apocryphal, but also the canonical Scripture. Caenalis. Which thing (saith he, fol. 66. b.) How unseemly it is, he knew that said, women do rule you, do ye not mourn? See, how grossly this is wrested. Whereas, Zorobabel maintaining his theme, Bridges women are strongest, but truth overcometh all things. Among other sentences saith on this wise, 1. Esdras 4. ver. 22. Therefore, by this ye may know, The Apocryphal scripture wrested. that the women bear rule over you, do ye not labour and trau elland give and bring all to the women? This now allegeth this ignorant Bishop, as though it were a mournful and lamentable state, where women have any civil and politic government. Caenalis. But (saith he) no man will call the woman sex, most mighty Lord, and dreadful Prince, nature even directly repugning against it. Therefore that sex is altogether uncapable of a most mighty Principality. Bridges Indeed, no man having his right wits, will be so fond as to call a woman, a Lord: and yet may Queens with natural comeliness, and subject like duty, be called most mighty Lady and dreadful Prince, or dread Sovereign. Or in place of these, other reverend and honourable terms, may serve, without any direct or indirect repugnancy to nature well enough. But if this or that term will not beseem them, shall we for the unfitness of that term, that is more proper perhaps to a man, deny a woman's right of principality? And if a woman were uncapable also of the most mighty principality: might not for all that, a Woman be the Queen well enough of all France? or is that, the most mighty principality? I think England ere now hath matched well enough with all the might thereof. And yet have women governed more mighty principalityes than England or France, or Spain, and put them altogether. Caenalis. But (saith he) the womankind is so prone to fall, and to plunge headlong, that it hath more need of a bridle than a sceptre. For it is written, Pro. 31. Who shall find a strong woman? This is not only this shameless Bishops accustomed wresting Gods holy word: but héereon he breaks forth from all arguments, Bridges. into so black rhetoric and plain railing: that I must needs here for very shame and weariness begin to shake him off, and turn him lose, to some common scolds, more fit a great deal to deal with them, than to dispute on Prince's titles, save that where again he allegeth the Scripture, saying. For it is written. Who shall find a strong Woman? Caenalis. I know well enough some notable Matrons in the feminine sex are provident and beautified with many virtues. But this Woman is a rare bird, and most like to a black Swan. But that law doth consider those things, that a man shall find every where, not the things that happen rarely. Howsoever this Bishop can wrest and turn his Salic Law, he ought not to wrest the law of God. For Solomon speak not this, Bridges as though there were no such strong women at all: For all that followeth of the woman's commendation is clean contrary. Yea, and this very word of Solomon which here he useth, ver. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Mulier fortis, signifying not only substance or wealth, strength of body or courage of mind, called fortitude and virtue, such as may be in a private man: but such as is requisite in the government of the people, yea, of an army, which word he so ascribeth unto a woman, that he saith, she putteth it on as a garment, verse 25. The 70. call this Woman, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a valiant, manly or a mannish Woman. And say, she hath put on 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The derivation of the name woman Might & comeliness. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may very well be fetched from the Hebrew word, which calleth the Man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ish, and the woman 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Isha, and the Latin is, vir & virago, the English, Man and Woman, as the party whom the man doth woo. Whereby it appeareth, that this sex, though the weaker vessel by nature, yet by grace as she is, according to the Apostles saying, 1. Pet. 3.7. coheir with us of the gift of eternal life, which of all other is the greatest gift: so is she not uncapable of this virtue of politic government in this mortal life, which is a gift though excellent, yet far inferior. True it is, few have had this gift in excellent manner: Neither many men But that is no reason, for the seldomness of it, that the Law of man should clean debar it. For we rather say contrary: things the more rare, (if they be good things) are so much more precious, and esteemed the rather, the rarer they are, The rareness tak●●h not away the right. and yet might that Law perhaps the less think thereon. For, seldom seen soon forgotten. And it is seen the seldomer, by reason that ordinarily the parents want not sons, and therefore it devolveth the seldomer to the daughters. But, this should not clean drown God's Law in utter oblivion, Guardianship. and much less remembering it, Man's law should not of purpose be written against it. And yet it is not so seldom, but that in that Chapter (and using also that very word of the forditude of government, even of an army if need were) he saith, Verse 29. Many daughters have gotten strength, but thou haste surmounted them all. So that, Fortitude in a woman. though they be very rare which surmount all other: yet, he saith Many Daughters may have a competent degree even of this Fortitude, that can govern the multitude of the people: the residue in Caenalis, which followeth out of Poet's invectives is unworthy the answering. As for the Amazons I am of his opinion. His next argment is this. The Laws repel a woman from being tutor or Guardian to a pupil or Fatherless child: Caenalis. with what reason then should they be received to defend and protect the chief dignity of a Monarchy? Reason first, is a weak argument from the defence and protection of another's weakness, to the title of ones own right. For a man child, though he cannot also be a tutor, but is under tutors: yet can he be a Monarch or a King, even while he is defended and protected under his tutor's government. A child under tutors and yet a Monarch. For, that government of his tutors, is not in any respect of any right of their own: but of his right. And is only a supply by another of his infirmity. Which maketh the better to prove that natural imbecility, though it might take away the actual exercise of many things either from a Child or from a woman: yea, from a Man also: yet, can it not take away their title & authority from their right and propriety in the kingdom. For though a king be continually sick, yet is he king still. As, when David was so cold and impotent for age and broosing in the wars, Bridges that he could no longer come abroad, nor get warmth: yet remained he king Azaria or Vzia though he was a Leper, and lived in a house apart, and his son judged and ruled the people in his steed, 2. Chro. 26. yet remained he in right and title still the king. And have not some French kings also been long sick & weak, and so distracted, & yet continued kings, though their selves not able to execute any part of Government of the kingdom? Now although we see this argument is more against him than with him: yet it stands not on so absolute and firm a principle. The Laws do not repel a Woman from a Tutelship, Infirmity no debar to right. except in certain conditions. Mater filii tutelam perdit, vel si incontinenter vivat, vel si ad secundas nuptias transeat. The Mother (saith the law) loseth her tutelship if she live unchastely, or if she marry again. Pan in C. uxoratus. De coniug. So that this condition being avoided: the Laws which hold even in France, do admit the tutelship of a pupil as well to a woman as to a man. And although in the ancient Civil Law there be a rule of Ulpian quae tutela eo & haeredit as pervenit, nisi cum faeminae haeredes intercedunt: whereupon that Law was made which saith, Mulier non potest esse Tutrix. L. s●ff. de tutelis etc. Yet notwithstanding saith Montholonius in promptuario divini juris & utriusque humani, etc. Et hoc absolute verum erat de iure antiquo, nisi a principe filiorum tutelam impetraret, ut dicitur in D. L. fi. Quo casu, privilegium principis habebit locum non extantibus legitimi● & seruata forma quae habetur in L. 2. C. Quando mulier tutelae office fun. poss. hody verò etiam de iure communi foemina habilitata est ut tutelam filiorum suscipere possit. Vt est text in Aucten. matri & aviae. & notat Barth. in L. si sub conditione. Col. 3. ff. de testa. tutel. & talis tutela quae matri competit non potest sibi a patre auferri. Vt notat Bald. consid. 608. Testator. lib. 1. Vbi miratur quod Earth. dubitaverit de hoc. But what need recital of the Laws: where the practice hath ever been, & still is, to the contrary? & that even in the young or infirm French kings themselves, as we heard of Batildis etc. and have seen in our own days of the Q. Mother in France which is yet living. But that (saith Caenalis') some object of the daughters of Salphaad, Caenalis. Num. 2. is out of the cause. For we must not deny to a woman her father's inheritance, how wealthy or much soever it be, so that the chief type of the whole Monarchy fall not to a woman, being altogether unable to defend to sustain that burden. As for those women that be altogether unable: that is an other question. So, the man might be debarred too, though neither of them, Bridges man nor woman, of their title, yet of their exercise and administration of the same. That all women are not unable héereunto: we have partly showed fair proof and evidence, and shall (God willing) show yet further. Yea, that none are dissabled, only for the respect of their sex, even this law sufficeth, which is of such force: that this B. granteth it holdeth in any inheritance, A Woman's ability to bear the charge. be it never so wealthy or rich. And then (say I (it holdeth in a kingdom. If it be not (saith he) the type of the whole Monarchy. And where finds he this restraint in this law? Or in the practice of the jews? indeed he confesseth, they used it not. But the cause that he thus restrains it, is this, that a woman, (saith he) is altogether unable to sustain this burden. And is not a woman now in the state of Christendom under the gospel as well able, as then a woman was, in the state of the jews under the Law? but he ever dreams of such a great Monarchy in France, Many greater Monarchies than France. that a woman is not able to sustain it. As though it were only so great a Monarchy, that in all Christendom or in all the world none were like it. And is not Spain as big and bigger than France? and have not the ancient Monarchies of Asia & of Rome been bigger than both, and then all these parts of Christendom now are? & yet have women governed those Monarchies. But a Monarchy is a Monarchy, be it little or great. And England is a Monarchy too, (God be praised) & that France hath felt. Yea, when this law of Pharamund was made: God wots, it was then a poor state, vassal and tributary to the Romans (as I have showed) not so much as contending for such a Monarchy, but rather for a quiet state, which it got afterward, and in time grew (I grant) unto the Monarchy that now it is, French Monarchy. but, had it been so then, or be it now as great a Monarchy, as they affirm it is: yet, if a Woman may govern it, in the name of the tutleship of her son: (as diverse have done) can she not do it as well in her own name, if she had a right and title thereunto? His fond argument of the Sun and the Moon: is in deed not worth the answering. Caenalis. That as the Moon shines by the light of the Sun: so doth the Matron rays by the light of her husband. But no man hath so much as thought in his dream, that the Sun being the greater light, should depend of the brightness of the Moon, especially in the chief Monarchical principality. Indeed the Pope doth plead on this wise, for his superiority above the Emperor. Bridges. And therefore, these Popelings may be the bolder to borrow his argument. But if he compare it to a man and his wife (as here he seems to do) and so indeed the Sun & Moon did signify in the dream of joseph, Gen. 37. yet that matrimonial comparison is not to the purpose of a Monarchical state. But to admit also this resemblance. Though the Sun be the greater light than is the Moon: yet hath the Moon a goodly light also, The comparison of the Son and the Moon to the man and the woman, is not against women's government. and a proper monarchy of her own, to rule the night, as well as the Sun to rule the Day, even by the testimony of the Scripture. Which is not ascribed so much to any other stars, although they be bigger far than the moon is. These vain and frivolous arguments, hath this French Bishop (which yet both in this point, and in all the French antiquities is one of the most industrious of them all) and straineth all his wits, to recommend and set out this Salic Law, wresting and writhing of the scriptures. How much better, in my opinion, and with far more modesty, (though otherwise he be also a great favourer of the French estate above England,) doth jacobus Meyer the Chronicler of Flaunders writ of this matter. Lib. 12. fol. 136 saying. In the year of our Lord, 1335. Easter day being the 16. of April, the English war began, which of all other continued longest, and was most cruel. And which held out (with truces between while) above 100 years. Which might rather be called a Domestical sedition than a War. The Christian commonweal is one kingdom, and one house. Whatsoever wars are made therein, are made with great blemish. Neither (if we should say the truth) they are Wars, but most reproachful seditions. King Edward opposed to the Salic Law of the French, the divine Bibles: which call the woman to inheritance, in defect of the issue male. Certain there were in France that misliked not those arguments of Edward. Which men being put to death: Edward determined to pursue his right, although with long and hard war, and with most mighty force of arms, The reasō● of this treatise. to extinguish that Heathenish custom of the French. The Salij are said, while they yet lived among the Scythians, to have ordrined and kept that law. These Salikes in the time of the decay of the Roman Empire, got to themselves the surname of franks, and began to be called Salij Francici, Salic Frankons. As also the Frisian franks, the Saxon franks, that is to say, the free Frisons, the free Saxons, to wit, those that could be no longer compelled to pay tributes. These Salik Franks, after that they pierced first unto the river of the Rhen, and after that even to the river of Sequana, or Seine: albeit that they also became Christian, yet renewed they, and tooth and nail even to this day they have held that law. (But that this is not so, we have already showed even by Caenalis the chiefest urger of it.) Howbeit not without great detriment of Christian piety, as me thinks. (And here he noteth in the margin, The Law Salic hurtful to the Christian common weal.) For if these laying aside their hatred. and the superstition of that Law) had now joined to themselves the riches of England: them had the French, the English, the Scots, the Flemish, and the Burgundians, grown together into one kingdom, and with so mighty a power had easily destroyed that barbarousness of Mahomet, which continued in Spain even almost until our times. But after that (I know not by what evil spirit of the French) the French have always attempted to bear rule among other men, all things have been troubled, all things have been full of discomfort, all things lamentable, all things seditious. We have since that time seen peace no where, no where quietness. How unhappily the Salic law sotted the French. England was seen to offer the occasion that was most to be wished for, but that French blockishness and infelicity could not take hold thereon, being sotted by that Salic law. And again Fol. 148. lamenting the great slaughter at the battle of Chertsey: where he telleth how the French King called King Edward, a Merchant of wool, and King Edward called him the Merchant and author of the Salic Law: he saith: The Frenth men allege certain fond causes of so great a slaughter. But I think there ought none other to be alleged, than we have before mentioned, that is to wit, the frinolous right of the French men, which is full of controversy, uncertain, and (that I may not say) false, verily most far unworthy of so great bloodshed. I suppress herein his unreverent terms of Queen Isabel by whom the right of this title came. Only I note his judgement of this pretended Salic Law. Which sith that all the French writers so earnestly urge, to stop there with the title of the Kings and Queens of England, not one-onelie then in the time of ignorance and superstition reigning: but that also in this clear light of the Gospel and manifestation of God's Law, even these notable and excellent learned professors of the Gospel in the French reformed Churches, Danaeus arguments. calvin and Danaeus savour yet so much of this French faction, that upon the occasion of women's public speaking in the congregation, they cannot refrain themselves from this humour of their Country, but must also most unnecessarily cast forth these intemperate speeches and disputations, against the right and title of women's public regiment: and that some also among ourselves, snatching at their arguments, with more greedy newfangledness, than with advised consideration, have likewise, to disturb and endanger our state, attempted the like invectives: I therefore thought it not amiss, both for the plainer manifestation of the right of that title, The causes of the larger discussing this point of women's government. which I have heard many desire to be discussed further than any yet hath done, (although I meddle not here with titles any farther than defensively for women's right of government, & to justify against all slanders the right of our Prince's title) & for every man's fuller satisfaction in these questions upon these foresaid occasions, to be somewhat the larger, though withal (craving pardon, I confess) to be some what also the more tedious in this long process hereupon. But tedious or not, the more pains was mine, and they that have lust and leisure to read it, may, or may not, at their own liking) I regarding chiefly the satisfying of the curious in these days, at least the staying of the simple from this curiousness, am driven myself to be rather over curious, than over negligent in slubbering over a slight & slender answer. To return now therefore to Danaeus further argument. Danaeus on 1. Tim. 2.12. fol. 84. Of which matter also (saith Danaeus proceeding on the proves of his foresaid question in his treaty on 1. Tim. 2 verse. 12. folio 84.) the examples are extant, in Semiramis the Queen of the Assyrians. Candace of the Aethiopians, Act. 8. verse. 27. Cleopatra of the Egyptians under Augustus, and Zenobia, a most valiant woman under Adrian the Emperor. To the Empire of which Zenobia many Christian Churches also did obey. Bridges This argument seemeth to tend to the confirmation of that he spoke before, Danaeus examples of women's government. that in Spain, England, Scotland, and diverse other regions, it was a right and honest matter, for a woman to have the chief government over men. But Danaeus doth it so coldly, and brings out only here these four examples of Heathen women, and those not of the choicest neither, which among the Heathen women he might have found: that he rather seemeth in so slender defending it, to oppugn it. But, let us take the view of these his examples that he allegeth. And first, for Semiramis person we will not stand in plea she being an Ethnic, might the easier (as in the end she is recorded to have done) degenerate into great vices, Semiramis Queen of Assyria and Chaldea. yet for a great while, both in the nonage of her son, and afterward also in respect of worldly policy, power, and magnificence, sheée wonderfully governed about forty years, that mighty, golden, and first monarchy of the Assyrians and Chaldeans, and the most Historiographers that writ of her life, have her acts in admiration. None accuseth her (that I read of) as an unlawful governor. Neither did the people (which was in the time of our forefather Abraham) condemn her government of that Monarchy, Candace Queen of Ae●hiopia. as an unhonest and unlawful state. But I pass from her the lighter, because I had rather consider better Danaeus his other example of Candace. Who though she were also an Heathen Princess, notwithstanding her name at least, is registered in the holy Scripture, that this Candace was the Queen of Aethiopia, who not only reigning in her own right and title, and not of her husband, had the chief government of a great monarchy in that Country: but that also diverse other Queens there had the like sovereignty; calvin o● Act. 8.27. and that it was an usual order, calvin noteth thus thereon. The name (saith calvin) of Candaces, was not the name of one Queen only, but as the name of Caesar was common to the Roman Emperors: so the Aethiopians, as Pliny testifieth, called their Queen's Candaces. This also maketh to the purpose, that the Historiographers affirm, that it was a noble and a wealthy kingdom. Because we may the better gather by the largeness and might thereof, how honourable the condition and dignity of the Eunuch was. Meroe was the headand chief seat. The profane writers accord herein unto the testimony of Saint Luke, who doth report that Women were wont there to reign. Thus saith calvin in his Commentary upon the Acts. 8. verse. 27. and because he nameth Pliny, it shall not be amiss to set down Pliny's own words, who speaking of Meroe, libro. 6. Naturalis Historiae, cap. 29 saith. Plinius lib. 6. natural. hist. ca 29. There reigneth the Queen Candace, which name hath now this many years passed unto the Queens. The Temple of Ammon is also there religious, and Chapels all that coast along. But when the Aethiopians were the rulers, that Island was of great nobleness. For they say it was wont to give 250000. armed men, and to maintain 400000. artificers. Whereby it appeareth that it was not any small Monarchy. Vadianus writeth thus. The most ancientest City in Meroe is Saba, which afterward the king Cambyses in the memory of his sister, named Meroe, as josephus testifieth in his second book of Antiquities, as I suppose, imitating Strabo. But Pliny also mentioneth therein the Town of Meroes', being seventy miles distraunte from the entry of the Island, Candace. which was holden for the seat royal of Aethiopia. This is Saba that seat of the queen of the South (for josephus telleth, that she governed both Aethiopia and Egypt, of whom we read in the tenth Chapter of the third Book of the Kings. That she being stirred up with the fame of Solomon, The Queen of Saba governed a mighty troop of men. came with a mighty troop, and with more than princelike gifts into Palestine. She is also commended of Christ, Matthew 12. and Luke 11. for that she came to Solomon for the love of wisdom, even from ehe farthest coasts: when as the pharisees would not hear him, admonishing them to their faces, and by a divine power witnessing himself to be the son of God. But we must note, that the people of Meroe which were wont to be subject unto women, in the age that followed, called their Queen's Candaces, by a name as common to them, as we have foreshowed that the name of pharao's and Ptolomeus was unto the Kings of Egypt. Of which matter also we understand that the Eunuch mentioned of Luke, Acts. 8. (Whom Philip baptised, being taught out of the lesson read in isaiah) was one of the Court of the Queen Candace. Besides that, we are admonished, The Scripture familiar to the Aethiopians by the delivery of Luke, that the reading of the Scripture became familiar and usual to that nation, even from the very age of Candace, neither that they used for any other cause, yeerelie to visit jerusalem, as a place renowned for religion, how distant so ever it were in journey. Caius Plinius writeth, that Publius Petronius, one of the order of Knighthood, being lieutenant of Egypt in the time of Augustus, pierced into Aethiopia with an army, that the Queen Candace won the victory, which Strabo writeth, was a woman that had but one eye, but in prudence and equity of mind comparable unto great men. I know not whether that were Candace the eunuchs mistress, which Luke mentioneth, or it were another. The very account of the years, & of the exploits achieved do almost admonish us, that it was another. Neither is it any doubt, but that the Queens of Aethiopia were long after called by that name. And here Vadianus reciteth that which we have already alleged out of Pliny. women's government, a thing acstomable. Neither ought it (saith he) to seem marvelous, that women do there bear the chief rule, sith that the government of women is not a thing unaccustomed, even to the most valiant nations. For Semiramis of Assyrians is known, and the Queens of Scythia are known, and the Roman history doth celebrate Theuta, which governed the Liburnians, as her that durst make work for their City. Neither must we count it altogether to be fabulous, that the antiquity hath sonog of that Dido the African. As for their religion, I have authors not unworthy to be believed, which affirm that Nation to confess Christ. Neither that they differ from our orders in any other thing than in ceremonies, that is to wit, a very small matter. This also Vadian a reverend Protestant writeth of this Queen, and other her ancestors and successors, called all by the name of Candaces. Now although I do not yet so throughly assent unto Vadianus, that the Queen of Sabaea, and the Queen of Aethiopia, were all of one kingdom: but rather assent to Peter Martyr, that the Queen which came to Solomon was the Queen of Sabaea in Arabia, from whence such aromatical drugs are brought, and not from Aethiopia: yet not withstanding that there was also such another notable government of women in Aethiopia, and so approved by such both authentic witnesses, as josephus, Pliny, and Strabo were, and allowed by such notable Protestants, as were calvin and Vadianus: it is no small confirmation of women's regiment. But what stand we upon men, when we see the approbation of the Scriptures? The Scriptures approbation of Candaces' government. For, had it been an unhonest matter and unnatural, for man being in his sere the superior, to have obeyed as superior to him, in the person of her dignity, a woman's supreme government: can we conceive by any reason, that Philip having informed the Eunuch in the faith of Christ, would not also have admonished him of so necessary a point, for the direction of his conversation? Philip therefore not speaking any thing at all against it, and namely Luke the Evangelist, by the indictment of the holy Ghost, consecrating the same to a perpetual record, that such a Queen (had there been no more but she alone) was there the governor, and her such worthy nobles under her regiment, as this Eunuch was: how can we choose but conclude hereupon that the holy Ghost improveth not the state of a woman's supreme government, but that it may (if there be no other impediment, than her sex) accord together well enough with the sincere profession of the Gospel? Danaeus next ensample is, of Cleopatra of the Egyptians, under Augustus. Cleopatra was indeed in the time of Octavius, Danaeus. for he vanquished her lover Antonius, and she would at the first have alured him likewise, Cleopatra. as she had done before his adoptive father julius Caesar. But seeing he minded that she should have been under his subjection, as a captive: she wilfully made a way herself, that she might not be under his authority, all which was done before he was surnamed Augustus. She was Queen of Egypt at the first, jointly reigning with her brother Ptolemy, whom when he would have deposed from participation in the kingdom, she fled to julius Caesar. Who reconciling her unto her brother, when afterward her brother was drowned, she reigned alone, until she joined herself unto Antonius. Who being overcome by Octavius, Anthony & she destroying themselves, that kingdom became provincial (as many other did) unto the Romans. But how dissolutely so ever she lived, her state while she was Queen was lawful. Zenobia. Neither was this Cleopatra the only Queen that governed Egypt: there was another Cleopatra, grandmother to this, which also was the Queen & chief governor of Egypt, besides the widow of Ptolomeus Philometor. Besides another Cleopatra Silene, the Queen of Syria, even at that time when Alexander reigned in judea. Yea, the reign of a woman in Egypt was so ancient, that the Chronicles report, that Rhea the mother of Osiris the great, reigned in Egypt. And Isis her daughter after her called juno of Egypt, (Eusebius calleth her Iò) on whose monument, as Diodorus Siculus testifieth, Rhea and Isis. Didorus Siculus Minerva. Palladian woman. Dido. was engraven this Epitaph: I am Isis the Queen of Egypt, instructed by Mercury. Those things that I in my laws have decreed, let none violate. And as it was in Aethiopia and Egypt, which are two principal parts of Aphrica: so in Lybia, Berosus showeth, how Minerva the daughter unto jupiter of Lybia, the son of Ammonius, taught the discipline and laws of governing an army, and after went to Greece, where she builded Athens, and there reigned. And with these Palladian women (saith Functius, Tab. 16.) Hiarbas in Lybia making war, was of them vanquished, and submitted his kingdom to their power. Of Dido in Aphrica, we have heard Vadianus judgement. Next to Cleopatra Danaeus citeth Zenobia under the Emperor Adrian, Panaeus. a most valiant woman, unto the government of which Zenobia, obeyed also many Christian Churches. Zenobia. I wonder that Danaeus saith, Zenobia lived under Adrian, or in the time of his reign, who reigned and died (if she were sortie years old, when she was vanquished by Aurelianus) at the least one hundred years ere she was borne, a great many famous Emperors reigning between their times. This Zenobia was indeed (as Danaeus calleth her) a most valiant woman, and is highly commended. Though her wearing armour, and the suspicion of her husbands death, were no small blemishes to her government. But for this point, of the lawfulness of a woman's government: Danaeus own testimony, is (in my fancy) a great both praise and proof, that not only the Heathen, but many Christian Churches did obey her. For had the government of a woman, or the obedience thereunto of men, been monstrous, unnatural, or any whit against the faith and life of Christianity: The Christian Churches obedient to the government of Zenobia. though some might for fear and infirmity have been enforced, yet would not many, and those true Christian Churches, have obeyed such a state. Which obedience in them, argueth their good affections in this point, and that neither quarreling at the vices in their persons, nor at the infirmity of their sexes, but to obey them as the higher powers, & that their power is of God, is an obedience to be yielded, even for conscience: & as this was praise worthy in them, & a good example to all other Christian Churches: so not a little it recommendeth her, that being an Heathen woman & in those days, women's governing. when the most renowned Princes were persecutors, she quietly governed many Christian Churches, and they Christian like did obey her. These are the examples that Danaeus citeth of women's chief government among the Heathen. But lest we should think there were so few examples, as only four, for all the world to gaze, on such rare monsters, as calvin & Caenalis unreverently term them: before we descend to the people of God's Church, to the Monarchy of Rome, and to the states in Christendom, let us yet see a few more, to bear these princely dames company. And even at the time of Zenobia, with whom Danaeus leaveth: The examples of many notable Queens. Coelius telleth of another famous woman governor at Coleine named Victorina, which with Tetricus nobly defended the Gauls and the Spaniards, from the invasions and spoils of the Barbarians. Thomiris the Queen of Massagethia, that vanquished the mighty Monarch Cyrus, in defence of her Country, was such a governor. Zarina Queen of the Sachans, to whom the Parthians (for the fame of her valour and justice) revolted from the Medians, was also such a notable governor. Cratesipolis likewise governed the Sicionians. Such an other was Artemisia, the Queen of Halicarnassus, that to her power helped Xerxes against the Grecians, & built that famous Mausoleun, her husband's tomb, one of the 7. wonders of the world. Pithodoris the queen of the Tiberians, of the Chaldeans, of Colchis, of Pharnacia, and of Trapezond, did nobly govern a mighty Empire. Tania the queen of Dardania. Helen the queen of A diabene & of the Chosroenians, which relieved the jews with corn, in the dearth mentioned, Act. 11. Neither néed● we be curious to inquire after such foreign Queens, that here at home had not our own country barren of such worthy women governors, of whom Tac●●s writeth in vita Agricolae. Britanni sexum in imperijs non discernunt. The britains make no difference of the sex in their Empires. Cordilla the daughter of Leire, succeeded her father in the kingdom. Mercia the wife of Guinthelinus did so prudently govern in the administration of the kingdom with her husband, that she made many wise & politic laws, which long after were in high reputation among the Britons & of her name were denominated, The Mercian laws. In like manner Bundwica ruled this Realm, and maintained wars against the Romans, in defence of her country's liberty. Now although that these Heroines, & a great number more. whom I refer to their diligence that list to collect them, were in religion to Godward all Pagans, and therefore their government (in many actions) not so commendable, & in some vicious, yea, beyond the bounds of the sex feminine: yet hindereth not this, but that their government & authority (if they usurped if not, Their Paganism hindered their authority. nor abused the same) might notwithstanding be good & lawful in them But Danaeus setting them aside, turns to the government of God's people, & saith. salomon's line. But in the people of God we have no such kind of thing, whether the jews or the Israelites kingdom be looked upon. Danaeus in 1. Tim. 2. ver. 12. For that which may be alleged of Athalia, 2. of Kings. 11. is easily washed away. For that government of Athalia, was an usurpation, and an unjust invasion of the kingdom, & not a kingdom or lawful power, to the which the people willingly would assent, as it appeared afterward. Wherefore she was justly by joiada the chieefe sacrificer, overturned and thrust out of the royal throne, and slain also, for that she usurped the kingdom. In saying, we have no such kind of thing in God's people, whether we look on the kingdom of the jews or of the Israelites. Bridges. Danaeus doth too straightly abridge the examples of women's government over God's people, The state of god's people among the Israelites & jews. to limit the same only to the times and stories of the Kings. For they were God's people as well before and after, as then, even until they were cut off, and the Gentiles engrafted in their place. And government was as necessary for them, & they had governors also called judges, for the greatest part of that time: and for the most part of those their governors, till toward the end of that their policy, they were better governors far than many of their Kings were. So that, if Danaeus would have thoroughly looked upon their whole estate, so long as they remained God's people: he should forthwith have beholden Deborah such a governor, Deborah. in manner as that state was ordained under God & over his people, though not such hereditary monarch to reign over them, as the Gentiles round about them had, (for that was the state of the government that the people desired. 1. Sam. 8) yet was she under God, the chief and supreme Magistrate, & so is called their judge, A woman judge. as were the other judges that were men, which sufficiently answereth to our purpose. For, if a woman may be a judge, & sit in judgement, & administer justice, & be under God the chiefest in those judicial actions, which are the chiefest points of a monarchs office: What then letteth but that a woman also may be a Queen or Monarch? And by so much more reason, as a Monarch; King or Queen, are not so necessarily bound to execute in their own persons by themselves, all those judicial actions, that a judge is bound to do. But now, set aside a while this example of Deborah, although there had been in that estate, while the kingdoms of the jews and the Israelites did continue, not one Queen that had the chief government, or any public administration of the common weal over the people of God: Were this a good consequence, that for defect of such an example, either he or any may conclude a rule thereon, that therefore it was not lawful for a woman, at any time all that while, to have had any chief or public government of God's people? Or rather, Why might we not better hold ourselves contented with this reason? That there was no woman governor all that while; because, that either God so provided (as in the kingdom of the jews) there wanted never an heir male all that space, Athalia. God continuing the issue male, or destroying male and female. and therefore there was no occasion of the woman's supreme government, which is no debar to their right thereunto, if that the issue male had failed. Or else, that god rooted clean out diverse of their kings whole posterity, male and female, & raised up others, as he did in the kingdom of the Israelites, so destroying the house of jeroboam by Baasa, The house jeroboam clean rooted out. The like destruction of the issue of Omri, save Athalia. The issue of the kings of juda slain save joas. that he left none alive. 1. Reg. 15. ver. 29. And this punishment of rooting out his house, God also threatened to Baasa. 1. Reg. 16 ver. 3. & 4. and performed it, by Zimri, ver. 11. & 12. and the like he did to the house of Omri, that slew Zimri by the hand of jehu, destroying joram & his mother jesabel, & all the issue of Ahab, save only this wicked Athalia, whom jehoram jehosophats son, the king of juda had married. Yea, not only the issue of diverse kings of Israel were thus destroyed for their wickedness: but also the kings of juda were slain partly by jehu, 2. Reg. 10. ver. 13. who afterward also slew Ochozias: and partly by the Philistines and Arabians, 2. Chron. 21. verse 16. and 17. and Chap. 22. verse. 1. but chiefly and most unnaturally, all that remained, by this bloody tiger Athalia, save that joas Ochosias' son, an infant, one year old, was hidden by his aunt josaba, the wife of joiada, the high Priest. So that, there was none of them which was then known to remain alive, except this josaba the high Priests wife, and sister to Ochozias, to whom in that line the inheritance of the crown could immediately deuolue. Which josaba being not capable thereof, because of her marriage with the high priest, which though it were lawful, yet, sith these offices of the Prince and of the priest were divided: she lost therefore by her marriage, had she been by nature the nearest, yea, the only heir, her title of inheritance to the kingdom. So that, if there had remained any male or female, which female had been known, and had not been married to another Tribe or family: all Athalias cruelty had not served her turn, but the party male or female had been strait ways inheritor to the kingdom. For, Athalia herself had thereto no right in the world at all; Athaliaes' ●sorpation. but was (as Danaeus saith) a mere usurper, besides her unnatural tyranny, in murdering her own sons children, to establish unto herself the kingdom. Unto the which, although she had no title, she being not only of another Tribe, but extract from another kingdom, the daughter of jesabel, which was daughter to the king of Sidon: yet notwithstanding having been before both the Queen and the Queen mother; and in both estates, having also borne the chiefest sway, Athalias ●●ling in her husbands & sons days. as well in the impotency of her husband jehoram, who lay sick a long while, and even rotten above the ground by God's just punishment of him, 2. Chron. 21. verse. 15.18. & 19 and in her sons days also, having borne all the stroke, as appeareth, ●. Chron. 22. verse. 3. & 4. (the king following her and her kindred's counsel:) she having thus continued all the government at her own wicked & Idolatrous disposition, it was the easier both for her to make away all the right heirs, joas. and to establish herself in the kingdom. Now although this especially prove that she had no right: yet withal this proves the stronger, that a woman that had right, had not been clean cut off, sith she that had so little, and used it so ill, was permitted thereunto. For if it had been so utterly against the law, that by no manner of means it had been lawful for any woman, bad or good, not heir, or heir, to have governed at all: then had she sought the only way to have herself presently clean put down, and to be reduced into a private state, by the introduction of another line. And then the line of Nathan had entered, as some also following Philo affirm it did, & that this joas was of nathan's line, & that she had clean destroyed (save josaba) all the line of Solomon. But, because the government of a woman was a thing, that long before the people were well acquainted withal, as lawful & usual, yea, in some respect though there were kings living, and of full age and strength, & good Kings too, as appeareth, 1. Reg. 15.13. How Asa put down his grandmother Maachah from her estate, because she had made an Idol in a grove. Whereupon (saith Peter Martyr) for the committing of this wickedness he abrogated from his grandmother her principality. For the mothers of kings were wont to be of great authority in the common weal. Which though it prove not, that women had the sovereignty, when there were Kings able to sustain the same, women's government even under kings among the jews. yet argueth it, that commonly they were not without some authority even of public government in the common weal over God's people. Which authority, Asa (no doubt) would have let his grandmother to have still enjoyed, but that (as Peter Martyr saith) the good Asa was afraid, lest if any power should appertain unto his grandmother, detestable Idolatry should be fostered. Which late example of the grandmother's deposition for Idolatry, Athalia peradventure setting before her eyes, more than either the fear of God or man, or than any natural or womanly affection, being blinded with Idolatry, Athaliaes' massacre. and kindled with ambition, & extraught from the bloody race of jesabel, and perhaps desiring as great a slaughter of the royal blood of juda, as jehu had made of the blood of her Father Achab: she broke forth into this cruel massacre, and usurpation of the kingdom, thinking that now none remained, that could, or durst make nearer title than she thereunto. Athalia therefore (as Peter Martyr well concludeth) got the kingdom the kingdom by tyrannical violence, which was not lawful. Sith, that she was a stranger, and drew her mother's kindred from the Tyrians and Sidonians, except peradventure she would pretend inheritance & succession from her son Ochozias which was slain. But in the kingdom of Israel such right had no place. The law of God. Deut. 17. For in Deu. 17. it is commanded, that the king should not be chosen out of those that were strangers, but out of the number of their brethren. salomon's line. And in juda the family of David was appointed, which perpetually should have such succession. The prophesy of jacob The promise to David. 1. Chro. 17.4. The reason of which law was both for the preservation of God's true religion, & also for the establishing of God's promise, prophesied by jacob. Gen. 49. ver. 10. & made unto David his seed. 1. Chron. 17. v. 14. prefiguring & directly leading unto jesus Christ. So that the jews were bound unto the stock of David, & that in Solomon. And therefore I think not, the joas which here was saved came of Nathan. For although Nathan were David's son, and so salomon's brother, as appeareth, 1. Chro. 3. v. 5. yet I take it not (as Tremelius draws his table) that Nathan came of Bethsabee. For where Tremelius table puts Solomon first, & Nathan next, & so Shobab & Shimea: it is a manifest inversion of the text, which is thus; And these former were borne unto him in jerusalem, Shimea and Shobab, & Nathan, & Solomon of Bathshebaha the daughter of Ammiel. And the like order also is set down, 1. Re. 5. v. 14. in which words is no necessity, that the naming here of her after them, unporteth, she was mother to them all four: but, that the other were named without mention at all of their mothers, as well as all those his other sons, in the three lines following are also named without mentioning of their mothers. Only when he came to the naming of Solomon, among the children that David had in jerusalem, as he mentioned the names of the mothers to the sons, which he had in Hebron; so he maketh mention of salomon's mother, as Matthew also doth emphatically, or with greater force of signification because of God's especial promise unto Solomon. And Solomon was the next son to that, which died begotten in adultery, as appeareth 2. Reg. 12. v. 24. and as for the note of the Geneva Bible upon 1. Chro. 3. v. 5. to salve the matter, it makes the matter far worse, in saying: Only Solomon was David's natural son, the other were Vriahs', whom David made his by adoption. For, the text is not only clean contrary, A great mistaking of the note of Geneva translation. plainly telling how they were his sons, borne unto him in jerusalem, not adopted unto him, but borne unto him. And the very same words the holy Ghost useth also. 1 Reg. 5. v. 14. And if it were not so that he had been one of David's natural sons indeed, 1. Chro. 3.5. except we help the matter better, by some marriage of the mother's line from Solomon or from David: all the pedegrée mecioned by S. Luke; chap. 3. mounting unto David by Nathan, & also the holy Ghosts promise to David of Solomon & his seed, is clean defeated. But as the text is manifest that Nathan was David's natural son, though his mother's name be not expressed: so might he come into this line well enough by marriage of the daughter & heir of some of those, that after the kingdom was lost, have their name so changed in that pedegrée, that we cannot certainly tell in whom that line of Nathan did begin. For, that it began in joas, and that he was not the natural son of Ochosias, as diverse imagine, upon this occasion of this daughter. women's governing I yield not thereto, for diverse reasons following, although Flacius Illiricus faith in his Gloss on Matthew: Ioram begat not Ozias, but Ochosias who being slain without children, although Athalia attempted to destroy the whole stock royal: Flacius Illiricus conjectures out of Philo, that joas was but legal ●on to Ochozias. yet was joas saved of joiada, being a child coming of Nathan. For, David he ordained that the posterity of Solomon being extinguished, the issue of Nathan should succeed, and to that purpose (as witnesseth Philo) Nathan was called Achisar, that is, my brother the Prince: so that, plainly he was not a private person, sith Solomon called him so, for the ordinance of David. joram therefore begat Ochozias, who being slain, and the interraigne of Athalia being overpassed: joas of the stock of Nathan did succeed, who begat Amazias, and he Ozias. This joram therefore begat Ozias, to wit, because this was his heir, reigning in the fourth place at length after him. And so was both he and his ancestors, as it were the adoptive sons of Solomon and of his posterity. But Matthew doth therefore proceed by Solomon and other kings, not so much by the natural, as by the legal and adoptive succession: that both he might touch Solomon, which was the type of Christ, and that he might show him to be their successor, and the kingdomt of Israel to be due unto him. Thus saith Illiricus, and although diverse others (by reason of this daughter of salomon's issue) are also of the same opinion: yet had I rather hold with Chytraeus, who in his Chronologic saith on this wise: That this joas was the son of Ochozias, Chitraeus proves out of Scripture to the contrary. nor that the stock of Solomon ended in Ochozias, six, yea seven clear testimonies of the Scripture do declare, the 4. Kings. 11.2.4. and 12. the 4. Kings. 13.11. Chron. 3.11. (2. Chron. 22. ver. 11. and the 23. verse. 3.11. which worthily ought among us to be of more value, than either the opinion of Philo, or of Annins, that resteth on no foundation of the Scripture. Yea indeed, it hath neither necessity nor probability. Besides that the text is plain. 1. Chron. 3. verse, 11. Whose son was joram, and his son was Ahaziah, and joas was his son: and 2. Kings. 11.1.2. Then Athalia the mother of Ahaziah when she saw her son was dead, she arose and destroyed all the king's seed, that is, the children of her son, were they male or female, had he any Daughters besides her that is mentioned in the words following. But jehosaba the daughter of king joram, and sister to Ahaziah, took joas the son of Ahaziah, and stale him from among the kings sons that should be slainee, both him and his nurse, keeping them in a bed chamber, and they hid him from Athaliah, so that he was not slain. By which words it is evident that he was one of the very natural sons of Ahaziah. And not as Flacius & other say, his legal son descended from Nathan. For else, if we should understand the word Son in so large a sense, as to fetch it up from the descent of Nathan, salomon's line. salomon's brother, all the posterity of Roboam, Abia, Asa, josaphat, and joram, No likelihood that Ozias was of Nathan● line. besides the seed of Ahazias coming between: a far greater number should be included in the name of Ahazias sons, than either it is likely that Ahazias maintained, or accounted as his sons, many of them older than himself: or then Athalia murdered, or so much perhaps as dreamt on, that they after so many descents had any title, or would make claim unto the kingdom. Now although Athalia herself had no better title, and that there was yet surviving an heir male to Ahazias, that by this providence of GOD, escaped both her fury and her knowledge, to whom the crown was due, and whom jehoiada showed to all his confederates, not in the name of a new line from Nathan, but as Ahazias own son, and in that title he was brought forth in the 7. year after he had been hidden in the Temple, and solemnly made King, and Athaeia for her usurpation, Athalia, though an usurper, yet she reigned 6 years. K. Richard 3 and unlawful murder, removed and executed: yet not withstanding, for all that time the text is plain. 2. Chron. 22. verse. 12. that Athalia reigned six years. And therefore as we say of king Richard the third with us, though he for his part was but an usurper, and came to his usurpation also, by unnatural murder of the right heirs, and his nearest kin: nevertheless he is reckoned among the number of the Kings that have reigned in this Realm: So is Athalia reckoned as an absolute Queen among the Kings, and the years of her reign, even by the holy Ghost are numbered. And therefore, this is not so well said (me thinks) of Danaeus, that it was no kingdom nor lawful power, to which the people willingly assented, as it afterward appeared. For, a kingdom still it was the which she held, and the power also was lawful, though she unjustly usurped, & with furious cruelty did misuse the same. Neither doth the willing or dissembled assent of the people, or their cloaking, or manifesting the same in the en●▪ The state depends not on the people's willingness. either prove or improve the substance of a lawful power or kingdom, but only showeth either an evil Prince, or a wicked, mutable, & unthankful people. But to make the state depend upon their not willing assent, is a most perilous point. Neither is it so sitting to the subject, to call the Prince's title into question, being invested and possessed in the kingdom. For, Athalia came not so ill by the jews kingdom, but the Romans came afterward as ill both to the same, and to many other kingdoms in the world. The Romans came worse to the kingdom than Athalia, and with more grudging of the people. And yet would not Saint Paul have the people of God, either to resist them, or to call their right and interest into question; And therefore doth calvin very well collect upon the words of Paul: Let every soul be subject to the higher, for there is no power but of God. And verily (saith he on this word Higher powers) the Apostle seemeth to me in this word, that he would have taken away the frivolous curiosity of men, Athalia. which oftentimes are wont to inquire, calvin in 1. Cor. 13. by what right they that govern the state have gotten their power. For to us it ought to be enough, that they do govern. If we now inquire farther, how then is joiadaes' disposing of Athalia, and causing her also to be stain justifiable? Peter Martyr debateth this at large in 2. Par. 10. fol. 279. b. But peradventure (saith he) some man will reprehend this endeavour of joiada, Peter Matt. in 2. Par. 11. fol. 279. first that he did not well nor orderly, in putting down that person that was already in the magistracy, verily it is lawful to good men, to attempt and endeavour to their power, that in the common weal the state of things present should not be altered, But when it is altered, and that any already possesseth the state, and hath entered into the office of the magistrate: it is not lawful to thrust him out of it. To this objection he answereth, saying: It is not indeed the duty of a private man, The approbation of joiadas executing Athalia. to thrust out of place a Magistrate, or a Prince already ordained, that possesseth the state. But we deny that joiada was a private person, sith that in the common weal he had the next place to the king, and when as he judged not only the sacred, but also the civil affairs, and now and then also dispatched them, and was the keeper of the laws. And in Deuteronomie is the law contained, concerning the institution of the king. Which Law was now violated by Athalia, & the promises made to David and his posterity, were by Athalia stopped. And moreover besides this, she was not only a stranger, but an idolater, and that incurable: therefore she deserved by the governors and nobles of the kingdom to be deposed. By which answer, withal it appeareth, that he findeth not any fault that she was a woman, but that she was not of the posterity of David, and therefore by the foresaid decrees of God, she was not capable of that kingdom, so that, had she been the nearest in the posterity, and had not stained herself with such horrible murder, and open Idolatry, as she did, she ought not for any reason of her sex, by him, or all, or any never so noble in that kingdom, to have been deposed▪ But now the right and title lineally descending to her nephew, to wit, her sons son, which by joiada had been harboured in the Temple, unwitting to this unnatural Queen mother, and cruel grandam: it was joiada his duty not only to give notice of the true heir; but to join with all the Clergy the Princes, and the people that he could, to inthronize the King, for so he is also called for his right, before he was seized in his kingdom, verse. 7.8. and 11. and to dispossess this usurper, so that even by this example of Athalia, being better considered, we see that this supreme government under God, and over God's people, was not prohibited to a woman, if by right of inheritance it fell unto her, & that she used it well, although there were no occasion of the like example among the jews, all the time of the estate of their Kings. God furnishing th●●ill with heirs male to succeed their parents in that kingdom. And as we now see this, in the tract of David's line, from Solomon till after that estate of the Kings, it joined with the race of Nathan: The Queen of Sabea. so even for Solomon himself in whom this issue of the Kings began, and was of them all the most magnificent, let us see likewise what was his opinion of this matter. For as we read, 1. Reg. 10. verse. 1. etc. The Queen of Saba (or Sabea) hearing of the fame of Solomon, in the name of the Lord came to ●rie him in hard questions. We have heard already the judgement of Vadianus out of josephus, concerning this Queen, that she was the Queen of Sabea in Aethiopia, and that the Queens there had continually the supreme government, as we have seen both Pliny's and Straboes' testimonies of Candace. But (as I said before) I take Peter Martyrs judgement to be the truer, Pet. Mart. in. 1. Reg. 10. fol. 79. that she was rather the Queen of the Sabeans, a people of the happy Araby. And when as (saith he) the Country being so happy, and blessed with much riches, maketh the inhabitants dainty: this woman is to be commended, which casting daintiness aside, took upon her such a far peregrination. She was of the stock of Chanaan, the son of Cham. For Saboth (as is contained in the tenth Chapter of Genesis) was the son of Chus, and Chus the son of Canaan. We are also taught in this history, that there is no accepting of persons with God, but that of every people and nation he hath his elected. Christ calleth her the Queen of the South, because that coast is Southward, if it be compared with the City of jerusalem. And he saith, that she came to Solomon from the ends of the North. Whereupon I believe the rather, This Queen one of the elected. that she came out of Arabia the happy, than out of the Island Meroe. Neither happened this without God, for verily it was he that stirred up this Queen, with the fame of salomon's wisdom. Yea, in a manner, he drew her thither, to the end that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of before: all nations shall know thy great name, etc. And again, Let us in the mean time ponder this speech, wherewith it is said, In the name of the Lord, and in the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. For thereby is first declared, that this Queen did acknowledge the true God. And also (as Kimhi saith) that the wisdom of Solomon was not spread forth but in this name, that the Lord had inspired the same unto him, This Queen did acknowledge the true God. etc. By this sentence also may be declared, that although Solomon was adorned with an heavenly spirit in all kind of learning and wisdom: notwithstanding this thing most of all inflamed the Queen, that he was richtly instructed with divine matters, The Queen of Sabaea. such (I say) as pertained to the name of god. The religiousness of this Queen As though peculiarly she sought that wisdom, the which is joined together with religion. And this thing is very honourable, to travail for wisdom and godliness sake. Plato, Pythagoras, and Apollonius Tianaeus, are commended, for that they wandered through the world to attain wisdom. Verily great studiousness of excellent learnings were in them, and therefore would they both see and hear also the men that excelled in erudition and virtue. Other besides the●e have been, The commendation of this Queens coming to Solomon. and are at this day not a few, that of curiosity, delights, and pleasures are stirred up to travail, and draw themselves thither, where they live more delicatlie and with more pleasure, and where they hope they shall see certain new and strange things, but these are not worthy to be praised, but rather to be discommended. As for the fact of this woman, may be numbered among the famous examples, wherewith we may be enkindled, to the studies of godliness and true doctrine. And although very many came to Solomon, yet doth the sacred history make mention, especially of this woman, and that very exquisitely, because she among other obtaineth the principal place. For, she was a Woman, whom the weakness of her sex did easily withdraw. She was also a Queen, wealthy, and abounding in delights. Whereunto beside, did come also the far distance of the journey: nevertheless she staying not for these things, No let could stay thy Q. journey. went forth to Solomon. But if we say: was it lawful for her to forsake the Region committed to her administration, that she might inquire after the learning and wisdom of Solomon, yea, although it were for religion? To this may be said, that it might be, she left either her husband, or her son, or some other, which in her place might have governed▪ the Kingdom. Moreover, she took the journey, that she might get not only to herself, but also to her people sound religion and sincere godliness: she therefore profited more her people in travailing abroad, than in sitting quiet at home. To the which ye may add, that in this folded up secret, The mystery of this Queen's coming. Christ's commendation of this Q. was signified the calling of the Gentiles, which were to gather themselves to Christ, the true Solomon. Whereupon Christ himself (as is contained in the Gospel) commended this woman, and affirmed, that in time to come she shall judge the hebrews, because she far excelled them in faith. And in this place, yea, and by this declaration, the contemners of God's word are grievously noted, which daily more than needs do bewray themselves: While in so great a light of the sacred doctrine, which by the goodness of GOD even at this present day hath shined, they are nothing at all moved. For, often times do they linger and foreslow, even to arise out of their bed, to hear the sacred sermons. So far off are they, to suffer themselves to leave their Country, or their house. They despise the holy Books in respect of their delights. The Doctors also and the Preachers they hate worse than a snake: and with their tongues vehemently detest good studies. And if they see any Princes somewhat given to learning and to godliness, they deride them. Verily this Woman behaved not herself after this manner. And therefore, as Christ hath forespoken it, in the last day he shall judge them. She came to tempt Solomon, but not with a pernicious temptation. Yea, rather with a holy and an honest temptation, wherewith she desired to be instructed of those things whereof she was ignorant. Aenigmata, hard sentences properly are called very obscure allegories, which are rare in use, the which in daily speech do well-near always come in use, which are easy. But in this place, by hard sentences, we understand doubtful and difficult questions, which mightily occupy the mind, not about light business, or every kind of matters: but about great and grave points, appertaining both to eternal life, and also to the civil government. The Hebrew word as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Her questions to Solomon about eternal life an● civil government. which signifieth to sharpen, from whence the Noun being deducted, betokeneth an oration or obscure question. To the exposition whereof, it behoveth to apply the sharpness of the wit. It is likely that the Queen had a● home Philosophers, Magicians and wise men, which concerning humane and natural matters, could have easily answered her. But concerning Divine and supernatural matters, sith that in them there is need of the spirit, and of divine revelation: they were not able to satisfy her. Whereupon she travailed herself unto Jerusalem, in the which City, GOD had placed not only the Castle of Wisdom, and pure religion: but also Solomon, of all Kings the most wise. Thus at large writeth Peter Martyr, in the commendation of this noble Queen. Whereby it appeareth, that not only she was for worldly estate, a mighty Queen, not under her husband in that respect but above him, and he (had she any) but her deputy under her in her absence, albeit she was inferior to him in the bands of matrimony, and inferior in sex, to all the men in her Monarchy: but also that for religion, though her people were Idolaters, yet was she a professor of the only true and living God, The Q. a Mirror to all Christian Princes. and even one of Gods elected (if we may adventure to judge so far, on such excellent fruits) and not only a figure of bringing the Gentiles to the knowledge of God: but a very mirror and Pattern for all Christians, specially Christian Princes, to set before them. And if she be such a spectable to all Christian Princes, and shall be also a judge to a great many of them: mought not she, or such another as she, have been the Queen or chief governor also, even over the people of God? and would she not have governed them far better, than many or most of their kings did? And verily, Solomon doth no less esteem of this most excellent Lady that came thus unto him, than the goodness of the cause that moved her did deserve. How Solomon did esteem of this Queen. Did he repel her out of his kingdom as a Monster? For so unadvisedly calvin said: all prudent men have always repudiated (or put back) the government of Women, as it were of a Monster. Or did he mislike any whit of her the more, for her supreme Government over men? We find no such matter. Was he of Caluines and Caenalis' judgement? But that he received her with all honour, and heard her speak unto him whatsoever she had in her hart, and Solomon declared unto her all her questions, not one word was hidden from the king, that he declared not unto her. And, had he misliked her estate, that she being but a woman should rule men, should busy her head about such high questions, and meddle with the administration of a commonweal, and be the chief governor of a kingdom: if he had thought this to be directly or indirectly against God's Law, or against the Law of nature, since she came especially to hear God's Law, and to confer about such matters: no doubt he would never have concealed that matter above all other, but have reproved her, or have gently persuaded her, at least, (take it how she would) have truly informed her, of the unlawfulness and undecency of her calling. Which thing, sith he did it not, & yet neither he nor she dissembled or flattered the one with the other: A great confirmation of a woman's supreme government. I cannot tell what other men will judge. quot capita tot sententiae, so many heads, so many wits: surely my dull wit cannot conceive, but that it is a mighty argument, to confirm the supreme government of a woman. Neither ground I mine argument so much, on Solomon's doings or approbations, but that the holy ghost also hath so far allowed thereof, that he hath consecrated the same, both to perpetual memory, and to profitable example, and therefore cannot this government be debarred even from the people of God. Especially, being also approved and recommended to all Christians, by our L and Saviour jesus Christ. Mat. 12.24. & Luk. 11.31. in plain terms calling her the Queen of the south, jesus Christ approves her state as Queen. not the monster or usurper of the south Countries. And here, because our question of women's public government arose on women's public speaking: let us see also, how this most excellent Qu. behaved herself in her publi●e speaking. For after she had propounded all her questions, & was satisfied in his answers to them: & after she had beholden all his wisdom, & his house that he had builded, & the meat of his table, and the sitting of his servants, & the order of his ministers, & their apparel, & his drinking vessels, & his burnt offerings, which he offered in the house of the L: she was exceedingly astonished, and said unto him: It was a true word that I heard in mine own land, of thy sayings and of thy wisdom. Howbeit I believed not this report till I came, and had seen it with mine eyes. But lo, the one half was not told me. For thou haste more Wisdom and prosperity, than I have heard by report. Happy are thy men, happy are these thy servants which stand ever before thee and hear thy Wisdom. Blessed be the Lord thy God which loveth thee, to set thee on the Throne of Israel. Because the Lord loved Israel for ever, & made thee the king to do equity and righteousness. These words though she spoke especially to him, yet as she spoke them publicly in the audience of his subjects (for so her words import) happy are these thy servants that stand before thee and hear thy wisdom: So therein she containeth notable matter. What excellent & high speeches & Prophecies she publicly uttereth. And being before so public a person, both a king and a Prophet, and before the assembly of his Court, and of her troop, she breaketh forth into the function of a great Prophetess. The Queen (saith Peter Martyr on these foresaid words) being no less Godly than prudent, placeth the chiefest good, neither in power, nor in riches, nor in pleasure, but in the knowledge of God, which should be had in his word, and not only by the contemplation of natural things. The Son of God brought forth this self same sentence, but somewhat more augmented, Peter Mart. and more clearly expounded. Blessed (said he) are they that hear the word of God and keep the same: that is, do not suffer it easily to fall from them, but express it both in their facts and works. After this, she referreth all the good things of Solomon, unto God. Which example of her, it becometh us also to imitate. For while we behold the good works of Godly men, it behoveth that we glorify our heavenly Father. For it is a vicious thing to stay ourselves in the causes inferior, when we ought always to ascend to the highest, that is, unto God the fountain, the head, and beginning of all good things. But (saith she) God which hath delighted himself in thee, (or which hath loved thee:) She teacheth, What this Q teacheth that so many and so great things happened not to Solomon of his deservings and his virtues, it was the mere goodness and clemency of God, that had so greatly ennobled Solomon. She amplifieth the benefit given unto him of God, that he had gotten a kingdom, and that not of any Nation whatsoever, but of the people of Israel, whom she testifieth that God had loved perpetually. But if ye shall demand, from whence she could know these things, that God esteemed the Israelites so much? I answer, that the deliverance out of Egypt which consisted of so many and so great wonders, was known almost to all the southern, and the Eastern provinces. Which also were not ignorant, that Israel was brought into the possession of the Land of Chanaan, by the help of God. they knew also the acts of David prosperously achieved, who (the Lord being his guide) with great might and many victories, obtained Syria, even unto the river Euphrates. At length she toucheth the end, wherefore the King was placed of God over that people, that is to wit, that he should do justice and judgement. That is, he should govern them with right and equity. Thus doth this notable Queen, not only set forth the public praises of God, In the presence of so wise a King: but as it were presume to teach him, at least wise, to confirm him, in the most special points of a Princes supreme Government. And therefore she herself, being also taught and confirmed mutually, by the wisdom of him, was not ignorant of the lawfulness of her state, nor how to govern her people accordingly. Now, although this example do not yet prove, that there was any Queen the chief governor over God's people: God ●had people over whom she was Queen. yet sith (as Peter Martyr saith) she took this journey, that she might get not only to herself, but also to her people sound religion and sincere Godliness: If this her good purpose were not frustrated, but took such effect, that many of her subjects, both of the very great train that came with her, and saw and heard the wisdom of Solomon likewise and of her other subjects at home, to whom she related (no doubt) that she had seen and heard abroad, whereby many are thought to have believed as she did, in the only true and living God: then may we safely say, though she were neither Queen of juda, nor of Israel, yet was she a Queen over God's people, though not over that people of God. And this also being a secret folded up, signifying the calling of the Gentiles, which were to gather themselves to Christ the true Solomon: What doth the unfolding of this secret infer (to have the thing signified, answer to the sign) but that those Gentiles that should be converted to the true Solomon jesus Christ, which is the wisdom of God, and Prince of peace & all true glory: should come to him, & become his people as well by the travel and under the government of Queens, being their supreme governors (as this Queen was) as under the supreme government of any kings. And that (as Martyr well observeth) in this respect also, as of God's elections, there is no difference of persons before God, so much less of sex, Male or Female, as here we see, by the notable example of this Queen. By this example it is plain, that although there were no good Queen like this queen of the south, that had the chief government over God's people, The lawfulness of women's government over Gods ●c. during that state of their Kings in jury and Israel, before the captivity: yet scythe Solomon one of the best Kings among them, doth thus allow it in other Nations, therefore De iure, it had not been unlawful among the people of God, if De facto, they had had occasion of women's lawful inheriting of that state. Though they had it also de facto in Athalia, where in jury de iure it appertained not unto her. Alexandra. And yet in that disturbed state of the jews that succeeded their return out of captivity, we are not destitute of another example of Alexandra, Alexandra. whom josephus and other histories do record. True it is, she was not of the right line of David and Solomon, nor of the tribe of juda, but of the tribe of Levi, and descended from the Maccabees, which not long before had mightily defended the jews, and therefore they gave to their posterity this honour of the chief government of them. Albeit the Sceptre was not yet clean taken from the tribe of juda, in whom the jurisdiction of the Sanedrin did continue. And although the Pharisees at that time bore the greatest sway, and Alexandra the title and the dignity, insomuch that josephus saith, lib. 13. antiq. jud. cap. 22. The Queen only the royal name, but the Pharises possessed all the power, etc. Yet, notwithstanding in those dangerous times, all that, was done but for a policy, which her husband Alexander taught her on his death bed, for the more assurance of their state, and preservation of their children. Which counsel Alexandra following, she governed very politicly. And therefore, of all the Chroniclers that mention her she is reckoned in the number of their lawful Princes, and nine years so reigned over God's people, that she deserved not by Danaeus, to be wittingly buried in oblivion. Danaeus his next example is of the Amazons. Amazons. Which, sith I accord also, that it was an ill state of government, in murdering, and expelling of men from the whole affairs of the commonweal, and from living among them: though I take it not to be altogether fabulous, but that there were indeed such Women, and had such government: I therefore pass it over without further answer, as I did before, to the like objection of Caenalis. Howbeit, this we may say, that if they had not so misused themselves, but given that honour unto the Man, which by the Law of God and nature, is due unto the dignity of his sex: & in the society of Matrimony, had not violated the man's prerogative. Then, if the right of governing those regions had fallen to a Woman, I see not why it had not been as lawful there, as in Ethiopia, Sabaea, jury, or in any other kingdoms above specified? But (saith Danaeus) (as though this that he alleged of the Amazons, Danaeus. were not to the matter) Let us return to the question propounded. Albeit that we read Isai. 3. verse 11. that it is set for a great sign of the curse of God, that children and women should obtain the government in any Nation: Notwithstanding, that thing is not perpetual. I grant that God here threateneth a great curse, Bridges. and a miserable state, that he would bring upon the wicked jews, The curse of God in ill governors. in taking away all their natoble men, and giving them weak and wicked rulers. Childish & effeminate Princes. As he saith, verse, 1. etc. For Lo, the Lord of hosts will take away from jerusalem and from juda, the stay and the strength, even all the stay of bread, and all the stay of Water, the strong man, and the man of War, the judge and the prophet, the prudent and the aged, the Captain of fifty, and the honourable, and the Counsellor, and the cunning artificer, and the eloquent man.. And I will appoint Children to be their Princes, and Babes shall rule over them. And again, after he had threatened them, vers. 6. etc. That every one shall take hold of his brother of the house of his Father, and say, thou hast clothing, thou shalt be our Prince, and let this fall be under thy hand: in that day shall he swear, saying, I cannot be an helper, for there is no bread in my house nor clothing, therefore make me no Prince of the people. Doubtless Jerusalem is fallen, and juda is fallen down, because their tongues and works are against the Lord, to provoke the eyes of his glory: etc. Then cometh in this curse, Children are extortioners of my people, and women rule over them. O my people, they that lead thee cause thee to cry, and destroy the way of thy paths. By which it appeareth, that he speaketh here of such a miserable state, that they should be driven to seek for their Princes, & offer the chief government to any, (had he right, or had he not right) that would help them and they should find none, but only such, as here by these speeches he describeth. And therefore this being a token (or rather the stroke itself) of God's curse for their wickedness, is very odiously and wrongfully alleged, (clean besides Gods and the Prophet's meaning) in this purposed question of women's supreme government, or of children's supreme government over God's people. divers writers therefore that expound this Prophecy, considering the states, wherein both women & children have been given of God to be supreme governors, not as any token at all of his curse, but of his great favour and blessing, dare not so literally understand these words, but according to the manner of the Scripture, metaphorically. For, where he saith in the words here by Danaeus cited, vers. 11. the exactors of my people are a child, or, as the Geneva translates it, Children are extortioners of my people, and saith, they lead the people and cause them to cry, and that they destroy the way of God's paths: sith exaction and extortion importeth violence and oppression, and sith infants cannot lead, but are led, nor cause the people to cry, nor destroy God's paths: How can we understand this of a natural child (or not rather of a man that useth force? & yet because he guides not by ancient counsel & true wisdom, is for his lack of discretion, called a child. Or, because he is a wanton & effeminate man, called a woman. Paruulos scientia vocat (saith Vatablus) he calleth them children in knowledge. Not those that be children in age (saith Luther) but children in mind. And here he taketh Women (saith Musc.) for those that are tender & effeminate, God's curse. & so doth the Geneva note well interpret it: That, because the wicked people were more addict to their Princes, than to the commandments of God, he showeth that he would give them such princes by whom they should have no help, but that should be manifest tokens of his wrath, because they should be fools and effeminate. Children (saith Cal.) understand it not only in age, but in wit & manners, such as are tender and effeminate men, calvin in isaiah. 3. which excel in no virtue, nor can govern the sword committed to them. He opposed not every singular member, the one against the other, for it sufficed to define the manner whereby the common weal easily runs to ruin, to wit, if fools and unskilful men do rule, as though they were children, in whom is no gravity nor prudence, etc. Furthermore, whomsoever the Lord governeth not, nothing remaineth unto them, What person● the Prophet understandeth by Children & Women. but that they be like to children, to wit, destitute of all both counsel and prudence. Moreover God exerciseth his punishment two ways, because oftentimes while we seem to ourselves to have grave men and skilful in things, when it comes to the matter they blunder like blind men, & they have no more prudence than have children. For God depriveth them of that notable virtue, that before he had endued them with all, and doth so sot them, even as if had stricken them with some thunder. Now and then God proceedeth more slowly, and by little & little taketh away the men of heroical wits, which were apt for the administration, and transferreth the governments of matters to them, that can not indeed govern one child or one family. When these things happen it is most certain that destruction is not far. Moreover (saith Musculus) He calleth exactors not them that exacted those things, that were due unto the Magistrate: but such as wrong from the people at their pleasure, whatsoever they liked, and so peeled them with wicked exactions, Sith therefore Children could not be such exactors: as we cannot so well understand these words of those that are in years, children: so neither, of those that are in sex, women. But now, be it spoken in the natural sense of very children, and of very women, & those lawful princes: doth not this prove so much the more, Though women & children be in this curse literally understood yet it still confirms the lawfulness of their state. that albeit it were also a curs always of God, to have such Princes (as we shall see anon, even by Danaeus own revocation, that it is not,) yet, that the principality, even of them is a lawful state, and that, although in nature it were the better of twain, (if men could always have their wish) to have their Prince rather to be a Man than a Woman: and to be a Man of ripe and perfect age, than to be an Infant or a child: yet notwithstanding, sith neither infirmity of sex, nor of age, debarreth the Lawefulnesse of the estate, when GOD sendeth (be it also, but for a punishment) such a Prince: yea, although he gave not withal, to the weaker sex of the Woman, any other heroical and supernatural gifts, nor to the tender age of the child, any other industrious and Godly tutors: yet for all that, the people of God ought not resist ●his ordinance of God in these▪ their Magistrates, but obey the same for Conscience sake. Which saying of the Apostle to obey higher powers as the ordinance of God for conscience sake, Rom. 13. if it took place, when such hypocrites, and tyrants, such wilful and unskilful rulers, such childish and effeminate persons, & of all them infidels, heavy plagues, curses and scourges both to God's people, and to all the roman Monarchy, were the supreme governors: why should it not take place, when the supreme governors are not Women or children in such vicious senses, but only in nature, without all these vices, and all other infirmities sufficiently provided for and supplied? but if these words of God, by the Prophet Esay, are to be understood literally: then did God perform the same unto them literally. And then it followeth of necessity, that the people of God, had not only men, but children, nor children only, but Women also to be their lawful princes, which is the thing that Danaeus before denied. If now again, this that was threatened here as a token of a curse, do not debar the right and lawfulness of their estate: what shall we say then to those, where God of his surpassing might and goodness, so provideth for these infirmities of nature, that he turneth all this dreadful token of a curse, into the comfortable feeling of a blessing: for, dare Danaeus make a perpetual rule of this sentence, that it shall always stand for a token of God's curse unto the people, where children or Women are their Princes? No, he dare not. But straight way corrects his former saying, Danaeus. and saith: Howbeit that same is not perpetual, The curse turned into a blessing. for oftentimes Kings being children also, as for example Solomon and Josias, have most holily and most happily reigned, and the empire of them was enriched of God withal kind of good things. The same may be said of certain Women, and of their Empire, whom the Lord hath in marvelous manner blessed, as appeareth out of diverse histories. Bridges. Ha, go too then, this is another manner of matter. For recompense of our former tokens of cursing and misery, here are better effects of happiness and blessing, in the government, both of Children, and of women neither as a rare, but as an often experience put in practice, and that among the Lord's people. But what is this to the lawfulness of these party's government? No is? Indeed (as Christ saith, Math. 5.45) God maketh his Sun to arise on the evil & on the good, Women & children's government lawful. & sendeth reignė on the just & unjust: & the wicked many times prosper & reign, in that which the world esteemeth happiness. But when as Danaeus so placeth it héeré, that holiness goeth before, & happiness cometh after, & when their Empire is enriched of God with all kind of good things, & with the spiritual riches of God's kingdom: if all this may truly be said of children's government, and the same may be said also of women's government: children's government. doth not this import, that their government must needs be lawful? And as for children's government, these two here by Danaeus alleged, are notable examples. For God himself giving him his name, appointed Solomon both before his brethren that were his elders, Solomon a child. who otherwise by nature should have had the kingdom before him, but that God beyond all their expectations and aspiring, advanced him unto it, when he was but about 17. years of age: and did God all this, and was it not lawful? And as for josias, he was but 8. years old when he began to reign. And yet was his reign in that age so acceptable to God: that he was prophesied upon by name, almost 200. year before he was borne. 1. Reg. 13. ver. 2. josias a child. And joas was yet younger than was josias. who was worst in his old years, when he ought to have been best, and best when he was young, and is therefore commended to do that, which was good in the sight of the Lord all his time, while joiada the priest did teach him. 2. Reg. 12. ver. 2. Azaria began his reign at 16. years of age. 2. Reg. 15. ver. 2. and is also commended to have done uprightly in the sight of the Lord. Azaria a child. Which is understood only of his younger years. Manasses was 12. years old when he began to reign. 2. Reg. 21. ver. 1. who though he did evil in the sight of the Lord: Manasses a child. yet was his reign as lawful as the others. Now (as Danaeus confesseth) that the same may be said of some women and of their government, The government of women as lawful as the government of men. which is enough to conclude all the matter: (for we desire no more to be granted but even thus much) and what more can be said of the government of men? For who can justify all men's government, either that they, hold the same by right, or rightly administer that they came rightly by? Yea, lest we should take this that he saith, of some women, to be of some such, for whom he might pretend exception of example, as that they had some special calling, as Deborah: although we have heard of other also in the scripture, and that in commendation, of whom we can allege no such special calling, but that might well be drawn to an example of our own times and state, and so do his words also import, that this some may be said, as spoken of some women of this age: when not only he saith, as appeareth by diverse histories, as we shall after ward (God willing) see, how the state of Christendom is not unfurnished of many examples: nevertheless, for the more manifest proof hereof, he beginneth with our state in England, as an honourable and present testimony of the same, saying: Verily, of th● most renowned Queen of England Elizabeth, which now most happily reigneth, it may be said, Danaeus. that the whole compass of the world hath seen nothing at any ●ime, more happy or more to be wished for, than is her reign. The more we consider this testimony of Danaeus, Bridges. of the which both ourselves especially, Her majesties happy reign. and other foreign regions not a little, find the proof and feel the comfort: the more are we all bound to glorify almighty God, and to think & speak well of her Ma. government, not only to be lawful: but also most necessary & expedient for God's Church. How much we are bound to glorify God for her Majesty & to love her, & obey her laws. And to pray to God to bless her Majesty more & more, and to defend her, and us by her, to whom he hath given (in these troublesome and dangerous days) so happy a reign over his people, & a government so much to be wished after. And the more are we also bound both to love & honour her, and to obey her government in her laws. And this being true which Danaeus here confesseth: then how unthankfully, yea, how untruly do our Brethren report to the world, that the state of the Church of England, is a disordered, deformed & corrupt estate? As we have heard their hard speeches, besides other that writ a great deal harder. How do these here agree with Danaeus? If her Majesty reigneth most happily, and that in all these foresaid happy things: how reigneth she not lawfully? And how unlawfully then, yea how unhappily do our Brethren oppose themselves against her so happy reign? I grant, they do it not in such virulent and treacherous manner, Our Brethr. disobedience not like the Papists. as do the adversaries of the Gospel, which her Majesty defendeth and setteth forth, and wherein chiefly consisteth this her happiness: b●t in an other wayward and not contented sort, as maintaining such a disordered, corrupt and deformed state of the government and discipline of Christ's Church. As though her reign suppressed the reign of Christ, and the sincere advancing of his kingdom, which in the lords prayer we desire. If her Majesty did thus: what happiness were there, or rather what unhappiness were there not in her reign? But now, when such as worthily are accounted, to be the most learned professors of the Gospel in other Nations, and such as so hardly can brook women's government, Strangers & those that brook not women's government, surmount our Brethrens that are subjects. smackering too much of the french humour, as we have showed, shall notwithstanding give this honourable testimony of her Majesty, and of her reign: And I hope they do it no more for flattery, than they need for fear, but even for the truth sake itself, (for except they would suppress it, they can in conscience say no less): shall now her majesties own subjects and those Protestants too, that feel the benefit, whereat other rejoice so much, for the hearing thereof, shall not they confess as much as doth a stranger? What a great ingratitude should this be? Howbeit, Danaeus confesseth not so much, but we find much more, the experience and benefit of this her most happy reign. God make us with like thankfulness to acknowledge it. For certainly, if we shall consider all circumstances, we shall not choose, (at leastwise in our consciences, though we would not with our mouths, but confess as much as doth Danaeus, that the whole compass of the world hath seen nothing at any time, that is more happy or more to be wished for, than is her reign (or government). Neither the government under the Queen of Saba, or of God's people under Deborah, neither yet under the most excellent men. David, Solomon, Asa, jehosaphat, josias, or Ezechias; no, not in Christendom under Constantine the great, or the great Charles, though their reigns did in some things excel her majesties reign: yet all things pondered, especially those kind of good things wherein true happiness most consisteth: (Danaeus spoke here a great word, but we may well uphold it for a truth,) that the whole circle of the world, saw nothing at any time, more happy (or blessed,) and a thing more to be wished for, (if men might have their wishes) than is the reign or government of her Majesty. The Lord (I say again and again) make us thankful to him chiefly, and after him to her, for the same, and vouchsafe to continue and increase, this her most happy and wished reign, still among us, to his further glory, to our answerable thankfulness, and to the refuge, succour and comfort of other kingdoms, where his Church also is dispersed, and yet by the seducinges and oppressions of antichrist, have not attained to this happiness and wished state for all their Kings, that we in England under our Queen Elizabeth, his most happy handmaid, and our most gracious Sovereign, have all the time of her reign, and yet (God be magnified therefore) do enjoy. And still shall a stranger say these speeches, and ourselves bury them in dumb silence, or if we speak thereof, deny it or deprave it? This is much to our shame, & to the great commendation of Danaeus: if happily he had stayed even here, & so concluded up this question. Danaeus his high praise if he had stayed here. For what could he or any have said better, that could more fully confirm the supreme government of a woman to be lawful in the Church of Christ, than this so manifest example and present instance, of Gods so happily blessing her majesties supreme government, over us his people. But, what shall we foade ourselves with all these goodly speeches, when the matter for all this is still impugned? For, to what purpose doth Danaeus drive all these great praises of her majesties reign? To confirm and establish a woman's government? Or not rather in the end, even as our brethren do (but with a more cunning compass) to undermine it? And yet, our Brethren (as we have heard) cast forth now & then very fair speeches of her Majesty, & of her happy reign, Fair praises and foul practices. & of her lawful government also. But when it cometh to the very point, they not only refuse to obey her majesties laws and government, but they so cry out upon the same, as a most deformed, & corrupt state of god's Church: that all their praisings are nothing comparable to their dispraysinges What a strange kind of dealing is this in so high matters, and with such great and noble personages? It is an old saying, Non est bonum ludere cum sanctis. And shall we dally thus, Danaeus joineth with Caenalis. in the chiefest matters of estate, with Princes? What could have been more avouched for confirmation of a woman's lawful government, than this so high recommending to all the world her majesties government? The invincible instance of her majesties government. Solemnly pronouncing: Verily, for Elizabeth the Queen of England that now most happily reigneth, the circuit of the world hath seen nothing at any time more happy (or blessed) and more to be wished for, then is here reign. If here Danaeus have not flattered (as he had no cause) but spoken (as indeed we find it) the very truth: what then can he afterward or all the circuit of the world allege, against this so excellent a precedent of God's approbation for women's supreme government? In very deed nothing can be rightly opposed, that shall ever be able to overturn this instance. And verily, if Danaeus shall now allege any thing, against the lawefulnesse of a woman's supreme government over God's people: he shall but contrary and weary himself in vain, as we saw how Caenalis did. And in the end, we shall see likewise, how Danaeus fair and softly drives the matter, not only to the same, but to a far worse pitch, though in better speeches, and with more learning. For Danaeus having gone thus far, dare not now say that the government of women is a naughty, unhonest, or monstrous thing: (which term calvin used) for then, all the world would have straightway seen it, and cried out upon it, as a gross and manifest contradiction. But, he so fetcheth it about by little and little under hand, that in the end it comes all to one pass, as if had flat and plain denied it. And first here, as he hath so highly commended her majesties reign: so will he not seem to discommend, but to give at least some sober commendation, to those that will admit no such government. Notwithstanding (saith he) those people seem to have wisely looked unto their profit, Danaeus. which have taken heed unto (or provided) by their laws, and by a right (or law) public, lest that women should rule among them, and over them, and should have the chief right and government. If we confer the sex of the woman with the man's, because that unto many offices which the administration of a kingdom requireth, they are less apt and are unable, by reason of the nature and imbecility of their sex. As for example to govern an army, to pronounce the law sitting in public. Which things certainly do not become at all a woman's shamefastness. In commending the wisdom of those people which have provided by their laws, Bridges that women should not have the supreme government among or over them: Danaeus seemeth (though with more modest coverture than did Caenalis) to insinuate the French his country men. But with what wisdom they could devise better laws than God's laws, and oppose their caveats or provisions of those their laws, to cut off his laws: I refer to Danaeus and to the indifferent readers further deliberation. But, if we may conjecture by the event (as we have seen already out of Meierus, the Chronicler of the Low countries) this wise provision of their laws contrary to the provision of God's law, hath been the very folly, which hath made that realm of France refuse, to unite itself with this Realm of England and with all those countries, whereby such a mighty Monarchy might have grown, as might have both repressed the usurpation of Antichrist, and the invasion of the Saracens and Turks; the one having won and spoiled more than half, the other having seduced and tyrannised almost over all Christendom, without any Christian Monarch, sufficient to resist or stop them. For the kings of England that ever to their power, did most withstand these two open & privy enemies of Christ's Gospel, were either still crossed by the french▪ or, for want of this union, (that in right aught then to have been made) had not might sufficient to achieve it. While in the mean season, France hath felt, that the only maintaining of this their wise provision, hath been the greatest plague and scourge that ever France hath had, and the chiefest occasion of their greatest overthrows. And at this day (God be praised for it) England hath the light and liberty of the Gospel, and is so blessed withal, under her majesties most happy reign (as Danaeus saith) that would to God France and every Christian kingdom, yea, all the world had the like blessings of God, if it were according to his good will. Not, that they should be all governed still by women; for so is not England. But, not to debar the right of inheritance, no, not to a woman. And if all the world never saw so happy a reign as is the Queens of England: Why might we not charitably wish that all the world, France and all, might see the like happiness in their dominions? What could it prejudice if a woman now and then reigned over them, so long as God blessed their reign as he doth her Majesties? But now, where Danaeus draws his sentence further, with this conditional, if we confer the sex itself of the woman with the man's: If he add this, as a reason that moved the French or any other, to make this proviso against women's supreme government: then I answer, that indeed in this conferring; the woman's sex is inferior to the man's. Howbeit, government having rather relation to that principal person, that is represented in the government, which is God; and with all, to the ability, by the gifts and spirit of government, which God giveth to the party whom he advanceth; and also, to the right of inheritance, whereby the Governor claimeth title or comes thereto: the superiority is rather to be conferred, in these or the like respects or comparisons, In conferring the sexes, the man to be preferred. than in the sex of man & woman only. And yet, we grant, that the sex of the man (cateris paribus, all other things in conferring of them, being found to be equal) is evermore, The sexes conferred. as the more worthy, to be preferred before the sex of the woman. But if now, this conferring of the sexes, be referred to the later part of the sentence, Personal imbecility no bar to right of government. which rendereth a cause hereof, saying: because that unto many functions which the administration of a kingdom doth require, they are less apt and are unable, by reason of the nature and imbecility of their sex: then I deny this also to be a sufficient cause or reason, to debar any persons of their right to a kingdom, only for that they are not able, personally to administer many functions, which the administration of a kingdom doth require. For if he mean, that all Princes must of necessity administer all such functions in their own persons, or else they be not lawfully administered: then, not only (as we have showed) a man child (while he is a child) is clean cut off from the possession of a kingdom, and must, for conferring his age with the age of a man that is of riper years, be excluded: because that unto many functions which the administration of a kingdom requireth, the nature and imbecility of his age is less apt and is unable: but also of what age soever he be, Sickness. yet his sickness may so greatly, or so continually impair the strength of nature: that he may be even altogether unable, at least, the less apt to administer many of those functions. Yea, what health so ever he have also, and might, and wisdom: yet if he have many kingdoms or provinces under him, as diverse Princes had, that are not therefore improved in the scripture, Viceroys & deputies in personal absence. yea David, Solomon, jehosaphat, etc. had such Provinces too, and deputies in them: and how then can the king administer those functions in his provinces, personally? Yea, have he but one kingdom, and that but a small one too, yet will there still be many functions which the administration of a kingdom doth require, that he shall be driven to do by other persons in his name and right, and not all of them in his own person. If now, this administration of those functions by a deputy or minister in his name, and having authority from him, be good and lawful in a man: why it is not good and lawful also in a woman? If any reply, that although the King may appoint such deputies, yet he must appoint a man to do the actions that appertain to a man: I deny it not. But can not a woman Prince appoint men also to do them, as well as a man Prince can appoint them? But of that after, only this now, why should a woman be more bound to the personal administration of such functions, more than a man is bound? Or should she not rather, even for the nature & imbecility of her sex, be of the twain, (seeing she is the weaker, Deputies more allowed in women than in men and so the more to be honoured and borne withal) be permitted to administer all such functions by other men, as she can not administer by herself, without any prejudice to her right or supreme authority in the kingdom? The Apostle S. Peter went not thus strictly to work for Princes personal administration of all their functions, but saith 1. Pet. 2. v. 13. etc. submit yourselves unto all manner of human ordinance for the Lords sake, The ordinance of God. whether it be unto the king, as unto the superior, or unto the Governors, as unto them that are sent of him, etc. here he first nameth this general word, 1. Pet. 2.13. every human ordinace, or creature. For the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, comprehend both the ordinance created, & also the creature or person either of man or woman. And though he afterward specify the name of king, which rather seemeth to be limited to a man: yet his reason includeth both sexes, though according to the common phrase, he mention only the more worthy sex. Saint Peter's words stretch to men and women. As when he saith afterward, ver. 17. honour all men: he excludeth not the honour due to women, but includeth it. And v. 18. & 19 Servants be ye subject to your Masters withal fear, not only to the good & courteous: but also to the froward. For this is thank worthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering it wrongfully. here these words Master & man, are not limited to the sex, but are rather spoken of the persons. So by a courteous or a froward M. is meant also a courteous or a froward Mistress; & by man either any servant, or any person he or she that suffereth wrongfully. Neither only doth Peter in the term of one sex, include both: but meeteth also with this reason, that it is no disobedience to the king, but only to his deputy: & therefore saith he: or unto governors, as unto those that are sent of him. Which word him, if we refer to the king: If he may have such governors, as sent of him: so also may a Queen as sent of her. Calvin rather referreth it, as unto those that are sent of God. But this again makes for us. calvin in 1. Pet. 1. He signifieth (saith Calvin) all sorts of Magistrates, as though he should say, there is no kind of government, to which they ought not to subject themselves. He confirmeth this, because they are Gods ministers. For they that refer this pronoun (him) to the king, are much deceived. This therefore is a common reason to commend the authority of all Magistrates, that they rule by the commandment of God, & are sent of him. So that, what sorts of Magistrates so ever they be, we neither respect the difference of their states, whether in a Monarchy, or in an aristocraty, or in a popular common wealth: nor yet respect we the sexes of the governors, but God that placed them in authority, & for his ordinance sake we must obey them, and their ordinances, if they be not contradictory, but subalternal, to God their principal, that did send them. So that, the inability of the sex, is no more lawful pretence to repel the authority of the person; then is the inability of age, or of health, or of strength, or of knowledge, Examples of de●u●ies. to administer personally many functions that pertain to the administration of a kingdom. Pharaoh could not do many things pertaining to the administration of his kingdom, the joseph could do: neither Nabuchodonozer, that Daniel could do: nor Saul, that David: nor Oziah, that his tutors in his name could do: & yet was this no impechment to their states. But here Danaeus picks out two things, that he thinks by all means to be utterly inconvenient, for women to have any doing at all in them, Danaeus his exceptions. that is to wit, to be over an army, and to pronounce law sitting in public place of judgement. Prince's deputies. These two functions are such (I grant) as appertain unto a supreme governor, Two functions of a Prince to govern an army, and to sit in judgement. and are necessary both for war and peace, the two chief estates of every common weal: the one to defend them from their enemies, the other to maintain them among themselves. Howbeit, neither of these two functions, either to be a governor in war, or to be a judge in peace, are such functions, that if a Prince can not personally exercise the same, he should therefore be debarred from his right; or having it, he should surcease it. For if the king be a child, well may they live in hope of his riper years; but in that infirmity of his age, neither the activity of his body, nor the skill of his mind, will reach to the administering of these two functions. Yea, when he comes to man's estate, he may both be so weak in body, so faint in heart, and so unexpert in the feats of war: he may again be so simple in judgement, so unlearned in the laws, and may prove altogether so unapt for discerning and deciding of controversies; that neither child nor man, he may be able or apt for the personal administration of these functions. And what then? Shall he be clean excluded or deposed from his kingdom, for his only unability or unaptness in these functions? Or, on the other side, if we shall more safely conclude, that deputies may supply his imbecility herein, Azarias though for his sickness by himself he could not, yet by his deputies be administered these things. as we have seen, how Azarias remained king being a ●eper, separate and shut up from the people, neither able to govern an army, nor to sit in judgement: but to do these functions, and all other belonging to the administration of a kingdom, by his son jotham, who governed the house and judged the people of the land. 2. Reg. 15 ver. 5: can then not Christian Princes, where any imbecility of nature or of sex, maketh them less able to do these things themselves, supply them also by their deputies? Did David guide all his armies by his personal conduct, or not his greatest & most dangerous battles by his lieutenant joab? David's deputies. Yea 2. Sam. 18. ver. 3. the army would not suffer him to go to battle with them, but said: Thou shalt not go forth, for if we flee, they will not regard us, neither will they pass for us, though half of us were slain, But thou art now worth ten thousand of us, etc. And yet David ceased not to be their king still. Yea, he was the safer from danger in his person, & for the matter, he made no less noble conquests by his Captains. The Senate and people of Rome did all by deputies. The Senate and people at Rome conquered the most famous parts of all the world, and all or most by their deputies, whom they sent forth with their armies, while they sat still & debated the matters in the Capitol. And although that the sitting in public judgement and pronouncing right, be easier for the body of the twain: yet sith it requireth the knowledge of the laws (except Princes should sit for a show, or according to law will I, or resolve the doubt as Alexander undid Gordias his knot:) how many salomon's are there, that sit their selves in judgement, A Prince's functions. & some of them good Princes too, having learned & uncorrupt judges to administer those functions for them? But can any of them therefore be said, that he is not a lawful Prince, or no Prince at all, yea, Though a Prince can not decide controversies yet he ceaseth not to be a Prince. although he were also a dissolute and unjust Prince? If now these functions in men Princes, can be thus administered by the deputations of other men, experienced & approved in these functions: why should this supply be debarred from a woman Prince? What allegeth Danaeus against them? That though some men Princes do not these things; yet for women Princes, though they would, they can not? Nay, Danaeus is not yet so peremptory, that by any means they can not do it: but (saith he) these things become not at all women's shamefastness. Indeed shamefastness is one of the chiefest ornaments of women, and great reason it is, they should have a special regard to the comeliness and shamefastness of their nature. Neither is fight and martial affairs so fit for their imbecility and the profound discussing in pleas of right and law, doth commonly surmount the capacity of women, which as by custom they are not so enured and acquainted withal, so are they by nature (for the most part) more witty than wise, and more pregnant in invention of delightful matters, than deliberate in judgement of grave and doubtful controversies. Howbeit, we speak not now of the ordinary sort of women, but only of those that are supreme governors of a kingdom, which also falleth out very séeledome: nor yet ascribe we the ability of these functions to all those that are such women Princes. No more than it can be said also, How a woman Prince may do these actions. of all those Princes that are men, though it be no sufficient debar to the right of either of their estates, which is a far higher point in law, than is the personal administration of their functions. And yet, well may we justify this, that as God hath so given the administration even of both these functions to some singular women princes, without any stain at all unto their shamefastness: so upon especial occasion or necessity thereunto, why may we not conclude, when God calleth a woman prince to the supreme government of a kingdom, that she may in good order do these things, without any touch of blemish to the decency & honour of her shamefastness? I speak not of personal fight in the wars, like the Amazons & the french pucell: and yet in some necessity, women have put to their hands sometimes extraordinarily, to the defence of themselves, & striking of their enemies, & that without reproach. jael. As jael that killed Sisera, & got thereby great honour. jud. 4. and the woman that cast a piece of a millstone on Abimeleches' head, & broke his brain pan. Iud th'. jud. 9 And judith that cut off Holofernes head, & by her prudence and valour overthrew all his mighty army, and directed her people how to set forth their armies. But these were yet no governors of armies. And indeed it is one thing to strike the enemy, To govern an army. or to defend themselves, and another thing to govern an army. But have not we recited a number of those women that have governed armies, Governance of an army. & some of them without any discommendation, but rather to their high praise, besides the great benefit of their subjects? But to contain us in the bounds of the Canonical scripture; did not Deborah, Deborah. as well as Barak, go forth with the army, yea & chiefly govern it, both what number they should be, & who should be their Captain, and when they should give the onset; & of all this she took no shame but glory? And when the Queen of Sabaea, The Queen of Sabaea. came to Solomon with so great a train that Peter Martyr saith thereon, habuit multitudinem secum instar exercitus, she had a multitude with her as it were an army: did not she chiefly govern then? And why did not Solomon lay that in her dish, & tell her, that she could not be a Queen, because she could not with that shamefastness which becometh women kind, govern an army? No, nor Christ debarreth her of the title of a Queen, or of her due commendation, for all that matter. Neither Philip found this fault in the eunuchs Lady and Mistress, Candace the Queen of Aethiopia, Candace. that governed such an army, as we heard already out of Pliny & Strabo. Neither (besides the scripture) josephus finds this fault in Alexandra. Alexandra. And yet all these had, & must needs have had, armies and defences against their enemies, yea though they had peace with them. Therefore, notwithstanding this exception of Danaeus for the governing or being over an army, whether by their deputies (as Peter Martyr saith, the Queen of Sabaea might appoint her son, or some other in her absence;) or in case, by themselves, as herself conducted the troop that came with her to Solomon: Queens are not to be sequestered from all supreme government of a kingdom. Yea, they may so orderly govern over all their armies also, that they may still with honour and without shame, retain the decency and shamefastness of their calling. The other function, though it pertain more to peace and quietness: yet because it hath the hearing and debating of quarrels and brawls: Sitting in judgement. the contentious pleading of titles & doubts: the finding out and determining of right and law: seemeth to be as far from women's modest shamefastness and milder capacity, as the other in the broils of wars. And yet if we shall thoroughly consider this function, having granted the one, which is the harder, for the government over an army in the war: women will hope the better and plead in peace the harder, not to be clean debarred from the bar, nor yet from sitting in the judgement seat, if the importance of necessity or special occasion, and much more title of right, do call them to it, and they have able gifts to answer it. What authority in her City the wise woman of Abele had, The wise woman of Abele. 2. Sam. 20 (though she pleaded so wisely even in the wars with joab, and in giving counsel to her people for their peace,) Sitting in judgement. I will not examine because she was under God no supreme governor, nor sat in any public judgement, that we read of. But for Deborah it is expressly set down in the scripture that she judged Israel. Deborah. judg. 4. ver. 4. and that the children of Israel came up to her for judgement. ver. 5. If it be replied, this was a specialty, and therefore can not be drawn into any ordinary rule or example: although it may be well answered, that God did not draw such specialties from such persons, as otherwise in them the function had been monstrous and mere against nature: so that any person whom God calleth to authority, and furnisheth with his spirit of judgement, enhabling their inability, may take it on them, and look on Deborah for a precedent: yea, were the Prince a child, and had the gift of judgement beyond his age, (as had Daniel, or Solomon:) for all their rare and singular gifts, yet might he well set them before him for a pattern. But howsoever we exempt the example of Deborah: what shall we say to these two foresaid Queens of Sabaea and Aethiopia, The queene● of Sabaea & of Ethiopia. mentioned without touch of ignominy, if not rather of praise, both in the old and in the new Testament, at leastwise, approved to be lawful Queens? For, either the Princes personal execution in the administration, of this function pertaynining to the government of a kingdom, is not so necessary, but that they might do it, & did it by their deputies: or else these queens did sit their selves in public judgement, & yet no reproach or uncomeliness unto their shamefastness. But whatsoever they did then, Danaeus will prove that this should not now be done. And why not now? From hence (to wit, that it is utterly unseemly for the shamefastness of a woman, Danaeus. saith he) by the civil law of the Romans L. mulieres D. de regul. juris, women are rightly repelled from administering the functions and offices belonging to men, such as also are those that aught to be exercised in public. And the same is the saying of Augustine, Lt. de nupt●s. cap. 9 Neither can it be doubted, that men ought rather to be principal unto women, than women to men. Here is both the authority of the civil law, Bridges. & of this most famous Doctor of the Church S. Aug. alleged, against women's sitting in public judgement & their supreme government over men. To S. Aug. afterward in his order. Let us first consider the civil law hereon. The civil law. Not that I will take upon me lawyerlike, to answer this rule of the law of man, in such learned & full manner, as the professors thereof would do: it sufficeth me, that I find sufficient warrant for women's supreme government, out of God's law. Notwithstanding I deny not this law civil, so far as it cotrarieth not the law divine, which we & all Christendom are more bound unto, than to any civil law of the Romans. Io. Ramus in his Inchiridion (or manuel) de reg. juris, li. 2. axiom. 50. de Faeus. mentions this rule, & from whom Danaeus taketh it: Ulpian (saith he) doth say, judgement of women. that women are removed from all civil or public offices, Ulpian. both because it is not commendable for the shamefastness of the feminine sex, to be provoked to do those things which appertain to men: & also because the counsel of women is feeble, frail, and without the experience of matters. Ulpian allegeth examples, & therefore women can be no judges, nor demand (right) nor appear for other, nor be procurators. Of what women & matters Ulpian speaketh. Of the motives that induced hereunto this famous lawyer Ulpian, (and yet but an heathen Idolater, not knowing God's law, nor seeing such measure of his gifts among the heathen Romans in those days:) we shall after (God willing) see further, Danaeus leading us to the enquiry, what women have also governed the Roman Empire. As for this law, both properly is understood of the personal actions of such offices or functions, as appertain only to pleas, for hereunto he driveth all his examples: and so, no more restraineth the principality of a woman's supreme government over a kingdom, than it doth of a child's: neither is it further to be stretched, than serveth to the reasons here alleged, which only take place in the ordinary sort of women. But when as we have showed so many laudable examples to the contrary, and shall see further in the practice of the greatest states in Christendom: yea, Danaeus also himself hath specified some such examples, as in all points are answerable to all the virtues here required, and to many far more excellent, beside as firm, as constant, and as expert counsel of most weighty matters, as in the most & best Counsellors: among men, not only such as Holda, Holda. to whom josias, the high Priest, and the gravest Counsellors resorted for counsel: nor as judith, judith. that gave most godly, stout, and prudent counsel to the Priests, the Elders, and all the people: but (God be praised) by Danaeus own confession, we are not unfurnished in this behalf. And therefore such excellent women, are to be excluded from this rule of the civil law, but not from the rule of the civil government. But for our better proof hereof, to show how this rule of the civil law, debarreth not simply all women, Montholonius in promptuario divini & veriusque iurishum. especially not Princess, no, not from public sitting and pronouncing law in judgement; the promptuary of the three laws, to wit, the divine law of God, the Cannon law of the Bishops, and the Civil law of the Emperors, collected by Montholonius, as coming next to hand, may suffice (me thinks) both for the matter itself, and for the laws reaching to or restraining of this rule. Upon this sentence judg. 4. Deborah the wife of Lapidoth, was the Prophetess which judged the people, at that time (of jabin king of Chanaan) and she fate under a date tree, that was called by her name, between Rama and bethel in mount Ephraim, and the children of Israel came up to her for all judgement, etc. Upon the word she judged (saith Montholonius) By the law of man it is not permitted for women to judge or to exercise the office of a party that judgeth. The text is open, in L. faeminae. in princ. ff. de reg. juris. & in c. cum Praetor. §. 1. ff. de iudi. in C. 1. §. tria sunt. 3. quaest. 7. & in c. mulierem militem. in fi. 33. quaest. 5. which notwithstanding proceedeth not in the case that is put in c. dilecti. de arbi. where it is said: Dilecti fill Abbas etc. Our beloved sons, the Abbot and Covent of Sardinia of the Cistercien order, have by complaint declared unto us, that whereas among them of the one party, and the hospitalers (he meaneth those of the order of S. john, whom we called the Knights of the Rhodes, or now, of Malta) of the other party, a question was moved in suit of law, about the usage of a certain wood, it was by both parties compromitted to the French Queen: The french Queen's judgement. who understanding the merits (or rights) of the cause, thought good the definitive sentence to be promulgated or published by arbitrament. But, although according to the rule of the Civil law, women are removed from public offices: and in an otherl place it be said, that albeit they be of most high estimation, if they take upon them an arbitrament, or else being Patronesses, they interpose themselves in the hearing of matters among their tenants manumised (or made free) they are to be separated from all judicial examining, so that no penalty nor any exception of covenant may be taken against the contemners of them, by reason of their prolation: The custom & the f●ench law for women having jurisdiction. (or sentence that they have given forth) nevertheless, because of the custom approved, which in the parts of France is holden for law, women preexcelling are known to have an ordinary jurisdiction over their subjects: we therefore command, that by the penalty decreed in the compromise, the hospitalers observe the same arbitrament, even as it is providently set forth and received of either party, especially sith it hath been ratified with the presence and counsel of the Bishops. These words hath the text. Which well proveth that those which are preexcellent women (or of great nobility) may give judgement. Hereupon saith Angelus in his Counsels, Consil. 270. that he saw Queen joane sitting in the throne made for the judgement seat. And although this, to wit, that a preexcellent woman may judge, be understood by the gloss in the word. Regina. in c. cum devotissimam. 12. quaest. 2. & in §. 1. in the word mulieres. 15. quaest. 3. that it proceedeth only of custom, according as the foresaid chapter dilecti speaketh: notwithstanding this also proceedeth even by the common law, because although a woman can not judge, in that she is a woman, In what respect a woman may be a judge. notwithstanding if any dignity be delated (or brought) unto her, by reason whereof there belongeth withal a jurisdiction, she may exercise the jurisdiction. So doth Panormitane notably say by that text in c. dilecta. in 1. no. de arbi. & in ●. significavit. de rescript. Aug. wrested. And so peradventure may it be understood, that is here spoken of the Prophetess Delbora. Deborah. Howbeit, if it were the custom that women should judge, that custom ought to be kept, not only in women that were preexcellent; but also in others. For the cause that women can not judge, is brought in by custom only, Custom the overruler of this question. even as it is proved in the said law, cum Praetor. §. 1. in verbo. moribus ff. de indi. And in the said chapter. 1. § in verbo moribus. 3. quaest. 7. therefore, by the contrary custom, the contrary may be induced. So holdeth, after other by him alleged, Dominus meus Decius. in dicta lege. 2. Colum. 1. ff. de regu. juris. Thus we see, doth the civil law of the Romans answer the civil law of the Romans, and that not only in other regions, but especially in France, where the civil law is most in force, to the more full satisfaction of this objection, and rule of the civil law that Danaeus here allegeth. As for that which Danaeus annexeth out of Augustine, Lib. 1. de nuptijs cap. 9 saying: neither can it be doubted, that men should rather have principality over women, than women over men. S. Aug. wrested by Danaeus. I muse much that so excellent a man (as I gladly acknowledge Danaeus to be) could be thus far carried with affection, to cite a testimony of any Father, or any other in this manner, both clean besides the author's matter, which he was in hand withal, that should have fully declared his meaning: and even in that little sentence which he taketh, to leave out those especial words, that should have bounded all the sentence. Albeit, he ought to have taken notice, (at least wise, some inkling) where about S. Augustine went, even by the very title of the book that here he quoteth, de nuptijs, of marriages. So that the principal drift here of Augustine is not to prove the principality of civil government, that it is not compatible to a woman over men, but only to men over women: but he driveth all to that natural principality, which appertaineth to the sex, and to the state of marriage, for the propagation of man and womankind. Why one man was rather for that time permitted to have more wives, than one woman to have more husbands. And in that ninth chapter, Saint Augustine's purpose was, to prove, that although for propagation of children, one man was then permitted to have more wives: yet could it not be permitted to one woman, to have more husbands. For that would not increase, but rather hinder the propagation of children. For saith S. Augustine, If the multitude of wives had not therefore displeased the God of our Fathers (and which is our God also) that wanton lust should vaunt itself more abundantly: then eftsoons had the holy women likewise each one of them obeyed diverse men. Which if any had done, what had compelled her, but even the uncleanness of unlawful lust, that she would have more husbands: sith this licentiousness should not have had the more children? Howbeit, that not one man and many women, but one man and one woman, appertaineth rather to the goodness of marriages: even the very first conjunction of matrimony made by God, doth sufficiently declare, that marriages should fetch their beginnings from thence, where the example should be marked with more honesty. But the race of mankind proceeding forth, good women were joined to certain good men, the more women to particular men. Whereupon it appeareth, that the modesty of the dignity rather desired that: & the nature of fruitfulness permitted this. Man's principality in marriage over the woman. For principality also can be more naturally of one over many, than of many over one. (And here cometh in the sentence that Danaeus citeth) neither can it be doubted, by natural order, that men should rather have principality over women, than women over men. Which thing the Apostle keeping saith, The man is the head of the woman. And, women be ye subject to your husbands. And the Apostle Peter saith, 1. Cor. 11. even as Sara obeyed Abraham & called him Lord. Which although it be so, that the nature of the beginnings loveth singularity, and we shall more easily see a plurality in the subjects: notwithstanding, many women should never be lawfully joined to one man, except from thence many children should have been borne. Whereupon if she join herself with more men: because that from thence she hath not the multiplication of her children, but the frequenting of wanton lust, she can not be a wife but an harlot. This is all S. Augustine's whole chapter on this matter. What now is here that can be drawn (except it be drawn with violence) against a woman's principality over men, in respect of Civil government? True it is, that by way of comparison, he speaketh also here of civil principality. But doth he say, a woman can not be such a Prince, as in that respect of civil principality she can not be principal over many men that are her subjects? No, he hath no such words nor meaning: but only by the similitude of a Prince in the state civil, The plain meaning of S. Aug. he proveth the order of the natural & economical state. That scythe in natural order, the man by his sex, is the woman's head: and the woman also in the law & order of matrimony, which followeth the law and order of nature is subject to the man that is her husband: both which he proveth out of S. Paul's testimony in the new Testament, & by Abraham's & Sara's example in the old: ●●●●efore he concludeth, that in this natural & economical principality of the sex & of matrimony, it can not by any means be admitted, that the husband being the head & natural prince, should be more than one; & the woman being the subject in this law natural & economical, should be but one: & so one woman to have more husbands. Whereas, if the law of God had not been against it, it had been more orderly of the twain, for one man to have had more wives, (as it was a while permitted for propagation of mankind,) because this cometh nearer to the order of the civil state, where one Prince may have more subjects. But yet, he showeth in this similitude, Aug. true meaning. how the law of the natural and economical government in matrimony, differeth also in this comparison, from the law of the civil government. For all marriages must chiefly be leveled to the proportion of their first institution, the law whereof was, that they should be but two. Though process of time bred a permission to the contrary, for the respect of that, whereof now scythe there is no need: therefore in all marriages there ought to be but one man and he the principal, and one woman and she the subject. Whereas in the political or civil principality, there is one prince and many subjects. And therefore the comparison of these two kinds of principalities do not simply resemble nor imitate the one the other. Danaeus striketh out the very words that show S. Aug. meaning. This I take to be S. Augustine's plain meaning. And this sentence cited by Danaeus, had been plain enough, if he had but set down the whole words thereof. Neither can it be doubted, that by natural order, men should rather be principal to women, than women to men. Who may not easily perceive here, that he speaketh not simply of all principality: but such principality: only as ariseth, by natural order? And who denieth that? Or what is that to this purpose, of political order? And yet we deny not, but when these two orders, natural and political, can be orderly joined together; it is all the better. But there is a natural order also of inheritance, by which a woman may be nearer to civil principality than a man. Whereunto when by the civil law, yea by the law of God, there acreweth withal this civil or political principality. Then by that natural order of inheritance, the woman's government over the man, is not to be debarred, for any natural prerogative of the man's sex or marriage over the woman. And so when all is done, this sentence of S. Augustine is no absolute prohibition to a woman's principality over men, if it rather in some cases do not allow it, when he saith, it is not to be doubted, that by natural order, men should rather be principal to women than women to men. But as we speak not now, so much of natural order: so neither speak we of that, that were of twain the rather, if men might have their choice. But they that can not have Princes as they would, must be glad, at least wise, content with them, as they may. And where God, & law, & nature, calleth women to this civil principalility: we must not there stand descanting, what we had rather have them, but obey them as the higher powers of God, whether they be men or women. And sith S. Augustine, in the sentence before this cited by Danaeus, & as the ground thereof, doth say: for principality also is more naturally of one over many, S. Aug. alloweth women's principality over men. than it can be of many over one: and the same S. Aug. in other places clearly alloweth a civil principality unto women: then must it needs fall out, that either he must admit such a state of women's government as was among the Amazons, where no men were: or else, that this woman governor might have principality over men. But if now, this plac● be too weak, Aug. for women's government. to infer any thing against women's principality: if any here in searching further S. Augustine's meaning, would corroborate the same, with that sentence which is contained in the 45. Question out of the old testament. Tom. 4. For how can it be said of a woman, that she is the Image of God: sith that it is evident, she is subject to the government of the man, and hath no authority, for she can not teach, nor be a witness, Another objection. Tom. 4. Aug. 45. Quest. ex vettest. nor give faith (or take an oath) or judge: how much less is she able to govern. These words indeed, come both a little nearer to the purpose, than doth the sentence that Danaeus allegeth, and also specify the particulars mentioned in the rule of the civil Law aforesaid. Albeit that the former answer may satisfy wellynough, likewise, all that here is said: yet I hope our Brethren will not justify this work to be S. Augustine's: nor yet this sentence, if it were his. The Question is this. Quomodo homo ad imaginem Dei factus sit, & utrùm ad dominationem, & an mulier quoque. How man should be made to the Image of God, & whether unto government, and whether also a woman? Whether man & woman were both made to i Image of God and to government. It seemeth notwithstanding to some (saith this suborned Augustine) that man was made to the Image of God in government: and because he saith, let him rule over the fishes of the sea, and over the Fowls of the heaven, and over the whole earth: sith that these things are seen to be subject not only to man, but also to Woman, who it is evident hath not the Image of God. Which thing verily wanteth reason, two ways. For by this it is avouched, that neither God spoke to his Son, Let us make man unto our Image and likeness: but unto the celestial governors, which the Apostle rehearseth, if that man have the image of God in Government: and it is given to the woman, that she also should be the image of God, which is absurd. And so followeth this sentence above cited. Now, as we hold not this opinion, Wherein the Image of God consisteth. that the Image of God, consisteth wholly or chiefly in dominion, but withal, and much more, in that integrity of holiness and righteousness, whereunto S. Paul exhorteth us, & declareth that Christ hath reform us, which appertaineth as well to women as to men: so, how can this author then, maintain this to be absurd, and demand how it can be spoken of a woman that she is the image of God, sith there are more, and more excellent respects of God's Image in us, than Dominion? But rather, how do his own words hang together, in saying, the woman hath no authority? and yet he goeth about to prove, that this Image of God cannot be unstoode of government, because she hath government with the man, according to the words of God. Which words are not, as he cities them, Let him rule, but, let them rule, referring the authority of rule, both to Man and woman. But as S. Augustine himself in this point of God's Image, is so curious about the powers of the soul, to resemble the mystery of the Trinity, and so variable thereon in many places, that our Brethren their selves, dare not rest upon him: so, can they press us the less, by his opinion herein. Not but that we accord to the sense hereof, whereunto Saint Paul (as we have showed apply it) 1. Cor. 11. verse 7. The man ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the Woman is the glory of the man. Whereupon (saith calvin,) The same question may now be moved of the Image, that was before of the head. In what respect woman is God's Image, and in what, the man's. For, either sex is created to God's image, neither doth Paul bid the women less than the men, to be reform unto that Image. But the Image whereof now he speaketh, is referred unto the order belonging to Marriage. In which sense, and in all other prerogatives, that God by nature hath given to Man, yea, & that in all civil principalities, we evermore so grant the preferment to the Man: that they be not absolutely denied from the Woman. For that was so little the meaning of S Augustine to affirm that Women can not possibly and lawfully have any civil principality over men: that in his 253. sermon, de tempore, he acknowledgeth so far forth the Queen of the South, that he maketh her not only a good and lawful Queen: but to be a notable figure of Christ's Church. S. Aug. allowance not only of the Q of Sabees government, but also of Semiramisses reign. And avoucheth also (as do the other historiographers) that Semiramis reigned over the Assyrian Monarchy. Li. de Civit. Dei. 18. cap. 2. and that Ino came out of Ethiopia into Egypt, and that being a Queen, long iusteque 〈◊〉 pericaueri●, she reigned far at large, and righteously. And therefore after her death, they worshipped her for a Goddess. Whereby we may easily see, that S. Augustine doth not utterly condemn the civil principality of a woman over men. Danaeeus now thinking that this was the resolution both of the civil Law, and also of this famous divine: concluding hereupon with the practice of the chiefest state in Christendom, would clean carry away all the matter. Danaeus. Whereupon (saith he) a Woman can not be Empress of the Romans and Queen. And when Athalia in judea, & Irene the Mother of Constantine the third, would take upon her the Empire of Constantinople, either of them overthrew all things, brought in the worship of Idols into the Church of God, and this Woman (to wit Irene) laid open the Empire of Rome to be torn of the Saracens. Whereupon also Charles the great was at that time to be chosen into the Roman Empire in the West, and Nicephorus in the East. It is an old saying, show me not the meat, but show me the man. And therefore I like this order of Danaeus well, Bridges. to examine the practice of this thing. The practice of women's government. But he saith the woman can not be showed in this practice. For, a woman cannot be the Roman Empress & Queen. Although these speeches seem so ambiguously spoken, that the meaning may be construed divers ways: Empresses. since that (as these terms are now in use) one may be called King of the Romans, and another Emperor of Rome: For example, Charles the fift, being Emperor of Rome, his Brother Ferdinand was King of the Romans, (which title is used rather for security of succession, than present possession of the state) and so peradventure it mae be true, A woman hath been Empress & Q of Rome as chief governor. a Woman can not be Empress of Rome and Queen also: Notwithstanding, I take Danaeus in no such sense, nor yet, to be as Empresses and Queens under their husband's government, and without all rule, save only bearing these Titles and names, in the honour of their husbands, and no further: but (I take) that he meaneth, no Woman hath had the chief governance and administration of the commonweal in the Roman Monarchy. Which saying if it were true, albeit it were the less to be regarded, though a woman could not be there the Empress and Queen, sith in so many places else (as we have sufficiently declared, and Danaeus hath also clearly granted) a Woman might well be either Queen or Empress, that is to say, the principal or supreme governor of a Monarchy: yet how can this be true, even for that state, by Danaeus own confession, when he straightways acknowledgeth, that Irene was the Roman Empress? If it can not be, how then was it? except he understand it, that she could not be by Law, and therefore, he compareth her with Athalia: But we shall examine that, anon in order. Let us first (even from the shell) behold that state, but chiefly, after this title and authority of the Emperors, and so shall we fully be resolved for the practice. Functius citeth out of Berosus. A view of the women governors in Italy and the Roman state. Tab. 15. that Europs the second K. of the Sicionians sent his daughter Crana Helerna into Italy with certain colonies of people. Which woman was by voices chosen and exalted to be their Q. unto whom he gave a white sceptre. And that this was about 20. year before the birth of Abraham, & about 50. before the death of Noah. Moreover he allegeth out of Berosus, tab. 28. that Kitim, who for the excellency of his mind, was of the progeny of janus, called the Italian Atlas, gave in marriage his daughter Electra unto Coabus Blascon Prince of the progeny of janus. Who for this marriage sent certain colonies beyond the alps near to Italy, & Italus doth consecrate his daughter Roma to be under him the queen of the ancient inhabitants of that country. This Roma laid the first foundations of the city of Rome, which were afterward so beautified by Romulus, that it was worthily called a City. As he also confirmeth it out of Quint. fab. pictor, & Sempronius, In divis. But as Danaeus here cutteth us off, from searching all the Antiquities of Rome, to the time of the Roman Emperors: so this his assertion cannot stand: & that even in diverse of the Emperors themselves also living and reigning, not of the worst, but of the best Emperors that have been. I stand not on this, that all the Empresses in general, Empresses of Rome. were advanced to the participation of this honour, that they are called Augustae, and have their coins of money with their names and pictures, so well as the men: sith this might be be rather ascribed to the participation of honour, than to the administration of government. Neither will I cite (as any argument to infer the practice of women's government) the most dissolute and voluptuous time of Heliogabalus, The occasion of Vlpians law against women judging. when the Emperor himself was so effeminate, as is not to be written, & the insolency of his wicked mother Semiamira which ruled all the state, had a Senate of Women by themselves, which caused the Romans afterward, specially tha● famous lawer Vlpianus to make that foresaid Law, that Women should not sit in judgement, nor govern in the common weal. And yet notwithstanding, this Law was kept so small a while, that even in the days of Alexander Severus the next and immediate emperor (which also among the heathen is accounted one of the best Emperors) both his grandmother Moesia and after her his mother Mammea, being excellent Women, had the public administration and government of the common weal together with him, all the whole continuance of his Empire, even in the life of Ulpian, that was (as Chytreus calleth him) Chancellor to Alexander Severus. And although the Emperor Valens were both a rash governor and an Arian, and thereby came to a miserable end: yet his wife Dominica Augusta is greatly commended for her virtue, and among other things, for her public government of the Roman Empire, while through her noble and politic conduct, Dominica Augusta. she overcame the Huns, the Alanes, and the Goths, when they besieged Constantinople, and thereby she preserved the Empire. Eudoxia. Eudoxia also the wife of the Emperor Arcadius had all or the chief administration of the Empire, wherein although she were to insolent, in causing chrysostom to be banished: yet argueth it, that women were not then thought uncapable, of the public administration of the Empire. But howsoever the mother did somewhat misgovern the state: Pulcheria in the nonage of her brother Theodosius. her daughter Pulcheria is greatly of all the writers recommended. For when her father Arcadius died, and committed the tutelship of his young son Theodosius to Isigerdis King of Persia, but especially to his daughter Pulcheria: she so politicly governed the Empire, and brought up her young Brother in so godly education: that he proved one of the most excellent Emperors. Neither ceased her government even of the Prince's Court and all the affairs, even when Theodosius came to his full years, and that she had procured him a wife, and in the time of his best government And when as by subtle subordination or her evil willers she was removed from the government, and Eudocia the Empress had all the administration of the commonweal, under her husband Theodosius for seven years space: Pulcheria was not only afterward restored, and so continued all Theodosius reign: but also she advanced Martianus to the empire, another most noble Prince, and set the crown on his head, and with him governed the Empire of Rome, not married unto him, but continuing all her life a most renowned virgin, and in that sense, as not holding the empire under Martianus, but jointly with him, is of Zonara's called Empress. Theodora the wife of justinian, Theodora in the lunacy of justinian. while her husband was not well in his wits, had the most part of the government of the Empire in her hands, and imprisoned Vigilius the Bishop of Rome. After justinian, justinus succeeded, who when he died left Tiberius his successor, giving him in charge for his Widow Sophia, Sophia widow of justinus. ut eam (saith Cuspinian) veluti Dominam ac reginam obseruaret, that he should hold her in reverence as his Lady and Queen. Moreover Martina the wife of Heraclius, after her husband's death reigned jointly with her son about two years. After whom, about the space of sevenscore years, came this Irene whom here Danaeus only, Irene. of all the Roman Empresses, doth mention, saying: And when Athalia in jury, and Irene the Mother of Constantine, the third, would bear the rule at Constantinople: Danaeus. either of them overturned all things, brought the worship of Idols into the Church, and this woman (Irene) laid open the roman Empire to be torn in pieces by the Saracens. Whereupon Charles the great was to be chosen into the Roman Empire in the West, and Nicephorus in the east. Of the usurpation of Athalia we have heard sufficiently before. The Empress Irene, notwithstanding she maintained the worship of Images, Bridges and called by her supreme authority the second Nicene Idolatrous council: the histories nevertheless accord, that she was then lawful Empress of Rome, yea the doing itself declareth, that she had the chief stroke in the government. And so reigned together, with her son, ten years. And when he had deposed her, she again deposed him, and caused his eyes to be put out. Wherein although she showed herself not so natural a Mother, yet (were the good or bad,) this infringeth Danaeus rule, Irenees government lawful notwithstanding her faults. that a woman cannot be the Roman Empress and Queen. But Danaeus chargeth her that she overturned all things, brought in Idolatry, and laid open the Empire to be torn of the Saracens. If she had done all this: yet argueth it the stronger, that she had the chief government, or else she could never have done it. Neither do I defend, but utterly mislike her doing, both against the true worship of God, in setting up Images: and against the course of nature, in putting down her son. But in that superstitious age, were not many Kings as far to blame for Images as was Irene? and yet for all that, they were lawful Kings. Neither is it meet, how superstitious or unnatural to her son soever she were, to charge her (for the more reproach to women's government) more than with matter of truth, and in truth she so little laid open the Roman Empire to the Saracens, wasting at that time the East parts, or any part of the Empire, that not only she once stopped all their great army, by intercepting their victuals: but also another time in plain battle overcame them. By which noble doings, she bought her peace with them far more honourable, than many Emperors before had done, The praise of Irenees administration. or did after her. Volaterrane saith, she governed all things with great prudence. Zonara's saith, she sent also Legions to repress the incursions of the Arabians: the Agarens therefore going forth to seek their prays, when they chanced on the Romans army, were put to flight, many of them being overthrown. Cuspinian with Volaterrane affirmeth this of her, Mulier una rebus administrandis aptissima, & omnino nata. That she was the only Woman that was most fit and altogether borne for the affairs to be administered. Neither was there any need to choose Nicephorus, but violently and with craft while Irene was sick, he got the Empire from her, and ruled it far worse than she did. And as for Charles the great chosen Emperor in the West, it came nothing by the occasion of this Empress, but by the falsehood of Leo the Bishop of Rome and his predecessors, that under pretence of Images, had rebelled in the time of Leo Isaurus her father in law, and utterly revolted from the Empire of the Grecians, Irene the means to have the Empire reunited. and fled to the French. Nevertheless the Empress Irene by her prudence so laboured the matter, that by the marriage of Charles the great and her, the West and the East Empire had been reunited into one state, but that by the treason of Nicephorus she was hindered and disposed. Not long after, succeeded Theodora with her son Theophilus. Theodora. For (saith Cuspinian) he being a child was not able to order the reins of the Empire, and the administration of Irene the mother of Constantine, made that the Grecians not unwillingly received the Empire of a woman. This Empress was no less superstitious for the worship of Images than was Irene, and yet otherwise for her politic government eleven years space, The Grecians willing admission of women's Government. she is greatly praised, and her deposition was her sons overthrow. Besides these, not only Zoe alone, but her sister Theodora afterward together with her, were both Empresses, and had the chief government of the Empire. Eudochia also with her sons, and after with Diogenes, three years. Now, if that after the Empire was divided, Eudochia. Danaeus account not these for Empresses of Rome: (albeit the Chronicles do still so call the East Empire) notwithstanding what shall we say of Theophania the Empress, that subdued Rome, and all the coasts about it unto her Son Otto? Theophania the Mother of Otto. And did not the mother also of Henry the fourth Govern the Empire, while her Son for his youth was not yet able? And how then, having so many examples of women's Government in that state, while it was entire, & being severed in either part thereof: can this saying of Danaeus be upholden, that a Woman cannot be Empress of the Romans? As for that he addeth, that a Woman likewise cannot be queen: If he refer it to the Romans, call her Empress, or queen, or any other Title of chief sovereignty under God, Empress or Queen. so she have the supreme Government of that Monarchy, either in her own name, or the chief administration of the Commonweal, in the name of another, as we see in the diversity of these examples, it comes all to one reckoning and sufficiently satisfieth the question of women's public Government. And as it was thus of the Roman Empire, so for other Kingdoms in Christendom, of the lombards, of Cicilia, Polonia, Suetia, Demnarke, Boemia, etc. Because also we find that every one of these have been governed by Women, since the time they have received the faith of Christ: The government of women in their states. I refer then over to those divers Regions, which Danaeus saith, do admit the right of women's chief Government, so well as England Spain and Scotland do, as appeareth by their particular histories. Now when Danaeus hath thus far discoursed of women's supreme Government over empires and Kingdoms: descending down, he granteth women's supreme Government in inferior states, and saith: But where inferior jurisdictions, such as are Dukes, earls, Barons, Castellanes, are patrimonial (or succeeding by inheritance) as in France: Danaeus. they verily in my judgement, may be holden and possessed by Women, because these dignities & offices are not chief empires. And in my judgement, this is but a mere shift, and frivolous devise (if I may be so bold so to call it) to elude the matter. For although I might show, how diverse Dukedoms have been turned into Kingdoms, as Boemia, Polonia, Muscovia, Croatia, Dalmatia, etc. And Kingdoms turned into Dukedoms, as ostrich, Burgundy, Lombardy, Gascoin, Britanny, &c: And some Dukedoms hold the mere royalties, save the bare Title of kings, acknowledging no superior Prince, If other sta●es that have royalties be compatible to women: than Danaeus hath assoiled all his own arguments. as Venice or perhaps Florence. etc. Or in some respect of vassaiship, they be ●eodatarie, inferior to Emperors and Kings, as Saxony, Bavier, Prussia, Cleveland, Gelderland, etc. Besides many that be united unto kingdoms as Nomandie, Guien, Britanny, Lancaster, Cornwall, etc. Or holden of kings in respect of other Titles, as Milan, Brabande, Holland, Zeelande, Friselande, etc. Besides many Earldoms and Baronnies also under Emperors and kings: yet, sith in Danaeus judgement, all these Dukedoms, Earldoms and Baronies, or the most of these be patrimonial, that is to say, may pass in the right of succession and inheritance, and so be holden and possessed of Women: then is the Question clearly evicted, that a Woman may be a public governor. Magistracy patrimonial. Which being granted it is not the greatness or smallness nor the quality of superiority, nor yet the supremacy, any more than the inferiority, that can be a sufficient debar unto them. But if any thing be, it must be the nature itself of public government, or else, if she may have the jurisdiction of a Duchy, Earldom or Barony, she may have it of a kingdom also. Yea, and in my judgement, against his judgement, she may have the higher dignities much better than the inferior dignities: because the higher, require the less personal exercise of those functions and actions that the inferior dignities & offices do require. And therefore where he saith: But nevertheless these jurisdictions neither can neither aught to be exercised of the same women. Danaeus. I gladly grant hereunto, for some of these jurisdictions, and for the ordinary exercise of them. Bridges. But this also is against Danaeus himself. For if in these inferior dignities, the jurisdictions may be exercised by another, and yet they may be held and possessed, and that by patrimony, as well of women as of men: Danaeus ouerturnes all his own arguments. then what letteth, but that it may be so, and that much more easily, in the supreme government of a kingdom? And withal, this answereth all Caenalis and Danaeus former arguments, that a woman can not govern an army, nor sit in public judgement, nor can do those things that belong to men. May not these things be done in Dukedoms, Earldoms, and Baronies, so well as in kingdoms? and if they hinder not a woman's possession of the one: why hinder they her possession of the other? but here again Danaeus groweth into a misliking, and saith: Danaeus. Although this be utterly evil, and most naughtily received any where, that jurisdiction should be any part of patrimony, and of our rent (or revenue) and dominion. But so largely stretcheth and rageth covetousness over all, that it hath made the things that are most holy, as is magistracy, to be patrimonial, and numbereth it in a rent, but attributeth it not to the virtue and doctrine of them, that are capable of the same functions. Bridges. This is a most dangerous conclusion that Danaeus here maketh of this matter. For by this rule, that Magistracy should not be patrimonial, or that it is utterly evil and naughtily any where received, that jurisdiction should be any part of patrimony: This position toucheth too near the grounds of our faith, besides the spoil of all princes and kingdoms he quite condemneth not only all the ancient birthright of the patriarchs, but also the prophecy of jacob▪ Gen. 49. ver. 10. The sceptre shall not be taken from juda, and a governor from his Loins, until he come with us to be sent, and he shall be the expectation of the Gentiles. And was not this promise renewed to David, 2. Sam. 7. ver. 12. And to Solomon 1. Reg. 9 vers. 5. Which promises so continued, until their accomplishment in jesus Christ, that always either in the supreme jurisdiction of the kings, or at the least in some jurisdiction, and that in matters capital pertaining to the Sanedrin, the Tribe of juda, the root of jesse, the stock of David, and Solomon, or Nathan, had patrimonial jurisdiction. Yea, Very slanderous & dangerous speeches. the high Priest and all the Priests add all the Levites in that time before Christ, had also their jurisdictions patrimonial. And therefore patrimonial jurisdiction is not a thing utterly nought any where, and brought in by the rage of covetousness, for it was then brought in by God himself. And though that sacrificing Priesthood be ceased in Christ, and the Ecclesiastical jurisdiction of our ministery now be not patrimonial: yet can we not so say of the Civil magistracy. For though Christ be both the King and Priest, How Christ● kingdom was patrimonial prefigured by both their estates: yet sith he would not meddle with the external civil state of the magistracy, in such real manner as he meddled with the Ecclesiastical, wherein he both taught personally, and personally also offered up himself, for a full and perfect sacrifice, to translate that Priesthood, and to rest it for ever in his own person, and founded (in that respect) a new ministery unto us: but in the civil dominion he would not take upon him the kingdom due to him, but all in spiritual manner, confessing himself, though to be a King, yet that his kingdom was not of this world: therefore the civil jurisdiction of magistracy and dominion, being allowed of God to be patrimonial before, (though the jews policy and civil jurisdiction be extinguished,) remaineth entire throughout all Christendom, and over all the world wheresoever it be, in the same nature, for this respect of patrimony, that it did before, as a matter that Christ neither translated, altered, nor meddled withal. These speeches therefore of Danaeus, are most dangerous speeches, and not true. For hereby he utterly condemneth all Prince's titles of inheritance, as well of men as of women. Yea, he clean cotrarieth all, that his self hereupon hath said before, and almost even his own last words. Did he not say, that inferior jurisdictions, such as are of Dukes, Earls, Barons, Castellanes, are patrinomiall? And how then saith he here, Danaeus still confutes his own positions. It is utterly nought wheresoever it be, that jurisdiction should be any part of patrimony? May this serve (trow ye) for a sufficient excuse, to salve this most perilous assertion, because that through covetousness, virtue and learning is not always preferred? Where election is to be used, there (I grant) virtue and learning is to be preferred. Yea, there oftentimes, patrimony is of purpose excluded, although there be both sufficient virtue and learning in the persons. The dangers of turning out patrimonial magistracy & bringing in election. But that the jurisdiction of all magistracy & dominion should go by election, and none by patrimony, would not only abrogate all that hitherto both in the Scripture, and in all Realms Christian and Heathen, universally have been approved for good, lawful, expedient, and necessary: but would call in question all estates: yea, it would turquise and set all the world together by the ears. Hottoman I know also what calvin saith on the 17. of Deut. upon this point. But in reverence I forbear him, and rather construe his words (in the gentlest sense I can) only unto such offices, as may or should still pass by election. Nevertheless I wish, that those so excellent men had not measusured all states by theirs, but remembered the old Proverb, Maior est orbis urbe: and that they had used in those sir important matters, more circumspect and advised speeches. For some of our Brethren (I think) on their credit (if I may not rather call it credulity) and imitation of such notable men, have adventured further over the shoes, than standeth with the due obedience of Christian (specially Protestant) subjects. Neither have the disobedient Papists herein the advantage of us, we being so far from any of their accustomed rebellious practices, that we suffer not so much as any of these incommodious speeches, to have escaped any of our dearest brethren, howsoever otherwise in Christ we honour them, and in the Gospel agree with them. As for that Danaeus referreth lastly us to see the Canon, Mulierem. 33 Quest. 5. of this argument: it sufficeth to refer him also, unto that we have already seen, for the laws full resolution of the same. Now although on this foresaid occasion, I have thus far withdrawn thee, not unwilling I hope to follow me (gentle Reader) from our brethren's Learned discourse, upon the occasion of their citing Saint Paul, for the uncomeliness that he reproved among the Corinthians. 1. Corinth. 14.28. That Women should preach in the Church: Whereupon, in perusing the judgement of these excellent men, calvin and Danaeus, they strait lead us from women's economical or domestical and matrimonial obedience, and government of man, to this question of women's public and civil government; which they impugn by these arguments and contumelies aforesaid: following with Caenalis the French faction, against the title and right of women's government: which hath carried me also into so whole a Discourse, The Occasion of this digression from women's government. that I would gladly have here stayed the course thereof, with desire of pardon, both of Danaeus, (which is, GOD be praised, yet alive, and otherwise an excellent ornament in God's church) that I have thus opposed myself against his opinion, for the danger of letting these things go clear away unaunswered (which I marvel hitherto none hath looked unto) and therefore I thought it not amiss, thus by the way, to satisfy the scrupulous Reader somewhat in this point, and hope of the easier pardon for this long digression, though not impertinent, but much important: yet now, being even ready to return to our brethren's Learned discourse: see how another couple (though an uneven pair) of famous writers as were before, Caenalis and Danaeus: so now Bodinus and Hotomannus, the one (whatsoever the other is) professing the Gospel, but both, excellently learned and of great estimation, Bodinus. Hottomannus & Bodi nus against women's government. are afreshe come forth, and renew this question of women's government: I am therefore for the closing up of this matter, to crave even a little further patience of the reader, to give but one turn more to either of them, for the short hearing of a few their chiefest arguments, and then with all my heart again have with our Brethren. Hottomannus in his 19 Chap. of his Franco gallia, maketh modestly and wisely before hand, his open protestation, saying: Primum autem, etc. But first we will have that to be openly testified, that we dispute not of the ordinances of the Romans, nor of the right of other Nations, but alonely of our Franco gallia. Hottomannus in Franco gallia, cap. 19 And he toucheth there but the women's procuration of that Kingdom in the name & right of their sons or husbands, and though he pry more narrowly into their faults, or lay such faults unto them as they deserved not, by the testimony of other Chroniclers: yet we have the less to regard those quarrels, having seen enough already even in France, for the confirmation of our principal question. And if he start out of the bounds of his Franco gallia, he is to be reclaimed to his own protestation. As for Bodinus, is a great deal more blame worthy, that writing in general of the common weal, Bodinus de Repub. li. 6. cap. 5. not only utterly excludeth women's government, but loadeth it after Caenalis & the French manner, with heaps of untrue reports & cholerik speeches. Who notwithstanding, having been here in England, and with whom myself I have conferred, and he with his eyes hath beholden the excellency of her majesties government, and in admiration confessed the same, yea, he hath been vouchsafed her majesties nearer access and gracious conference: and yet see the unthankfulness of the man, shall I say for the indignity of the fact, of a man otherwise so learned (yet in his other works not without great escapes) Ad vomitum canis, How much Bodinus is blame worthy. et sus lota ad volutabrum? He hath since contrary to his certified conscience, and (as some say) to his solemn promise, not only renewed but amplified and aggravated his former follies. And where they were half hid before among his French, he hath now translated them into Latin, as by a tongue universally more known, to deface the government of women in all nations, but alack poor, vainglorious and intemperate man, in the judgement of all godly wise, he procureth but his own blemish. And yet, to give him where he is praise worthy, his one praise, How much Bodinus is worthy praise. before he enter into this question, even in the same Treatise, libro. 6. de Rep. capitulo. 5. concerning a Princes right of inheritance against election. And in discoursing the dangers of the states, that are governed by elected Princes, I must needs confess, that he hath many singular and worthy observations, and deserveth no small praise and commendations. Bodinus arguments. But when he cometh page 738. to women's government, the foresaid French toy▪ in the old jealousy of the English title, strait takes him in the head, and carries him quite beyond all God's forboad, further than any of his Countrymen, and more fondly. And first he maketh a boistious beginning, Hoc amplius oportet ab imperiij maiestate quám longissime foeminas arcere: est enim Gynaecocratia naturae legibus inimica, etc. Bodinus. Moreover this, we must drive women furthest off from the majesty of Empire (or government) for the government of women is an enemy unto the laws of nature, which hath given prudence, strength, magnanimity, force of governing unto men▪ from women hath she bereft them. Bridge's How untrue this ground is, we have heard before at large, albeit we have not here to consider simply, the course and force of nature uncorrected, which is vicious and defective in all men: Nature unreformed, and reform. but when nature is with grace reform and strengthened, in such persons as God advanceth. Or if not, yet the defects of nature are no good bar against right of inheritance by God's law. Or else, the inheritance also of many a man Prince, might be likewise debarred. Bodinus. But Bodinus said before, page. 728. Nec tamen satis est successione regnum dari, nisi proxim● cuique tribuatur, etc. Neither only is it enough, that the kingdom should be given by succession: except it be given to any which is the nearest, that is, to the first begotten male: for so, not only the order of nature & of God's law, but also of all nations every where requireth. Bridges. This is most true, if in want of the male issue, the female be not excluded, for this is neither the law of God, nor the law of nature, to exclude the parents natural issue legitimate, from the parents' possessions, nor the law nor practice (to which Bodinus appealeth) of all nations: but a peculiar devise of France contrary to all these Laws. But when such devices take place against the right of succession due by God's law, the law of nature, and the law of all nations: See how Bodinus confuteth himself even by his own examples, Bodinus examples confute himself page. 729. Nam quoties naturae ius illud inter principes violari contigit, etc. For so often as that law of nature shall happen to be violated among Princes, most grievous wars (such as we read there were, Bodinus. among the posterities of the progeny of the Ottomans) and most lamentable murders of their kindred did ensue: as when Amulius the younger brother, gate the kingdom of Albania from Numitor, & Aristobulus gate the kingdom of the jews from Hyrcanus. For the civil war; could ever find an end, until by the sentence of Pompey the great▪ the kingdom was restored to Hyrcanus: notwithstanding Aristobulus seemed to be borne for government, and the other unfit thereto. Which reason hath oftentimes eaused the parents themselves to disturb the rights of their children.. Bodinus. For when Ptolomeus the son of Lagus, breaking the law of Nations, gave the kingdom of Egypt to the younger: Ptolomeus Lagi filius. he caused the laws of nature to be violated, by the one brothers murdering of the other. Ptolmeus Phisco offended in the same error. Who (being induced by the persuasion of his wife) preferred the younger before the elder. But when the Father was dead, the people expelled the younger, and restored the Sceptres to the elder. Anaxandrides also, Anaxandrides the king of the Lacaedemonians, took the kingdom away from Cleomenus his eldest son, that the younger might reign, not without great grief of the people, because that (under the show of virtue) the laws of nations were broken, as Herodotus writeth. And although Pyrrhus had appointed the most valiant of his sons to be the king to come: Pyrrhus. the people for all that preferred the eldest, which was more unmeet for the war. For, neither the virtues of the body or of the mind ought to be so esteemed, that for them we should serve from the common Law of all nations. Thus writeth Bodinus, and more at large. Yea, adding this withal, The l●we of nations ought not to be broken for the virtues or defects of the mind or body. page. 730. Nec tantum propter ignaviam et inertiam primogenitus ab imperio non est repellendus, sed nec propter corporis deformitatem quiaem. Neither only aught the eldest to be repulsed from the government, for his slothfulness and dullness: no, nor yet for the very deformity (or misshapennesse) of his body. Albeit by the laws of Romulus and Lycurgus, it were lawful to kill the monstrous births: notwithstanding, the Law of God suffereth not the prerogative of the first borne, to be taken away by any deformity of the body. Which thing the Senate and people of Hungary adjudged, in an example worthy memory. For when Ladislaus was childless, he adopted Almus his brothers younger son, refusing Coloman whom he commanded to be entered into holy orders, and to be sent (as it were banished) unto Parise, Colomans' deformity. to take from him all desire of affecting the kingdom. For all over the whole state of his body he was deformed, a stammerer a buzzard, a limper, a crook back. Nevertheless when the king was dead, the Cities and the people had rather call that monster to the government, than suffer the government of the younger, and by their Ambassadors obtained of the Bishop of Rome, that he might be disgraded of his orders, sent home, and marry a wife. And no otherwise did Agesilaus, being a lame dwarf get the kingdom of the Lacaedemonians (expelling the bastard Leotichis) his adversaries in vain complaining, that they had a halting Kingdom. If now these reasons of Bodinus do hold in the weakness of such men, do they not hold in the weakness of a Woman? Bridges. And then how much less debar is the only weakness of her sex, when the Woman besides the right of her tile) excelleth, Bodinus argument. not only in all due proportion & natural gifts of body: but much more, in all heroical (at least, in all requisite and princely) virtues of the mind: and perhaps, excelleth most men Princes, yea, few men at all therein comparable? ●●dinus. But Bodinus goeth further, At etiam divina lex, etc. But the law of God also hath not only bereft them the government of the common weal, Bodinus argument from God's law. but also the government of the family. When as expressly it subdueth women under the government of their husbands. And hereto he qu●teth Gen. 2. We have sufficiently and at large answered already unto Caenalis and Danaeus for this point, Bridges concerning the difference of the economical and policall governments. The difference of the economical and political government. The law of God speaketh expressly of the economical government of the husband. And yet even in the economical government, if the woman be a virgin, having no parents, or a widow: may she not then be chief Lady, mistress, and governor of her own household goods, and of all the persons in that her family: but that another must be her governor in the same? And yet, there are many things in a family, and in the laws and administration of an household, that she in her own person is as unfit, and perhaps as unable, to do or exercise, as in a common weal, nevertheless this letteth not by God's law, but that she not having any husband, is the chief governor of her household. But for the common weal, Bodinus addeth: Bodinus. And almighty God so often as he testifieth, that he will most sharply revenge himself on the enemies of his name: Bodinus argument for GOD'S plagues. he threateneth that they shall be subject to the governments and laws of women, as though that were the most extreme of all evils and calamities. Bodinus being no great nor sound divine, may the more be borne with, in misquoting the Chapter, Bridges and perchance that is not his default: but his misreporting of the holy Scripture, is in him less excusable. In the 8. of isaiah God indeed threateneth curses, Bodinus double mistaking. and most dreadful revenge on the enemies of his name: but no such curse of women's government▪ but a curse of the government of such as were men. If he mean the third Chapter of isaiah, we have answered the same unto Danaeus, and the same answer may serve him, though no Protestant. Yea, I think, that when he came into England, he wished in his heart (if he loved his Country) that France were cursed no worse of God, under their king: than England (God be praised for it) is under our Queen. The Prophet speaketh indeed not of any curse, threat, or plague of God to come to the state by heroical women: but by effeminate men. Yea, he that promised that curse: promised (and that by the same Prophet) this blessing: And Queens shall be thy Nurses. It were better for that state of God's Church in France, if they felt the comfort of this blessing. Moreover (saith he) the Roman laws have withdrawn women far off from all civil offices and public functions, Bodinus. Bodinus argument from the Roman laws, and the reason thereof. not only for that they want prudence (as Martian thought, when among all women, he said only Pallas wanted a mother, being begotten of jupiters' brain, that it might be understood wisdom could not follow from women) but also that men's functions, are contrary to the sex and shamefastness of women. If Bodinus had any shame, or grace, or truth, or wisdom, or wit, but so mean as might beseem such a man, Bridges. he would never have let these words escape him. Doth he think to play out the matter thus with this unfavourie jest that Minerva had no mother, of whom for her wisdom the Poets feigned that she sprung out of jupiters' brains? Was not Bodiws brainless: or had he more brains than wit, when he wrote this? What Martian jested (whether he mean Martian the Emperor, or Martianus Mineus, or Martianus Rota) is to little purpose. If Martianus the Emperor had not found that the Empress and virgin Pulcheria had had both wit, wisdom, and prudence in government of the Empire, he had not come to the government of it. Have not diverse women both Queens & subjects excelled in prudence? If Bodinus did not leaver delight to allege Poets than Scripture, he should have found many commended for their great wisdom and prudence, far passing Pallas. If the Poets also did not rather give us to understand, in the person of Pallas, that not only in man, but also in woman, wisdom and prudence, namely of government in peace and war, was the only and special gift of God, coming not by the parents, father or mother, but that God of his mere influence, The excellency of diverse women in prudence. inspired this gift of prudent government not only to man, but unto woman, even as he pleased, and as we read the examples, and find the present experience in our Pallas, such another indeed, as France could never show the like, and therefore Bodinus brains did less conceive it. As for that he saith of the Roman laws, and the practice of their estates, we have very sufficiently enough seen the quite contrary. And have likewise discharged that shift, that for Women to deal in men's functions, is contrary to their sex and shamefastness. The public supreme government of a kingdom is no such peculiar function of a man, but that it is compatible both to man and woman, and the calling and gift of God, in which estate, they (whosoever) represent God and his power: in regard whereof, neither person nor sex of male or female is respected, as we have seen, not by Poettes fictions, but by clear testimonies and examples of the Scripture. And yet, even Poets recommend unto us some wise women for their government, besides Pallas. But here Bodinus coming to examples, telleth how nothing troubled the Roman Senate more, Bodinus. than that the Emperor Heliogabalus brought his mother into the Senate, Bodinus argument a minore ad maius, and his examples. not to give her sentence, but to behold that most holy assembly of the City. Which also (saith he) seemed new unto our ancestors, when maud the Countess of Arthoise was present, while the Council judged Robert Arthoise his cause. But, if it seem absurd and ridiculous for women to intermeddle in the functions and assemblies of men: much more absurd aught it to seem, that those things which appertain to the majesty of the government. should be laid open to the lust of women: but most absurd to bear the Sceptres. If Bodinus would tell the truth, I think he would say, that the Senate of Rome, Bridges although at that time (God wots) not very holy, was a little more troubled with the presence of that effeminate and monstrous Emperor, and with his most dissolute government: than with his mothers only coming into the Senate house, and there, so much as but looking on them. If neither she nor he had attempted far worse things than that, neither the Senate nor the state had been much troubled or hurt by them. Moesia both the grandmother of him, and of Alexander Severus, and Mammea, Alexander's mother, did more than thus in the state of government, and that without offence unto the Senate, or detriment unto the state. But whatsoever they did, have we not heard of many far better examples, than that wicked mother of the monstrous Heliogabalus? As of Deborah, sitting in iudgemen: of judith, making her oration before all the assembly of the Elders and people: and of diverse others. Doth Bodinus come in with such an outcry and amazement, Moses, David, Solomon and other Princes, permitted women in the assembly of judgements at the only coming of a woman into an assembly, and but beholding, or hearing of the judges? Neither Moses in his sitting in judgement, nor Solomon in all his royalty, was ever so dainty: but that even women also might look upon them, yea and private Women come themselves, and plead their rights before them, and hear their inditements. But it was news in France, to see a woman but to come into the place only, and standing by in silence to hear, how a matter was adjudged. If Bodinus would look better on his own Countries old Chronicles, or but consider those that we have noted, it would not seem so new a matter. But whatsoever that Mawde made there: our own Country hath a better example, of a more noble Mawde the Empress, and that had no small royalties in France too, besides many other far more excellent women, that have spoken many notable public speeches, both with the praise of God & man, & to the benefit of the Church and common weal. So that, it is no such absurd nor ridiculous thing, for such women as have just cause, to be in open assembly. Neither is this any lapping of themselves in men's peculiar function. And therefore, for any thing in this argument, which Bodinus on these examples draweth, a minore ad maius: Women may govern well enough, & bear the royal Sceptre, that God putteth into their hands. Not, that the things which appertain to the Majesty of government should be laid open to women's lust: nor to men's lust neither; but not to be locked up from their right. These are but overlusty speeches for so grave a man & so weighty a matter, but more unseemly for godly Prince's Majesties. Hereupon he frameth a Dilemma. Bodinus his Dilemma. For first (saith he) there is one of these two. Either the woman shall be joined in marriage, or else she shall govern by herself. If she marry: yet notwithstanding it is women's government: because she marrieth with that law, that the rights of the Majesty & government may remain together, but not to her husband. For that expressly was excepted, when Isabel Queen of Castille was married to Ferdinand king of Arragon. And the same again was called upon, in the marriage of Philip Prince of Spain, and Mary Queen of England. Which also was provided for, in the marriage covenants of Sigismond the Emperor of the Germans, & Marie Queen of Hungary, whom her subjects called King Marie. Which laws were made with most unequal conditions, sith that the husband, which by the law of nature is the head of the family, and hath the government domestical, is compelled publicly to the woman's government, because the government domestical hath nothing common, with the government public. And hereto he quoteth the civil Law, L. nam quam attinet ad Treble. And can Bodinus see this manifest difference: and not see withal, how he fully answers his Dilemma? Bridges But we have seen this also sufficiently answered before, both in the examples of Deborah, & the queen of the South, & diverse others. As for the covenants in these marriages, were very good & necessary for both estates, & nothing dishonourable to the husbands. No, not that term of the Queen of Hungary, that was called king: if we understand it as our Lawyers do, that, be the person reigning, man or woman, yet the law for the dignity of the sex, still acknowledgeth all as king. And as the Scripture containeth Eve in the name of Adam, & women & children often, in the general name of man. And this doth Bodinus own example that he allegeth hereunto, confirm. Bodinus example of Fabius Maximus and his son. For (saith he) when Fabius Maximus, which was called Cunctator, the delaier, riding on horseback, approached near his son being Consul: he was of him commanded to alight; when as (the father) might by his fatherly authority have killed him, indicta causa, without hearing the cause. Now unadvisedly of so famous a lawyer, Bridges. and learned historian was this spoken? Could Fabius Maximus at that time being but sent as a Legate unto his son, The civil law mis aleaged by Bodinus. than Consul, & chief magistrate of the common weal, have put him the chief magistrate to death, and that without his cause heard? Or was the law that he quoteth, In suis de liberis et posthu (which is long since abolished & of no force) to be understood so absolutely & in general, that it admitted no exposition, no, not of the public and chief magistrate? Yea rather, is not the chief magistrate (in a higher than the natural & private respect) the Father of the Country & common weal, & so, of every particular person or private Father? Which thing Fabius Maximus did well consider, that his son Fabius Gurges did represent in his magistracy & political fatherhood, an higher estate and majesty, than for that time his natural fatherhood could compare unto. And therefore he alighted forthwith, as he was commanded, & obeyeth his magistrate, not his son, & rejoiceth in his sons doing, that he could thus wisely discern between the states. Which example (with others in the Scripture, of jacob and joseph: of Solomon and Bethsabee, clearly confuteth Bodinus dilemma, & evicteth all the cause. For, if this be no blemish to the Father to obey his sons commandment & public authority, not in respect he is his natural son, but his civil father, nor any absurdity or inequality in the son, to overrule & command his Father, not as his private Father, but as his politic subject: (for the proportions of this rule & obedience, are not here Arithmetical, but Geometrical, & the justice of them distributive, not commutative:) how is not this absurdity of Bodinus, and these unequal laws (as he supposeth) clearly answered: when the woman obeyeth her husband as her husband, & yet, the husband obeyeth the wife as his prince as we have seen before in the example of Deborah & her husband, not he, but she being judge of the people, & so, in that regard, his judge also: without any inequality or absurdity. Yea, much more easy may this be in the state of man and wife, than in the state betwixt the Father and the son: the son owing far more obedience to his Father, & the Father having more authority over the son, as his son: than the husband hath authority over the wife, or the obedience that the wife oweth to her husband. But since these authorities (as Bodinus cannot choose but confess) are so distinguished, that the one hath nothing common with the other, the public with the domestical, the natural with the civil: this justice that giveth in each proportion Singula singulis, will never confound these things, nor bereave any party, son or wife, of their honour in the one, for their service in the other, but let both stand entire in their states. The other part of Bodinus dilemma, if the Queen marry not: because it is nothing but an heap of contumelies against womankind, Vasthi. with more impotent invectives than we have had before in Caenalis: both for the honour & shamefastness of the sex, & for the very shame of so learned a man's forget-getting himself, I pass it over as a fallation ab accident, as was the other part of the argument. The examples of Vasthies arrogancy & disobedience is nothing pertinent. The sovereignty of the kingdom was not in the right of her, but of her husband, & so, in all respects she ought obedience. As for the examples of joane Queen of Naples, Athalia, Cleopatra, Zenobia, Irene, etc. We have already heard of many better, & have seen also what is to be said, of the most & worst of these women. But he ought not, for more odiousness to slander any, as that Cleopatra (to reign alone) slew her brother: so many credible stories testifying the contrary. These are the best of the arguments that be maketh. For all the other, (save that which he hath of the Salik law) are not arguments: but his overmuch intermeddling in matters of estate. As for the urging of the Salic law, we have seen before many better confutations of it, than he allegeth any confirmations. First, after he hath set down the words of the law itself: De terra vero Salica nulla portio Haereditatis Mulieri veniat, Bodinus argument of the Salic law. sed ad virilem sexum tota tertae Haereditas perveniat: to prove this law, page. 745. he saith. At etiam Childeberti, etc. But also by the edict of Childebert king of the French, the which is comprehended in the Salik laws, wherein the nephews are called to the succession of the grandfathers, The Salic law. the women are removed a far off. How doth not this devise bewray itself, even as the ass in the lion's skin, by his over long ears? save that this forgery, by his overshort reckoning of Childeberts' time, showeth that these Salik laws are nothing so ancient as they pretend? For if this Edict of Childebert be comprehended in the Salic laws, and the Salic laws were made by Pharamund. Bridges Here is not the nephew succeeding the grandfather, but rather the grandfather succeeding the nephews nephew. If not the great grandlie, father to these Salic laws, intruding itself to exclude women's government. But to fortify this better, saith Bodinus. And verily if there were no Salic law, when as for the type of the government, there was strife between Philip earl of Valois & king Edward: & Philip maintained the Salik law: Lege Voconia, by the law of Voconius: but Edward maintained the protection of his cause by the hereditary laws of the Romans: a decree was made by the consent of all the Fathers and Princes, Bodinus. that no man in that disputation, should use the authority of foreign laws: but that every man should study to interpret the Salic law for his right. To what purpose should they so do, if there had been no Salic law? What kind of reason shall we call this? Might not Philip and his associates feign such a law? or might they not wrest it, Bridges. or misconstrue it if there had been any such an one? Or might it not have been as well antiquated and altered, as long before that time Voconius law was? For if Voconius Law had at that time stood in force, how could King Edward have pleaded his right from the Hereditary laws of the Romans? Was not Voconius and his law Roman? But such broken stuff as Voconius law, was good plea for Philip's broken title, and for the Salic laws defence. As for king Edward's plea from the Roman hereditary laws then in force, showeth that the Roman laws were not against women's titles. And that they were in force also even in France, which was a good plea. Albeit King Edward pleaded higher, even from the law of nations, and from the written law of God. Yea, but (faith Bodinus) when Philip made a decree with the consent of all the Fathers & Princes, The foul practices of Philip for the upholding of the Salic law. that none should use in this disputation the authority of foreign laws: but every one study to interpret the Salic law for his right: why would they so have done, if there had been no Salic law? This is a proper proof of the authentic force and truth of the Salic law, and praise of their upright laws, that they set out, to uphold their Salic law withal When Philip saw that king Edward pleaded the law of God, the law of Nations, and the civil law of the Romans, which law stood then forcible even in France: by & by he forbade such pleas, and calleth them all foreign laws. So that, for this Salic law, the French nation renounceth the law of all nations, yea, maketh God's law a foreign law, to bring in this Heathen Salic law. Was not this Philip a most Christian king that made this decree? And why then used he Voconius law? was not this foreign? But in forbidding all foreign laws, did he not forbid the Salic law withal? Which was a law (if there were any such) of the old Francons, & at that time (as yet now, & long before) of the germans, bordering on the river Sala, & not near any part of Gallia. He forbiddeth all men to use any so much as disputation, in these other laws that were not foreign. Where learned he this example? of them that forbade the Disciples to speak any more in Christ's name? But Philip goeth further, charging not only to use only the Salic law, but to study also how to interpret it for his right. What meant he by that would he have them study to hale and writhe with their misconstructions, the interpretation of the law for his purpose? What a foul practice was that, and indeed if we confer this with their own Chronicles, we have heard, how (when he could not stop their mouths thus, that among the French defended king Edward's title) he put them to death. Yea, but (saith Bodinus) could they have done this, had there been no Salic law. Bodinus his sorry conclusion of the Salic law. And is this then Bodinus his best conclusion? God wots, this is but a sorry conclusion to prove the truth of this law, or the force of it: when Philip was feign with such unlawful laws, yea, with death itself to restrain them that called the credit thereof in question. But I would learn, what Philip meant by this law, that they should study to interpret the Salik law for his right? Doth this law them admit divers interpretations, & that such interpretations, that it may be interpreted otherwise than Philip commanded them to study how they might interpret it for his title? Hottoman. Hottoman confuting the great error of the French historiographers & lawyers in misinterpreting the Salic law. And that they must be fain to study out such an interpretation of the law? Yea verily. For if we shall read Hottomans Francogallia, cap. 8. (although he also be against women's government.) He showeth, how greatly both the Historiographers & also the Lawyers have erred: Insomuch (saith he) that almost the error hath meed the law. To the confutation whereof, after he hath showed, of the second kingdom of the Francons, the one in Gallia, now called France, the other beyond the Rhine. at the river of Sala, from whence those Francons were called Salij, or Salikes, whose both kingdom & name is now well near worn out of use: he telleth of their four peers and Judges, Wisogast, Arbogast, Salogast, Windogast, and that from this Salogast, they say, that the law was found, which of him even to this day is called Salic, of his name, whereby their error may be reproved that name the Law Salic of Salt, that is, prudence: or that think the word Gallica to be corrupted (into Salica) than the which, nothing can be spoken more absurd. But far greater errors have sprung out of the same fountain. First that by those authors it was believed, that the Salic law did appertain to the public right of a City and Empire (or government) of the hereditary succession of a kingdom. For the Tables of the Salic law were found and brought forth to light not many years hence. By the inscription of which it is known, that they were first written and set out about the age of Pharamund. The very words of the Salic law. But in those there is extant this one Chapter. Title. 62. No portion of the inheritance of the Salic land passeth to a woman, but this the man's sex doth obtain, that is, the sons succeed in the same inheritance. But where among the nephews & their children, after long time contention is raised De allode terrae, of the own-ship (or right) of the land: Non per stirpes, sed per capita dividatur. Let it be divided not by the stocks for issues, but by the poles. The like Law is extant apud Ripnaries. Tit. 58. and also apud Angli●s. Tit. 7. Where it is so far off from that that it was ordained of the inheritances of kingdoms, that those laws appertain not so much to the successions of * Feudorum fees, but only of * Allodiorun. ownships, (or the things that are one's own) although indeed a dowry was assigned unto the woman out of those ownships. Thus saith Hottoman of this Salic law, whereof the French err so foully, and make such a boasting. As for that he addeth, Howsoever it be, first this is evident, that although there be extant neither any Chapter of the law Salic nor yet of the French law by which women are put back from the inheritance of the kingdom: A weak hold and often interrupted. notwithstanding the institutions and manners of the nation, kept with such a consent of ages, hold the force of a law written. This is ultimum refugium, and the strongest string that Hottoman, (when all is done) can find to uphold all that controversy withal. ●ut sith that string hath been so often cracked (as we have seen already) by the French own Chronicles:) both Hottoman and Bodinus may be now dismissed in good peace for that matter, and likewise Danaeus, with all due reverence. By whole & Caluines Questions about women's government, we have discoursed out thus far from our brethren's Learned discourse, upon occasion to answer our Brethren, The reason why, leving the learned discourse, I have discoursed thus far on this matter. for that they note, of S. Paul's reproving the uncomely disorder, of women's speaking in the Church of the Corinthians. By the which, searching after my plain and ordinary manner, what calvin, Beza, and Danaeus said on this matter: and at the first chop, meeting with such their foresaid arguments, I thought it very necessary, albeit Impar congressus Achilli Troilus, yet thus far forth to oppose myself, even to so famous men in these matters. Which I have the rather hazarded myself, unto, only lest any scruples of these invectives against women's government, might stick in any of our Brethr. minds, by mistaking the Apostles words, through overmuch credit of these most famous writers, I mean, specially calvin, Beza, and Danaeus. If our Brethren shall say, that all this was the more needless, sith they which make this Learned discourse, do acknowledge her majesties public and supreme government in the Church of England. Would God they did so, as they ought to do. Then indeed we should not need these questions, but join together in all dutiful obedience under God, to her majesties laws in these matters. But, to our grief we see, yea, to our shame, all the world cries out thereon, it is not so. It is but nice dalliance. We grant a form of words (as we saw both in calvin a Danaeus) & we impugn the matter. Nowbeit, because to our greater grief, we shall yet see this more & more, throughout all this Learned Discourse: Let us now return, & hear agains our Brethren the Learned Discourses. The argument of the 10. Book. THe 10. Book concerning the Ceremonies of our Church, for the fruitfulness, use, and urging of them. Weather confirmation of children by the Bishop, and the churching or solemn thanksgiving of women after childbirth be utterly to be rejected. Whether the dead should be buried without any ceremony, form of service, or sermon, or presence of the Pastor, etc. For hot contentions in small matters, & of a true pastors duty about the Church's constitutions. Of the Pastor's authority in common with the elders. Of the power of order and jurisdiction. Of Timothy's authority, & of the governing Elders authority. How unnecessary and dangerous to the state and magistrates, the erecting of these supposed Seniors would be. Of the removing all usurped authority. What kind of mastership and office of being greatest Christ allowed: and of tyrannising in the Church. Whether all the rules of government and policy be set down and prescribed in God's word, as the dostrine of faith, and precepts of moral life are. Whether a Bishop have any separate authority from others, or the Apostles had any such authority, and whether Paul delivered any such to Timothy. Whether his rules to Timothy be general rules to all Bishops of their authority and manner of ordaining Ministers, & judging of them. Of Paul and Barnabas elections and ordeinings. Whether separate authority infer sole and absolute Monarchical authority. What regiment Christ left to his church, and of his sentence Matth. 18. ver. 15. for the consent of the household servants, and whether we should consent unto our Breath. or our brethren to us, in these ceremonies. Whether all that consent have authority & that equal. Of the difference of the churches, and of the Persons authorities in them. Ceremonies The learned disc. pag. 72. BY which it is evident that Saint Paul's words are wrested of some, clean contrary to his meaning, to make him a patron of idle, if not hurtful ceremonies, maintained more upon will than reason, or granted▪ of Gods word, under the colour of order and decency, not only with neglect, but also with great hindrance of God's building, by spoiling the Church of so many learned pastors. TO apply Saint Paul's sentence, Let all things be done according to order, We use no wresting of the Apostles words. to the patronage of hurtful or of idle ceremonies; I grant, were an evident wresting of his words. But this would be proved, and not said only, that we so do. Wlée have seen and proved too evidently, how our Brethren are overbold to wrest Saint Paul's words, otherwise than either he spoke or meant. As for us, we maintain no idle Ceremonies, We have no maintenance of idle and hurtful ceremonies. & much less hurtful. If any such shall be showed, we are as ready as any our Brethren in all humble and dutiful manner, to desire the abolishing of them. But we hope all such are by law and order already removed. Would God our Br. would remember by whose endeavour they are taken away, and in thankfulness be contented. For what ceremonies can they prove, are by any authority commanded to be used, that are idle and hurtful? Have we any at all, exeept those that either God himself hath prescribed, or we have ground and grant of the lawful use of them, out of God's word? or that, being of their nature mere indifferent, have as mech reason as will for them to be used, not under the colour, but in very deed, only for order and decency, & so consequently for edification, and not otherwise. And may not indifferent ceremonies be so used? And both the Ministers and the people, so far forth be bound without scruple of conscience, What cermonies, & how we use them and matter of Religion, but only for obedience sake, as matters of decent comeliness, and the edification of quiet order, to use them: and yet never (under the colour of prejudice to the liberty of Christianity) to disturb the peace of the Church, the course of the Gospel, the obedience of the Prince, for the resisting of them? Verily, if any hereby do hinder the building of God's Church: our brethren herein have to take great heed, that make so great, and so unnessarie troubles in the Church, for these Ceremonies, with great hindrance of God's building. As for our parts, if any such Ceremonies as these, indifferent in their own nature (save that by order they be appointed) were also removed: we dote not on them, but could well enough be content, so that by order and law they were removed, and some other as comely and decent ceremonies, by her majesties authority, and by our whole Church's consent, were orderly ordained in their places. But thus disorderly to take these away, and that with such reproaches, Confirmation. both of these ceremonies & of all those that only in this manner, for external order, and obedience sake, do admit them to leave it free to every congregation, to cast all our ceremonies off, or to take what other new they shall like better, & to alter them also as they list, either every man, or every congregation, at their pleasure: or though they would tie themselves more strictly to them. yet living all under one state, to innovate or abrogate any authorized, with out the licence & authority of that state: this were (me thinks) not only an undecent & disorderly thing, & nothing furthering, yea, greatly hindering the building of the church: but very dangerous both to the higher powers & to the whole realm. And as for the hinderers of God's building, by spoiling the church of so many learned pastors: we know not any church, or learned pastor therein, that need so to be spoiled, except that any, more upon will than reason or learning (be they otherwise never so well learned) do wilfully withdraw themselves from doing their more important & necessary duty, in yielding unto (though not necessary nor weighty ceremonies, in their own nature: yet) so necessary & weighty in the manner as they are ordained and prescribed: that at leastwise, they ought to tolerate them, for fear of great dangers in these perilous days, (although they wished them away) & not to spoil the Church of themselves, & of their ministry, nor to make such troubles and divisions in the Church, for the removing of them. Which is nothing according to the duty either of faithful ministers, or of 〈◊〉 subjects, as they ought to be, and (these controversies set aside) I trust they are. There are beside these things, certain other matters: The learned d●●c▪ Pag. 73. as confirmation, churching of women, burial of the dead, thought to belong to the office of a B. or pastor. Whereof the first two are mere devices of men, and aught to have no place in the Church of Christ. The other, albeit it be to be retained with a certain honesty, yet it is not to be tied to the proper office of a pastor. Here are now 3. other matters, confirmation of those that are baptized, Churching or public thanksgiving of women, Bridges▪ after their deliverance from childbirth, and lastly the burial of the dead, which our brethren find first this fault withal: that they should be thought to belong to the office of a B. or Pastor. This goeth very hard, that none of all these things, Wh●th●r confirmation Churching of Wom●n and 〈◊〉 may be thought to belong to a Pastor. may not only not be tied to a B. or a Pastor's office: but that they may not be so much as thought to belong unto them. Their reason is, that the first two are mere devices of men, and aught to have no place in the Church of Christ. And is confirmation to be thus simply condemned, and that as a mere devise of men? If they said, such confirmation; as the adversaries of the gospel used, as, to make it a sacrament, or to tie it to necessity of salvation: or to use it with any of the superstitious trinkets that they profaned it withal, or to hold any of the errors that they maintained about it: then indeed this speeches should have had good pretence. But we using none of all these things, but such a reverend order, as in all points is agrééable to the manner of the very Apostles: to understand in what sort the parties were baptised, to see that the parties which were baptised (because they are included in the covenant, What confirmation we use & to what purpose. that God would also be the God of our seed) should now being grown to understanding, openly before that pastor, which hath the superiority of Episcopal dignity which we have proved, that from, and in the very Apostles times, some pastor had, among & over some other his fellow pastors) declare the sumine of their faith, and he especially lay his hands on them, and pray for them, that God would more and more confirm them in that faith, in which they were baptized and have professed: as the Apostles used to lay their hands, and to pray for the confirmation of such, as by other pastors had been baptized and shall we call this order, a mere devise of men? and say, that it ought to have no place in the Church of Christ? True it is, that at the so doing of the Apostles, they received commonly withal the miraculous gifts of the holy ghost, according to the dispensation of that time. Nevertheless, that was not their only end: nor the order of laying on of hands upon them, which were to be confirmed by him that was the foresaid 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, unto whom the superior Episcopal dignity among the Pastors was committed, did so cease: but was continued, both in the Apostles times, while any one of them james, Jude or john were living without any contradiction of them: and so, simply was used, according to the Apostles manner, till the other additions afterward, Chrism. as that of Chrism, etc., were joined unto it. Which addition Chrism, though it be very ancient, yet we rejecting it as a mere devise herein of men, & reducing confirmation to the first simplicity of prayer & to the ceremony only of laying on of hands, especially by those that have the foresaid episcopal superiority: why should our brethren here affirm, that it ought to have no place in the Church of Christ? But this so hard censure of theirs, neither agreeth with those our Brethren of the german and Saxon Churches: nor yet with calvin in Geneva. Melancthon in Analis. Locorum come. saith, Confirmation among the ancients, Melancthon was a trial of doctrine, in which they that were to be confirmed, did recite the sum of the Christian doctrine. Whereunto was added public prayer for them. But of the Apostles was added also, imposition of hands, which the manifest gifts of the holy ghost followed. As for that popish confirmation, is altogether a void and idle ceremony. Nevertheless in the mean time, it should be profitable for the trial of doctrine, to be made with the public prayer for them. Which certainly should not be in vain. Herbandus in compendio theologia, following Melancthon, and writing of confirmation, saith: What dost thou think of Confirmation? properly it is not a sacrament, But in the ancient time it was a trial of the Doctrine, made in the Institution of Christian religion, (as the Catechism is among us) in the which, they that were Catechised, did render a reason of their faith, and did testify, that they embraced this only religion, and to dissent from Ethniks and from heretics. Which being publicly done of the B. the prayers of the Church were added, with the imposition of hands. At which imposition, in the time of the Apostles, they were manifestly endued with the holy ghost. As it is manifest in the Acts, the 19 chap. Afterward by success of time, when miracles ceased in the Church, the ceremony of the Imposition of hands was nevertheless retained. Whereby those that were baptized, were prepared to the Christian conflict, & by the prayers of the Church and solemn blessing, were confirmed. But the age that came after, thrust unto the Church a certain feigned confirmation for a sacrament. etc. Thus writeth also Herbandus of this matter. He husius in examine theologico. loco. 18. de sacram. What thinkest thou of Confirmation? the answer. Confirmation is not a Sacrament. Heshufius. For it is not an external action peculiarly commanded of God, neither is it a seal of the promise of grace. The ancients searched the profiting of Children in the doctrine of the Catechism, and those that were rightly instituted, they admitted to the holy Communion. This is a laudable discipline in the Church, if superstition be absent. Kemnitius after he hath confuted the Papists errors of Confirmation These things (saith he) being thus unfolded, the examination of the canons of confirmation shall be easy and plain. For, whereas that the first cannon condemneth such a confirmation as consisteth in a Catechism, and children's profession of the faith: it hath this meaning and reason. Our men have often showed that the rite of confirmation, (the traditions unprofitable, superstitions & repugnant to the scripture being removed) both it may be used godly and to the church's edification, according to the consent of the scripture, after this manner: to wit, that they which are baptized in their infancy (for such is now the state of the church) when they came to the years of discretion, should be diligently instructed in a certain & simple catechism of the church's doctrine: and when they seemed to have meetly well perceived the beginnings: they should afterward be presented to the Bishop and to the church. And there hear the child that was baptized in his infancy, which should first with a short a simple warning be admonished of his baptism: to wit, that he was baptised: how and why: & into what he was baptised: what the whole trinity gave & sealed up unto him in that baptism the contract of peace, the covenant of grace: how the renouncing Satan the profession of faith, the promise of obedience was there made. Secondly, the child himself should before the Church declare, his own and the public profession of this doctrine and faith. Thirdly, she should be asked of the principal points of the Christian religion: he should answer to every one of them: if he did not so well understand them, he should be better instructed. Fourthly, he should be admonished, and this he should declare in his profession, that he dissenteth from all heathen, heretical, fanatical, and profane opinions. Fiftly, a grave and serious exhortation out of the word of God, should be added, that he should persever in the covenant of baptism, and in that doctrine & faith, and with often profiting be confirmed. Sixtly, a public prayer should be made, for those children, that God with his holy spirit would vouchsafe to govern, keep, and confirm them, in this profession. To the which prayer, the laying on of hands may be adhibited without superstition. Neither should that prayer be vain, for it relieth on the promises of the gift of perseverance, and on the grace of confirmation. Such a rite of confirmation shall bring with it very much profit, to the edification of youth & of the whole Church. For it were agreeable both to the Scripture, and to the more pure antiquity. For in the Apostles laying on of their hands, that there was a trial of doctrine, & profession of faith, the history, Acts. 19 manifestly doth witness. Of the exhortation also unto perseverance, of the confirming them by the word, in the doctrine & faith which once they had received: the examples of the apostolical Church are extant, Acts. 14.15. & 18. And that public prayer was adhibited, the history witnesseth, A & 8. Thus speaketh the 7. Canon of the Council of Laodicea & the 8. of the Council of Aries, concerning the trial and profession of doctrine, & faith in confirmation as we have before noted. And therefore the Canon of the Council of orleans, requireth a perfect age in confirming. Neither agreeth this evil hereunto, that Dionysius in the end of his ecclesiastical Hierarchy, writeth of th● Master of the catechisinges, when the children baptised in their infancy, were delivered to be instructed, that they might with doctrine and exhortations betrayned up to perform & keep the profession of the faith the renouncing of Satan and the promise of the obedience of God made in their baptism. These things were proposed in the conference at Ratispone in the year. 1541. And so he telleth how Eccius in the name of the papists did utterly & proudly reject all these things, affirming that in confirmation the use of reason must not be tarried for. Thus notably and at large, doth Kemnitius also declare and approve, this good order and rite of confirming children, and how contumeliously the Papists do reject it. This therefore savoureth nothing of popery, nor of any other error or superstition but is Godly, reverend, and very beneficial to youths, and to the whole Church's edification. And what doth calvin in his Institutions, differ from these, concerning the ancient custom of Confirmation? In the ancient time (saith he) this was the manner, that the children of the Christians, Cap. 19 sect 4. de confir. after they were grown up, were presented before the Bishop, to fulfil that office (or duty) which was exacted of them, that being of ripe years, offered themselves to baptism. For these sat among them that were catechised, until such time as being orderly instructed in the mysteries of the faith, they were able to declare the confession of the faith, before the B. and the people. Those infants therefore which were initiated by baptism, because they had not made confession of the faith before the church, at the end of their Childhood, or in the entry of their springalship, were again presented of their Parents, were examined of the Bishop, according to the form of a Catechism, which they had then certain and common. But to the end that this action, which otherwise ought worthily to have been grave and holy, should have the more reverence and dignity, the ceremony also of the imposition of hands was adhibited. Thus was the child (his faith being approved) dismissed with a solemn blessing. The ancients do often make mention of this manner. Pope Leo saith: if any return from Heretics, let him not be baptized again: but for that which wanted unto him, let the virtue of the spirit be conferred unto him, by the Bishop's imposition of hands. Here our adversaries will cry, that it may be rightly called a sacrament, Epist. 3●. wherein the holy ghost is conferred. But Leo himself otherwhere expoundeth what he meaneth by these words. He that is baptized (saith he) among heretics, let him not be rebaptized, but by the invocation of the holy Ghost, let him by imposition of hands be confirmed: because he received only the form of baptism, without the sanctification. Epist. 77. And Jerome against the Luciferians mentioneth it. Albeit I deny not that Jerome was somewhat overshot therein, that he saith it was the Apostles observation, notwithstanding, he is most far from the toys of these men. And he mitigateth the self same thing, when he addeth that this blessing was given to the only Bishops, rather for the honour of their priesthood, than of the necessity of the Law. Such an imposition of hands therefore which may be done simply in the place of blessing. I do commend, and would that it were restored at this day into his pure use. But the late age having almost blotted out the matter, have placed for a sacrament of God, I know not what feigned confirmation. etc. Scythe therefore calvin himself thus far forth, acknowledgeth this to be the ancient order of confirmation in the Church, and commending the same, wisheth that it were restored and even as he wished, we have restored it, and abolished all the Popish superstitions and errors that succeeded: how intemperately do our brethren here say, that it ought to have no place in the Church of Christ? But what reasons more than calvin had, have our Brethren utterly to displace it? The learned disc. pag. 73. And as for confirmation (say they) it ought therefore to be shut out, and have no place in the Church of God, as well because it displaced catechizing, and brought in steed thereof vain toys, and childish ceremonies to the great hurt of the Church, as for that also it derogateth much from the dignity of Baptizme, the Sacrament of the Lord, and is extoled above it, being a devise of man, and is pretended to be a sign to certify the Children of the favour and gracious goodness of God, towards them, falsely grounded upon the example of the Apostles. Whereas the ministration of baptism, is permitted to every hedgepreest Minister and Deacon. The confirmation that we do use, as it bringeth no vain toys, nor childish ceremonies into the Church of God, Bridges nor is used to the great hurt or to any hurt of the Church at all: so is it, so far from displacing Catechizing, that (as we have showed out of calvin and other) it was both used with catechizing in the ancient Churches, and with us it is one of the principal means for the maintenance of it. And therefore, if there were no other reason for the holding of it, Our confirmation displaceth not but maintaineth catechising. but even this (so long as it maintains no evil beside) sith this good at the least cometh by it, that our children are the rather induced to be catechised: it ought not to be displaced and shut out of the church of God, since Catechizing is not only not displaced, but so greatly furthered by it. And whereas our brethren say, also it derogateth much from the dignity of Baptism, the sacrament of the Lord, and is extolled above it, being a device of man: If they mean the popish sacrament of confirmation, that is another matter: they impugn one thing & we maintain another. For, We prefer not nor make equal confirmation with baptism. we neither account confirmation to be any sacrament at all, nor extol it above, nor yet make it equal unto baptism. But use it only as a good & convenient ceremony, order, or rite, helping more and more to the confirming of them that are baptised, in the profession of their faith, which they make before the B. being now more strengthened & confirmed therein, by his approbation in solemn laying of his hands upon them and and praying together with the Church, that God would confirm them. And where they say, it is pretended to be a sign, to certify the children of the favour & gracious goodness of God towards them, falsely grounded upon the example of th'apostles: We say not confirmation is a sign, though the imposition of hands be a sign If they mean by these words a sign, that we pretend such a sign as sacraments be, that are appointed of God to be visible signs of some invisible grace: we make in confirmation no such sign. And yet we deny not, but the B. imposition of hands is a sign, & is given even to certify the favour and gracious goodness of God towards them. But will our Brethren thrust▪ this sign also of Imposition of hands clean out of the Church of God? Or, if it be a sign that hath been, and is, and may be well retained, will they deny, it-may certify the parties upon whom the hands are laid, of God's favour and gracious goodness towards them? What error or superstition is in this: except it were made such a sign hereof, as we use to call a Sacrament? But, say they, it is falsely grounded on the example of the Apostles. If the Apostles did use the imposition of hands upon them that were baptised, to confirm them: and use with prayer for them, Confirmation maybe well said to be grounded on the Apostles example since the apostles gave such example though they prescribed it not. that they might receive greater grace of God, in the confirmation of their faith, besides the extraordinary graces than of working miracles & the gift of tongs: and we use the imposition of hands, without any of the popish or any other ceremonies: nor tie it to this, or to that, or to any grace to be necessarily given thereby: nor make any precise necessity at all thereof: but use it only as an ancient, reverend, and convenient order, for the foresaid reasons, and in such manner as calvin himself prayeth, and wisheth that it were restored: why may it not be truly said, that the use thereof (if there be any good use of it at all) is grounded upon the example of the Apostles, although they commanded it not to be used, as we have heard Kemnitius allege for examples. Act. 8.14.15. & 18. But, say our Brethren: Whereas the Ministration of Baptism, is permitted to every hedgepreest, minister and deacon. Our Brethren when they enueighed against the superiority of Bishops made them and all priests or pastoral elders in dignity equal. And now in dignity they are so unequal, that they term some hedge priests. What they mean by this contemptuous term, let themselves expound, but they here seem to excuse us prettily well, We permit not women to baptise. for committing the administration of Baptism unto Women: when they name (though in contempt) these three, Hedgepreest, Minister, and Deacon, to whom the ministration of baptism is permitted. No, we permit it not to every Deacon. But doth this argue, that confirmation is extolled above baptism, because the B. doth only confirm and every Minister may baptise? Do they measure the dignity of the Sacrament by the minister? what call they this? is not this a manifest error? or do we maintain any such opinion of confirmation? yea how doth not this the more recommend the dignity of baptism, that it may be administered by every never so mean a minister, & yet not lose his dignity, being a sacrament. The dignity whereof dependeth not on man, but on God. Whereas confirmation being no sacrament (which if it were, were appertaining to every minister) is reserved to the B. not for any higher dignity of the action compared with any Sacr. but used for the trial of the baptised parties profession of the truth, Why the B. confirmeth. by another higher person than the minister that baptised him. The apostles that were sent to confirm them that were baptized by Philip, women's churching. took not upon them to extol their confirmation, above the baptism that Philip had administered, and yet were they higher than he in office and dignity. For any of these reasons therefore here alleged, against our order of Confirmation, as it had place before the errors and superstitious of the papists did defile it, so may it▪ well have place still amongst us in God's Church. The learned Dis. Pag. 74. And as for churching of Women, (say our Brethren) because it savoureth of the jewish purification, and of popish Institution, it ought altogether to be omitted, for it breedeth and nourisheth many superstitious opinions in the simple people's hearts: as, that the woman which hath born a child is unclean or unholy: whereas the Apostle pronounceth, that Godly women are sanctified & saved by bearing of children. 1. Tim. 2.15. that it is unlawful for her, 1. Tim. 2.15. for any necessity to go out of her doors, before she be churched: that this churching is a necessary part of the pastors office: that she must wear a white rail over her head, when she goeth to Church by the Midwife, weighted home with the parish Clerk, with divers such like Babbles, which in a well reformed Church are not to be suffered. Bridges The first reason here alleged against women's public thanksgiving in the Church for their deliverance, after the birth of their children, commonly called Churching, is because it savoureth of the jewish purification, and of popish institution. In deed for the jewish purification, I think it hath some savour of it, so far forth only, as the Woman then gave God thanks, for his special benefit of her deliverance, and for her child. For, so far it savoureth of the moral Law. Even as our sabaoth also savoureth of the jewish Sabaoth, only in respect of the moral part thereof, though not with any like bond or necessity of the time. Other jewish savour it hath none, to any whose smell or taste is not distempered. As for popish Institution, (meaning for any popish error, or superstitious ceremony) much less hath it any savour at all thereof. It savoureth nothing at all of any popisherror or superstition. Our brethren affirm it hath. And why? For it breedeth and nourisheth many superstitious opinions, in the simple people's hearts: as that the Woman which hath borne a child, is unclean or unholy. There is no occaosin at all, in the order prescribed by the book, to give the least suspicion in the world, to any never so simple a person, that the Woman which hath borne a child, should therefore be accounted the more unclean or unholy. What one word or syllable tendeth thereunto? If the simple people will take or nourish such an opinion ●n no occasion given, but only for that the adversaries of the Gospel held such an opinion, and therefore it ought altogether to be omitted: we might ●ltogether omit the solemnizing of marriage by the Minister in the Church, because the simple people might thereby, nourish many erroneous and superstitious opinions, which the adversaries of the Gospel before taught them, and confirmed them in, at the administration of marriages. True it is, that S. Paul, pronounceth of the woman 1. Tim. 2.15. That she shall be saved by bearing of children, The woman for so special a benefit and preservation bound to make a special thanksgiving. adding this caution thereunto▪ if she shall abide in faith, and love, and sanctification, with sobriety. But what doth this hinder, or not rather much more infer, that she ought so much the more for her child-byrth, to give the more solemn and public thanks to God, both for her children, and for her deliverance from her travel, and that he hath vouchsafed the same to be among other his especial graces, a means also towards her salvation; and to beseech him, that as he hath preserved her in the one, so he would strengthen her to abide also in the other, to wit, in faith, and love, and sanctification with sobriety. So that (me thinks) this sentence is a better inducement, to have such a solemn form of thanksgiving, as our book prescribeth unto women in such a case; than to say, it ought altogether to be omitted. But they allege also, Not going abroad before she go ●o the Chugh. that it breedeth and nourisheth another superstitious opinions in the simple people's hearts: that it is unlawful for her, for any necessity, to go out of her doors, before she be Churched. Our Brethren seem to have inquired more curiously of women's demeanour in such a time, than ever I heard of, or than (I think) was used among any never so simple or superstitious people. I beléeur, none have now a days among us, any such opinion, or so strict usage. And yet a reverend order herein, is to be retained, which though our learned Brethr. would deny; How commendeble an use this is yet our sober sisters (I hope) would even for the modesty and commendation of womanhood, have respect unto. And not so soon as God shall have strengthened them again, rather go forth (unless any great necessity urge them, which, as it is said, hath no law) to other unnecessary worldly affairs, or company; than before all other things, to repair in solemn and reverend manner to the house of God, and there present themselves before the congregation, to give God public thanks for his great goodness extended unto them. Which order doth much recommend their devotion, and is a good example to all other. Besides this, our Brethren not another superstitious opinion which it breedeth, that this Churching is a necessary part of the Pastor's office. For such convenient necessity, The Pastor's office in this Churching of women. as by law and order he is bound to do, as likewise, to join in the celebration of marriage the man and the woman; whose office should it rather be, than the Pastors? As for any absolute necessity of salvation, the thing itself is not so urged, nor necessary as any particular express commandment of God, pertaining to his office; otherwise than in general, and as he is the public minister of the word. And this order being admitted, & by law prescribed; it may be well avouched in this foresaid necessity, that this churching, that is to say, the pronouncing of the public prayers in the Church, at the woman's thanksgiving; is a necessary part of the Pastor's office. As for that which followeth: A white rail on her head. That she must wear a white rail over her head, when she goeth to Church by the midwife, weighted home with the parish Clerk, with diverse such like babbles, which in a well reformed Church are not to be suffered: I think our Brethren, that talk thus of rails and babbles, were rather disposed disorderly to babble, on women's matters, than they would want matter to rail on our Church's orders. Doth our book or any law prescribe, The ancient matrons attires. the woman to wear a white rail over her head, when she goeth to Church? Or to be accompanied by the midwife? Or to be weighted home with the parish Clerk? Is not this a clerkly & Learned Disc. to note these matters? And why may not even these things be done also, as well as not done? So that there be no superstition in them, as (me thinks) there is none. For, what is the whit rail or keverchief, but such an ancient cover of the woman's head, as representeth the simplicity & antiquity of women's attire, such as the ancient matrons of Asia, Grece & Rome are noted to have worn. And as yet in the East parts, & in Grecia, & Africa, the sober & chaste women go with such white linen coverture on their heads, when they go abroad, even to this day. Which argueth that this attire arose not of any superstition at all, but in the old time was the usual attire of honest matrons. And not unlikely, but that as other parts of Grece did use it, so the attire that S. Paul mentioneth of women's covering their heads, 1. Cor. 11. when they prayed in the congregation, (though he mention neither matter of linen, woollen, silk or cotton: nor colour of white, black, or any other,) was not much different from the same. And as for her company: who fit, among all her neighbours, for diverse considerations, The midwives attendance & the Clerks. than her midwife. And if the poor Clerk would not lose his fee accustomed or his dinner, but would weight on her home, or rather weight (poor soul) to fill his belly, (without hope whereof he would give but sorry attendance) ask him, whether he minded more a babble, or the table? And must this also, as a part of this Learned discourse of Eccl. government, be solemnly registered, for a matter breeding and nourishing superstitious opinions in the simple people's hearts: which in a well reformed Church, Conceiving superstitious opinions hereupon. is not to be suffered? These than are the great & weighty matters, wherefore our Brethren find fault with this order of women's churching (or coming to the Church) to yield their public thanksgiving to God, for their child and safe deliverance, after their childbirth, for which causes (they say) it ought altogether to be omitted. But who seeth not that these quarrels had been better omitted, Burial. and are altogether if not babbles, yet bubbles of mere babbling (if I may have leave to use such terms) rather than any causes of importance, to omit or take away this reverend matronlike and comely order. And that although any were so simple to conceive superstitious opinions hereupon: and though this white rail also were left clean off, and that the midwife kept herself at home: and that the Clerk lost his dinner too: yet might this order of women's Churching, being nothing but public thanksgiving in the Church, after their deliverance, continue in never so well reform Churches, and be suffered without just offence given, well-inough. The third quarrel of our Brethren is at the manner of Burial, of which as they said before, pag. 73. The other, albeit it be to be retained with a certain honesty, yet is it not to be tied to the proper office of a Pastor: so proceeding page. 75. they say: As for the burial of the dead, because Satan took occasion upon Ceremonies appointed thereunto, The learned Dis. Pag. 75. to sow the seed of many heresies in the Church, as prayers for the dead, Oblations for the dead, Purgatory, etc. also many superstitions as hallowing of Churchyards, distinctions of Burials, as some in the Chancel, some in the Church, and some in the Churchyeards: some with more pomp, as singing, ringing, Burial of the dead. etc. some with less, burying towards the East, lights and holy water bestowed on the dead, etc. it is thought good to the best and right reform Churches, to bury their dead reverently without any ceremonies of praying or preaching at them, because experience hath taught them, what inconvenience may grow thereof, by example of that which hath been before. Our Brethr. having so peremptorily condemned the other twain, Bridges. confirmation of children, & churching of women: as though they could be retained with no honesty: for burial, they are somewhat yet more favourable, in saying it may be retained with a certain honesty. Our Brethr. favour to bury the dead that it may be retained with a certain honesty. Whereas if at the least, we should not afford the dead thus much: we should either let them rot above the ground, or cast them to the beasts or fishes, as did the Capsians: or let the birds eat them, as did the Hyrcans: or the dogs eat them, as did the Bactrians: or eat them ourselves, as did the Messagetians and the Derbites: or hang them upon gybbets, as did the Tibarenes: all which were no honesty at all, but horrible & unnatural savageness: or else we should burn them to ashes as did the Africans, the Romans, Whether our man's of burial may so be retained. & divers other people as was the Ethnic manner among the Gentiles: or else why may we not be bold simply to say, It is an honest thing to bury the dead? But that the burial of the dead may be retained, albeit with a certain honesty. If our Brethren mean not simply here the burial of the dead, but our manner of burial which the book prescibeth, that it may be retained with a certain honesty: how speak they not then against themselves, in speaking against our manner of their burial, The Pastor's office in burial. if with a certain honesty, or any honesty at all it may be retained? But they say: yet it is not to be tied to the proper office of a Pastor. So that they will stand to this, that it may be retained with a certain honesty, How other may bury the dead. and will not use here precisely these words, proper office, and the manner of tying: I grant them also, upon necessity or occasion, both that other may bury the dead, and that the dead also may be buried amongst us otherwise, and that properly of itself, it is no part at all of his proper office, no more than is the solemnising of marriage. Howbeit, it is such an action, as may be well adjoined to his office, without any blemish thereunto. Yea, if the public ministration of the word, How burial as, and how not the Pastor's part. be a proper part of his office, which our Brethren do not deny: if there be any public use and ministery of the word at the time of the burial of the dead: then, how hath not the Pastor his part herein? And other parts he is not put unto▪ as to dig the grave, to bear the corpse to the grave, to lay it in the grave, or to fill up the grave again with earth, or any such action: but only to pronounce the sentences of scripture, that concern the state of the dead, the information, and consolation of the living; the giving thanks to God for the party departed, and praying for ourselves that are alive: except a sermon be also preached at the funeral. If these things may be retained with a certain honesty: to whom then are these things more tied, than to the proper office of a Pastor. But our Brethren go further in the burial of the dead and say: because Satan took occasion upon ceremonies appointed thereunto, to sow the seed of many heresies in the Church, as etc. also many superstitions, etc. that therefore, it is thought good to the best and right reform Churches, to bury their dead reverently, without any ceremonies of praying or preaching at them. I grant, some heresies in the Church might be the more strengthened, by the superstitious manner of burying the dead: but I rather suppose, a converse; that the corrupt manner of burying the dead: took occasion upon the seed of those heresies. But here among the superstitions which our Brethren recite, of burying the dead: How came in these three, under the name of distinction of burials, as some in the Chancel, some in the Church, and some in the Churchyeardes: some with more pomp, as singing ringing, etc. some with less: burying towards the East? Is all distinction of burials, Distinction of burials. absolutely and without all distinction, superstitious? Would our Brethren have a confusion of burials, and no distinction but all persons, Princes, Magistrates, private and common people, rich and poor, to be buried all a like? Are they offended that some should be buried in the Chancel, some in the body of the Church and some in the Churchyeardes? What mean they hereby? The grounds to bury in. Would they have none buried, in any of all these places: but every body to bury their dead in their own proper grounds, or in some other common ground appointed properly thereunto? Neither do we contend with them, against this last mentioned ground of burial: neither ought they to contend with us, for the burial of the dead, so far as conveniently may be done, neither in Churchyard, Church, or Chancel. If they respect health or contagion, as diverse do: those are Physical causes, and not superstitious. If they respect the superstitions, into the which the Papists did degenerate: we reject them as much, as any of our Brethren, or ani● other do. And howsoever any did abuse the burial of the dead, with superstition, by occasion of the place: yet at the first they did not so. But as Aretius on the title of burial saith: the Christians when things were at the length set in order, did bury the dead at the Martyr's Churches, Aretius' in problem. desepult. which thing may be thought to be done therefore, because that at the Martyr's Churches, the prayers and the sermons were made. And if so be that any persecution should light upon them by the example and constancy of the Martyrs, they were stirred up among themselves, The originals of buriing in churches. to constancy in the faith, and in the profession of it, to the which thing, the present sepulchres of the Martyrs did incite them. But howsoever the posterity abused this afterward with superstition (from the which, God be praised we are free) neither are there many that are buried in the Chancel, or in the Church; and it is a thing done not for any opinion of more holiness in the place, but only for more civil honour of the party, in a place counted more worshipful. As Christ speaketh in his parable, Luk. 14. of the higher and of the lower place at the table, to be reserved for a more honourable man. And so h●re, the Chancel being counted the higher place in dignity, than the body of the Church: and the body of the Church, than the Churchyard: if now, the dead be buried according to his higher degree, when he lived in a place of higher estimation, so there arise no danger of superstition to the health of the souls, nor danger of contagion to the health of the bodies of the people living: what great matter is to be made of the distinction of these places? And if they stand so much on the distinction of these three places: will they disallow all three without distinction? If they count the burial in the highest place, to be but pomp: why should they mislike the burial in the Churchyard, which is the common place of burial for the basest? If they should not be buried in the Churchyard, neither. Where would they have them bury them? In the open fields; to be digged up of swine, or in men's private grounds, gardens, or orchyeards; as the worshipful among the jews were, or the common sort in some common plo● of ground (as I said before) dedicated to that purpose? But what is that ground, other than a Churchyard, Any place of burial may be subject to superstition. or a yard of many Churches or Parishes, for their burials? Which, stand it near or round about the Church, or further from it, or within the City, Town or Village, or without; except some consideration be had of narrow places in a populous City, and of contagious times and diseases, only to avoid contagion for the body, which consideration we hold well with, but let that place, or any other, be once made the ordinary place of burial: admitting withal any ministery of the word at the burial: may not that place also be subject to as much superstition as the other? Yea, if no ministery of the word at all be there used: may not that also, even for lack of-good instruction, breed as much, if not more, and that more dangerous superstition? Why should our Brethren therefore stretch their quarrel thus far, even to the burial in the Churchyard? The Churchyard. For although the Chancel and Church, be not properly dedicated unto burials, save that extraordinarily, some burials may be in them: yet the Churchyard is the proper place allotted thereunto, which the ancient Greek Church called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a place to sleep in, as the Monks termed their Dortoir or dormitory, likening our death to our sleep, and our burial to our bed, for the hope of our waking, at the last and general resurrection. And yet the hebrews much better, call it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beth caym, the house of the living: because though the bodies only be there lodged, as in a house; yet their soul's sleeps not, but are living. The Germans call it Gottes acker, of ager dei, the acre or field of God. And we term it, the Churchyard, as the measure of yearth pertaining to the Church, derived of the old word, kyrke-gerth, yet used in the North, as the yearth that is dedicated unto the Lord, not unaptly fetched from, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And what place fit (all superstition being disclaimed) than is this ground, if not of the Church: yet of this Churchyard, for our burials? But as our Brethr. find fault, with this distinction of places: so they find fault with this distinction of our manner of burying the dead: that we bury some with more pomp, as singing, ringing, etc. some with less. Pomp in Burials. If our Brethren take pomp in the better sense: would they have all persons buried with like pomp? Or if in the worst sense: would they have no pomp nor solemnity used at all, at any person's burial? but what this pomp should be, except that they mention only, singing & ringing: I can not certainly tell. For they suppress the residue, with an etc. but that singing or ringing is utterly or then unlawful: or any to be buried with more solemnity than other, according to the decency of their state & calling; me thinks our Brethr. herein should not be so hard, to condemn the distinction of that also, as in itself merely superstitious. We read in the old Testament of great distinction, about the burial of the dead, even of the holy patriarchs. Distinction of burials, some with more solemnity than other both in the old and new Testament. Who were all buried in such solemn place & manner, as Abraham buried his wife? Gen. 23. And was himself buried, Gen. 25 and as Isaac was buried, and Rachel jacobs' wife, Gen. 35. and as jacob & joseph Gen. 50. and diverse others, that were buried more solemnly than other were. Neither was the greater pomp of their funeral, esteemed of the holy fathers, before the coming of christ, a superstitious, but a decent & an honourable thing. Neither was it any such figure of Christ's more honourable burial (as Zegedinus thinketh) that it should cease after the burial of Christ, and that we should now be buried all alike: no, it rather argueth (as Selnecserus therein thinketh much better in my opinion) that a Christian man according to his higher estate, or to the excellency of his life in his calling, may have without superstition, a more honourable burial. And as it appeareth how Stephen was buried, Act. 8. with greater mourning, than were the common sort of Christians in those days. As for the offence which our Brethren take, with burying towards the East: Burying towards the East. I think it not a matter so worthy, as to have been once noted in their Learned Disc. Indeed it is a common order among Christians, so to bury the dead; as well to differ from Turks & jews: as also (making no necessity of the matter, nor matter of religion) to be the more sign, that they have the better hope of the resurrection, in laying the corpse of the dead Christians, in such manner, as though they respected the reddier lifting up of themselves, when they shall all be raised to life again, to behold the coming of our Saviour Christ, which to us ward ascended in the east. Not to tie him to descend here or there; or that they doubted, but that wheresoever they be, & howsoever they lie, or shallbe consumed, he will at the glorious appearance of his coming, gather them all unto him, as he saith: Luc. 13.29. Then shall many come from the East, & from the West, & from the North, and from the South, & shall sit at the table in the kingdom of God And I take that our ancestors in these west parts in so laying the dead, had this especial respect. If any did it superstitiously, or made any matter of religion in so doing; I excuse him not, and think, so it be done without offence, or contempt of the common order, that they may use it otherwise, without any danger or impediment, for any thing I know to the contrary. As for the other things mentioned here by our Brethr. as they were proper to the adversaries of the Gospel: so (God be praised) they are removed. Neither doth our prescribed form of Burial allow them, or give any the least occasion to any of all those heresies, errors, or superstitions. But now, to avoid all occasion o● heresies, errors and superstitions▪ what form of burial would our Brethren have? Forsooth they say: It is thought good to the best & right reform churches, to bury their dead reverently, without any ceremonies of praying or preaching at them. Here is a short manner indeed of burying the dead, and agreeth herein with the book of the Form of Common prayer, which our Brethren have of late set out. Wherein upon the title of burial, they say: The corpse is reverently to be brought to the grave, accompanied with the neighbours in comely manner, without any further ceremony. And this is all that they say there, of the form of burial. But if this be the form of the best and right reform Churches: what shall we then say (to go no further, than even to the Church of Geneva itself) to the book called, The form of prayers and ministration of the sacraments, etc. used in the English congregation at Geneva, and approved by the famous and godly learned man john calvin? Which book on the title of burial, pag. 88 saith on this wise: The corpse is reverently brought to the grave, accompanied with the congregation, without any further ceremonies, which being buried, the minister goeth to the Church, if it be not far off, and maketh some comfortable exhortation to the people, touching death, and resurrection. Here is yet a Sermon to be preached at least wise some comfortable exhortation to be made by the Minister, at the burial of the dead; though not at the very place (for neither do we so tie it, to the place) of burial. The dead may be buried in the Churchyard, or any other place assigned thereunto, and the sermon be in the, Church, and nevertheless be well said, to be at the burial, because it is made for that especial purpose, and for that commonly, the congregation is not dismissed all in a doom and silent action, but that some words of consolation are uttered by the Minister ere they depart. Bucer in his Epitome Ecel. Argentinae cap. 27. saith on this wise: We teach concerning those whom the Lord in the confession of his name hath received to himself out of this life: Bucerus in Epitome Eccl. Argent. cap. 27. that they are withal fear of God and honestly to be committed to the earth, and there the people out of the word of God to be admonished, of the heavy judgement of God against sin, and also of the redemption of Christ who hath redeemed us from death, and of the aeternal life which he hath purchased to all his faithful. After which men are to be exhorted also to the repentance of their sins and to a firm hope of the blessed resurrection and heavenly life, and also to the earnest study and care of the life to come. Which verily is placed in the mortification of the old Adam and restoring the new. Whereunto also prayers are to be joined for true repentance, and confirmation of faith, and also for the blessed resurrection, both of the dead and of them that be present. To conclude, alms also are to be given. Yea, calvin himself in his Epistle to the Monsbelgardians Epist. 51 (wherein he telleth them what he himself would do, if he sustained their person) when he cometh to burial writeth thus. In the burial of the dead I would have this moderation to be adhibited, calvini Epist. 51. that the corpse should not be carried into the Church, but strait unto the Churchyard, there also would I have an exhortation to be made, that the company should acknowledge that which should be spoken in the present matter of the funeral. No contention for ringing at burials. This manner were not much to be disallowed. As for the ringing of the bell, I would not have you stiffly reclaim against it, if it may not be obtained that the Prince would remit it. Not that I allow it, but that I think it not a matter worthy of contention. Thus writeth calvin, what he would, and what he would not have, to choose, about the burial of the dead. Yea even of ringing also, though he mislike it, yet would he have no contention for it, but modestly referreth it to the Prince's order. Neither disalloweth he the burial in the Churchyard. As for an exhortation to be made, it is the special thing that he would have observed at a burial. Which exhortation, if it be a sermon (as the English Church in Geneva allowed by calvin doth also prescribe the same: calvin prescribeth an exhortation or sermon at funerals. then may that part of prayer, which is thanksgiving, be used at the burial of the dead. Yea and the other part of petition, though not for the dead, yet for the living & for the resurrection of living & dead, both may well be, & are always used in sermons, and a good part of our brethren's sermons are most what spent in the conceiving of prayers and petitions. Now if either exhortations or sermons be to be made at the funerals of the dead: who should rather pronounce or make them, than the Pastor? And if this be the order of the Church of England in Geneva approved by Calvin: who also wisheth it in other Churches: have our Brethr. here in England any just cause now to mislike it? If they think Geneva the best, or any right reformed Church (for I press them not here with the Protestants Churches in Germany, protestants books of funeral sermons. who have set forth diverse funeral sermons, and Spangelberges book is of the same matter; nor with the Churches in Helvetia: and Brandmillerus book, composed of 180. funeral s●●●●ns) how can our Brethren say, as here they do, that it is thought good to the best and right reform Churches, to bury their dead reverently, without any ceremonies of praying or preaching at them? Me thinks yet of twain, the English order in Geneva approved by calvin, is far better, than this new English order of our Brethren. Zanchius in his confession of Christian religion, cap. 25. de Eccl. militantis gubernation. Aphoris. 33. treating of the burial of the dead, Zanchius of the burial of the dead. writeth on this wise. As for their bodies we doubt not, but that they are to be brought with honour to the sepulchre: even as our Churches both in words and in very deed do teach: openly testifying, that they were the temples of the holy Ghost, now indeed destroyed, but in their time to be again restored, and to be raised up to life and that eternally. In the mean season the very sepulchres and the Churchyards are to be kept holily and reverently, as among us it is done. As for the children, or parents, the kindred and alliance of the dead, are to be comforted. And both we study, Singing Psalms at burials. to yield all the duties of humanity, that can be yielded: and we teach, that they ought to be yielded. And if any thing out of the Psalms, concerning the resurrection of the dead, be any where song, A sermon after the burial. while the corpse is borne, or if any sermon, after the corpse is interred, be made to the people, wherein honest mention be made, of other also which holily have slept in the Lord: we do never a whit disallow the same. Sith that, it is not made for the saving health of the party, or parties that are dead; but for the consolation and utility of the living, and to the edification of the whole Church. For we do believe, that the souls of the faithful being loosed from their bodies, do pass forthwith to Christ into heaven, and thereby have no need of our suffragies. Howbeit, the edification of the Church, is always upon any occasion given, to be furthered. Thus reverently writeth Zanchius of the manner of burying the dead not only allowing a sermon after the burial: but the burial to be in the Churchyard▪ Yea, not improving singing of the Psalms: as calvin before referred ringing to the authority and order of the Prince. And therefore our public order of burial appointed in the Communion book, as no whit inferior to any of these, (if not much better) may stand well enough in state as it doth, for any reason here alleged to the contrary. Our brethren's only reason is this: Because experience hath taught▪ what inconvenience may grow thereof, by example of that which hath been before. It is a good saying, Happy is he whom other men's harms do make to beware. But both our Brethren and we must again be as wary, lest that while we fear to stumble at that which might be occasion of like inconvenience, we both of us should mistake non causam pr●●●●sa, that to be a cause or occasion of heresies, errors, and superstition, which is no cause nor occasion of them: and so to shun the one, run on the otherside into as gross or grosser inconveniences, for lack altogether of preaching or exhortation, and that part of prayer, which is thanksgiving at the burial of the dead, as other heretofore have done by erroneous and superstitious abusing of the same. But our Brethren drawing now to the conclusion of these matters, The learned disc. pag. 75. & 76. say. And as they are not to be excused, if any for small trifles only, raise up hot contentions: so they have much to answer before God, that suffer the people of God to lack the only food of their souls for such human Constitutions. Whether any of these things aforesaid, Hot contentions. for the which our Brethren raise up these hot contentions, as the burying in the Chancel, Bridges Church, or Churchyard, the burial with more pomp or less, the laying of the corpse towards the East: Ho● unexcusable they are that contend for small trifles. the woman's white rail the midwives going with her to Church, and the clerks attendance on her home, be trifles and small trifles, yea, in comparison very nyfles, or no: let other judge. And yet must these be added to the residue, that the Churching or thanksgiving of women after their childbirth, might altogether be omitted: and that among the superstitions used in burial, no kind of praying nor preaching should be used. If preaching be the soul's food: who did last forbid it? And besides these things, what stir and hot contentions have been raised up, for a number of other things, which in regard of preaching (though otherwise in their kinds and degrees they be comely and decent, yet in that respect) may be accounted for small trifles? And therefore I would wish our Brethren to take good heed, what here they say, that they are not to be excused, if any for small trifles only raise up hot contentions: sith this toucheth themselves nearer than they ween. What maketh them to cast forth these speeches? But that they think, either these matters, for which they thus contend, are matters of great importance: or else, that not they, How farr● things indifferent being authorized, are to be contended for. but we raise up such hot contentions for them. And indeed, though in their own nature many of them be indifferent: yet, being by lawful authority ordained to be used, for public order, and for comeliness: they are become hereby more important, than that it may be lawful to any private man, at his own voluntary to shake them off, except by the like lawful authority, whereby they were brought in, they shall be removed. Yea, in this case we are bound to be hot for defence of them also (so we exceed not the bounds of Christian charity) both for obedience to the lawful authority that made them, and also for the order and comeliness sake, for which they were authorized, not to see them impugned; sith that in the impugning of them, not only the obeyer yielding to them is defaced: but the laws and Magistrates authority in making them, is violated and endangered. Wherein, although the defenders be hot, yet properly not the defenders, Not the defendants but oppugners, the raisers of these hot contentions. but the impugners are indeed the very raysers of these hot contentions. And therefore by this their own saying, our Brethren are not (in this behalf) to be excused, but rather (with grief, and in charity be it spoken) to be accused, yea they accuse in these words their own selves, as disturbers of the Churches quiet. Neither can they shelter themselves under this word, only; saying: they raise not up this hot contentions for small trifles only: but that among their quarrels, human constitutions. there are some of great importance. For, let any of them be of what importance soever they shallbe found to be: ought they (only or not only) to raise such hot contentions for any such small trifles? Now as in this point, they plainly make themselves not excusable: so much more, in adding these words: So have they much to answer before God, that suffer the people of God to lack the only food of their souls, for such human constitutions. Verily, this goeth nearer to the quick. For howsoever we may shuffle out answers one to another: The unexcusablenes of our Brethr. in withdrawing altogether of themselves from the ministery of the word for these constitutions. when we shall come to answer before God, we can not so answer before him. For if none should suffer the people of God to lack the only food of their souls for such human constitutions: shall our Brethren be excusable, that being lawfully called to the office of distributing this only food of our souls, do altogether with draw themsemselues, and that only (if they will afford them no better title) for such human constitutions? But they say, the fault is not in them: for they would gladly continue in feeding the people of God, if they might be suffered. Yet doth this their own saying, still make them unexcusable. For seeing they be but such human constitutions, as should be rather suffered, than that they should suffer the people of God to lack the only food of their souls; they suffering this, for not suffering the other; do invincibly recharge themselves, that herein they have much to answer before God. If our Brethr. reply, that these human constitutions, for which they suffer the people of God (as far as in them lieth) utterly to lack the only food of their souls, Whether our human constitutions be such as our Brethr. can not receive with retaining their functions be such as by no means are sufferable, and can not be joined with the delivery of the word of God: this requireth to be better proved, than yet it is. Which if they can prove, than we must needs yield the fault to be in us, and that we have much therein to answer before God, and to cry God hearty mercy, and join them. And also (I hope) upon such proof, every good man will do. But (for my part) I could never yet see this proved. As for any human constitution, that our communion book, and the Eccl. government of our Church of England doth require of them: hath been further by others & I also (I trust) have evidently & sufficiently proved, for those that as yet we have seen, that they are none other human constitutions, but such as may well stand with the Pastors feeding the people of God, with the only food of their fowls, to wit, the word of God. And therefore, they have much to answer, who (by their not yielding to them, but rather clean forsaking the Pastorship committed to them, and ministery of the word and sacraments) are the cause their selves, that they be not suffered to preach; and so suffer the people to lack the only food of their souls, for things, which are in comparison far inferior matters. But to conclude (say our Brethren) it is the duty of every true Pastor to observe those things that are concluded by the lawful authority of the Church, Controlment of the church's conclusions. concerning ceremonial matters for order and comeliness sake, and for edification, and not to control public order, The learned disc. Pag. 76. by his private judgement but upon great and weighty causes. This is a good conclusion, that our Brethren do here make of all these matters. But do they not yet see, how flatly withal they conclude against themselves? For we are now in hand with ceremonial matters: And the whole Church o● England hath fully concluded long since, Bridges. & that by lawful authority, that these things are to be observed, what things a true Pastor must observe and not control. concerning ceremonial matters, for order and comeliness sake & for edification. What followeth then? But as our Brethr. here do say, it is the duty of every true Pastor to observe those things, and not to control public order, by his private judgement. How then do our Brethren in controlling and not observing those things, observe the duty of true Pastors? Do they think that their judgement is not private judgement? But what is it else? For although they were some greater number of Pastors than they be: yet being compared to the lawful authority of the whole Church of England, they are but private Pastors, and their judgement private, especially being deprived (by lawful authority) of their Pastorship, or rather, exauthorating themselves of the ministry. Do they think this exception, Our Brethr. their selves and their judgement private. which they reserve for the last cast, (and place it as a rearward in the end of this conclusion but upon great and weighty causes,) will be a sufficient starting hole to save all upright, & themselves from pronouncing the definitive sentence against themselves, that their doing is not the duty of true Pastors? No▪ that will not help them. For, these matters being but ceremonial matters (as they call them) and so not great and weighty: what great & weighty causes should move a true Pastor, by his private judgement, to control public order▪ in those things that are concluded by lawful authority of the Church, concerning ceremonial matters for order and comeliness sake & for edification? Shall any private man think (if he think them to be indeed the Church of God) that the Churches concluding of those things by lawful authority, proceeded not of greater and weightier causes, than his controlment? And therefore, except men shall make so little & light account of the true Church of God, and of her conclusions and orders by lawful authority, as to prefer every private man's or Pastors private judgement before hers: our Brethren by this their own conclusion, Contempt of the church's conclusions & lawful authority. must either needs yield to the Church of England's public conclusion and lawful authority, concerning these ceremonial matters, that they are to be observed for order and comeliness sake and for edification, as the Church of England hath decreed them, and not to control public order by private judgement: or else let our Brethr. hearken to their own conclusive sentence and determination, The power of order & jurisdiction. that they do not the duty of true Pastors. And thus much also for these ceremonies. We have hitherto entreated of the proper duty of a Pastor himself: now it followeth, The learned disc. Pag. 76. that we likewise set forth his authority in common government with the Elders. But least any man should mistake that, which we purpose to say of his authority, we have need to express what we mean by this word authority. For even those things that we have showed before to be the duty of a Pastor, may also be called his authority, as to preach and teach, wherein is included his authority to forgive and retain sins. Also his authority to minister the sacraments, and to do other things in the Church, which none may do but he. But in this place we understand authority, for power of government in the Church. 1. Cor. 12.28. Whereof the Apostle speaketh, that it is one of the graces and gifts of God necessary for the building of his Church. This authority of regiment we have declared that it ought not to be a Lordly ruling, 1. Pet. 5.3. Luke. 23.26. neither over their flock: nor yet over their fellow servants and brethren: 2. Cor. 1.14. and lest of all, that they ought to have dominion or Lordship over the faith of the Church. Bridges. Our Brethren here promise to set forth that part of the Pastor's authority, which they say, he hath, not of the proper duty of a Pastor himself, but in common government with the Elders. The Pastor's authority in common government with the Elders. But because these words, as they are grounded on the presupposal of that Eldership, which they make one part of their Ecclesiastical tetrarchy, not dealing with the word: so promising ●o treat of the authority of the Pastor in common government; they seem their selves to doubt, that (except they should expound what they mean thereby) it might easily be mistaken what they meant. Neither doubt they this mistaking without a cause, which of purpose shun the plain and usual approved distinction, of the authority or power of the order, and of the jurisdiction. But whatsoever authority of the Pastor they will now set forth, and make plain what they mean thereby: when as they say, For even those things which we have showed before to be the duty of a Pastor, may also be called his authority, as to preach and teach, wherein is included his authority to forgive and retain sins: if this authority of the Pastor to forgive and retain sins, How our Brethren beginning to include the Elders in the power of binding and losing do exclude thē●rom it. be included in his authority of preaching and teaching: and withal, this be a thing appertaining to the proper duty of a Pastor himself, as also is his authority to minister the Sacraments, and to do other things in the Church which none may do but he: then have not the Elders to deal in the authority of forgiving and retaining sins. For if they should; they should intermeddle with the word. For this is included in preaching and teaching. But our Brethren exclude the governing Elders from preaching and teaching: The Pastors auth. in common. therefore withal they exclude them from the authority of forgiving and retaining sins. And this by the way is not unnecessary to be here observed, because afterward they give authority of forgiving and retaining sins, unto the governing Elders, which they confess are not Teachers, nor Preachers, nor dealers at all with the word. But doth not this authority of the Pastor belong to jurisdiction? And therefore not only the authority of his order, to which properly preaching and teaching, and ministering the Sacraments do appertain: but the authority also of jurisdiction, to which the power of forgiving and retaining sins appertaineth, is the proper duty of the Pastor himself, which none may do but he, and is an authority separate from that his authority which is in common government with the Elders, or with any other which are not Pastors in the Church. And as for that power of government in the Church, whereof the Apostle speaketh, 1. Cor. 12.28. What that power of government was whereof S. Paul speaketh▪ Cor. 12.28. That it is one of the graces and gift, of God, necessary for the building of his Church: S. Paul maketh not all the graces and gifts of God, which there he speaketh of, necessary for the building of his Church, if we speak of such perpetual necessity, as that the Church can never be without them. For S. Paul reckoneth up there great offices, graces and gifts of God, that are not necessary in that sense. As even the first office that he beginneth there withal, of Apostles, besides the gifts of healings, the gifts of powers or of working mighty miracles, and the gifts of diverse kinds of languages. All which are not now so necessary in our days, (nor many hundredth years sithence) to the building of God's Church. Neither is it agréeed upon by the best interpreters, what manner of grace and gift of God, this power of government in the Church was, which S. Paul in that place speaketh of. For albeit Beza say: he declareth the order of Elders that were keepers of the Discipline and policy Ecclesiastical: yet saith Aretius, it is a political faculty of administering the common weal, and of ruling others commodiously, and of conserving them in order, which gift is necessary in Magistrates. And while the Church wanted a politic Magistracy, certain chosen Elders governed the assemblies of the faithful, as it were an ordinary Magistracy. Aretius' in 1. Cor. 12. Elders governing till public Magistrates came. Here in deed he sayeth, this gift is necessary, but he addeth in whom, to wit, in Magistrates: and yet he specifieth in what kind of Magistrates, to wit, political, and in the administering of the common wealth, not the Ecclesiastical discipline. And withal, he limiteth a time, how long this gift of government in these Elders continued in the Church, to wit, while the Church wanted a politic Magistracy. As who say the gift of this government in the Elders is ceased long since▪ and not now necessary, the Church having a politic Magistracy, Political Governors. in whom the gift of government is still necessary, and not in such Elders. And in this sense I deny not Caluines interpretation. calvin in 1. Cor. 12. Governors, I interpret Seniors, which were the Presidents of Discipline. For the first Church had her Senate, that held the people in the honesty of manners, which thing Paul declareth otherwhere, when as he setteth down a double order of Elders, the government therefore consisted of Elders, which excelled others in gravity, experience and authority. So that, although calvin distinguish the order of these Elders into two sorts, as do our Brethren, (which yet no necessity doth enforce:) nevertheless, he both restraineth this their gift of government, to the honesty of manners, not to any Ecclesiastical orders: and he maketh this office and Senate not to be perpetual, but as a thing that ceased, he saith, prima Ecclesia habuit. the first Church had her Senate, as who say, it went no further. And so we may say, The first Church had Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, and diverse gifts of healings, miracles, tongues, etc. The ordinary offices of which gifts have long since ceased. And therefore we can now make no ordinary nor necessary plea upon them, nor the governing Ecclesiastical Elders that our Brethren would erect are such Elders. To the larger and better manifestation whereof, Gualther (expounding this word, Gualther in 1. Cor. 12. governments saith: The seventh place in this order setteth down governments, by whom is comprehended political men, which in matters of this world helped any body, and took intelligence of their causes, if any should arise among the Christians. For as it is said in the sixth chapter, the Apostles would not that those which professed Christ, should contend for their goods, or for other matters pertaining to this life, before the tribunal seats of the ethnics. Prudent men therefore and exercised in the use of matters, were appointed to the oversight of such causes. By whose authority and Council the contentions were decided. The same also were publicly present with the Church, if any thing were to be done before the Proconsul's or the presidents. Which thing there is no doubt, but that it happened oftentimes. To conclude, they with their Counsels and prudence (even as it were certain shipmasters governed the Churches being then tossed among the diverse dangers of matters. At this day there is not in public, such need of such persons, No need of such governors in these days. sith that (as we have abovesayd) the Magistrates are Christian, by whose authority all these things may more happily be dispatched. And we ought to acknowledge the singular benefit of God, which in these last days, vouchsafeth to give unto his Church, both politic and Eccl. Governors, even as in the old time he promised by Esaias. Let none therefore lightly disturb the order instituted of God, that (trampling down the authority of Princes and of Magistrates) he should institute a new senate, The gifs of powers. that should challenge to themselves a right and Empire, The abuse of the popish. (or authority) of commanding) over them. This thing in the old time did certain Bishop●, perhaps of a good zeal. Howbeit that matter turned at the length into a Pontifical tyranny, & for the ambition of a few, did utterly overturn the Christian state. Let the Princes know again, that they are the members, not the Lords of the Church. And therefore let them use their Empire to the defence thereof, and direct all their counsels to this scope, that the order and safety thereof may be preserved. Thus, even where Gualther speaketh against the abuses of Princes, & of the Popish Bishops: yet doth he acknowledge both their lawful authorities: and showeth what the authority of this seniory was, to wit, a mere public government all in secular, and not in ecclesiastical matters: and how long it continued: how unnecessary now it is: how it is not the order instituted by God for us, but the very disturbance of it: and that this senate can not be now brought in a new, without the trampling down of the very Princes & Magistrates authority. To conclude, these governments that S. Paul here nameth, are nothing that grace, gift or office, which our Brethren here pretend, for their senate of governing Elders. Which Gualther rather likeneth unto the gift of powers, which S. Paul before in that place did mention. In the fourth place (saith Gualther) proceeding these gifts are reckoned up, powers for those that exercise lawful power in the Church. These were seniors, which being set over the Discipline, corrected them that had done any thing contrary to the duty of a Christian man. What was the gifts of powers and who had it. As for the wicked and obstinate they corrected them with a greater power of the spirit. For they were armed with a singular gift, that they might also deliver unto the devil to be afflicted, those that could not with admonitions and reproves be corrected. Examples of this power were showed from Elias and Elizeus in the old time. Of whom he (to wit, Elias) burned up with flames sent down from heaven, Elias. the soldiers that were sent to take him. But this man (to wit, Elizeus) called forth the Bears, Elizeas. which tore in pieces the Children that more saucily mocked him. By the same virtue (or power) Peter slew Ananias and Saphira, which presumed to lie unto the holy Ghost. Peter. He delivered also Simon Magus to destruction. Paul also used this power against Elimas' the sorceror, whom he deprived of his sight, for that he proceeded to deceive the proconsul of Cyprus with his lies. The same (Paul) writeth, Paul. that he delivered to Satan Himeneus and Alexander, that being stricken with some punishment, they might learn from thence forth not to blaspheme. And hereto also ought to be referred, that which in threatening manner he saith to certain obstinate persons, jurisdiction. in the second Epistle to the Corinthians: but if I shall come again I will not spare you: sith that ye seek the experiment of Christ speaking in me. For in these words he insinuateth not obscurely that with his words he had a virtue joined, of performing that which he spoke, and of correcting his contemners. Why there was need of these offices then & not now. And in the old time there was altogether need of this faculty of the spirit, when as the Churches had not a Magistrate, & therefore could not use the right of the sword. There is no necessity to require the same at this day, when as the gift of this spirit hath ceased. And the Princes and Magistrates are Christians, who with laws and public authority, restrain any whosoever in their office, and as for the stubborn and froward, they punish them. Some indeed there are, which after the example of the ancient and primitive Church, will institute seniors or a Senate Ecclesiastical, which may have Empire (or commandment) even also over the Magistrates themselves, if they at any time shall not do their duty. But those men ought first to have made demonstration, that their seniors have this power, whereof in present Paul speaketh. Which thing when as by no argument it appeareth: The frivolous imitation of the primitive Church in the erecting up of their senate. and nevertheless they deliver to Satan whom they will: they do alike, as if any would attempt to cleanse the lepers, to raise the dead, & to work such other myraclous work. For because that in the old time, such things were commonly done in the primitive Church. Thus again, Gualther: and on these graces and gifts of of God, grounding this Ecclesiastical Seniory, not of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉▪ governments: but on the former word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Powers: betokening such power as is miraculous, which although some Seniors in the Church than had it yet he allegeth the examples hereof, that such only exercised the same in Ecclesiastical matters, as were Ministers of the Word. But howsoever these seniors were, or what power soever they had: he maketh them and their power, not to be perpetual, but abiding a while, only for the state of that time, and so to have ceased, after that the public state of Christendom was settled, and governed by such princes and Magistrates as openly professed Christianity: and that from thence forth, the Churches were not tied to such Seniors, but that we (after thus many ages of Christian princes) be free from them. So that, where our Brethren say, they will not now set forth the pastors authority, in common Government with the Elders: If there be no need of such Elders to join in commons with him in his government: then as the other authority was proper to himself, so may this authority for power of government in the Church, (for any thing here to the contrary) be as proper also to himself, as the other. For, if these graces and gifts whereof the Apostle 1. Cor. 12.28. speaketh, were such distinct offices, as our brethren say can not be, but in distinct officers, without confusion of them: then either these gifts pertain not to the Pastors, Our brethr. confusion by their elder enter-comming in the Pastor's jurisdiction. so well as to these Elders (as here our Brethren say they do:) or else, if the Pastors have authority in them: than have not Elders to deal with them, except we should infer this confession, that they would have us shun. But now, our brethren giving this authority in common with the Elders: proceed to the limittation of the same, and say: This authority of regiment we have declared, that it ought not to be a Lordly ruling, neither over their flock: nor yet over their fellow-servants and bret. and least of all, that they ought to have dominion & Lordship over the faith of the Church. Dominion and Lordship over the faith of the Church, we grant none hath but almighty God, Dominion and Lordship. and jesus Christ only, that is both God and man.. As for the other authority, which they call Lordly ruling over their flock, or over their fellowe-seruauntes and Brethren: as they refer us to that they have declared: so I refer them to that we have declared. And among other (I hope I have sufficiently declared, what manner of ruling they may have, both over their flock, and over their fellow-seruaunts and brethren, both by the word of God, by the practice of the Primitive Church, and by the approbation of diverse the best learned protestants, in the reformed Churches of our age. But how this authority of Government, which here they give in common to the pastors with the Elders, shall be parted among them: is not yet determined. For, albeit our Brethren acknowledge, that the Pastors have rule and authority herein, yet the form of prayers in the English congregation at Geneva, doth deny it, and say: Pag. 43. Because the charge of the word of God, is of greater importance than that any man is able to dispense therewith: Our brethr. disagreement about the pastors jurisdiction and S. Paul exhorteth to esteem them as Ministers of Christ, and disposers of God's mysteries: not Lords or rulers as Peter saith over the flock: therefore the Pastors or Ministers chief office, standeth in preaching the word of God and Ministering the sacraments. So that in consultations, judgements, elections, and other political affairs, his counsel rather than authority taketh place. So that by this rule, he is so far from all lordly ruling: that he hath no rule nor authority at all, in Common with the Elders in these matters. But of the twain, our Brethren here say better, that he hath authority, understanding it for power of government in the Church. But say our Brethren: In all these, the man of sin hath exalted himself, contrary to the word of God: The learned Dis. Pag. 77. so that he would be head of all the Church, Bishop of all Bishops, and have authority to make new articles of Faith. Whose intolerable presumption, as we have long since banished out of this land, so we wish that no steps of such Pride and arrogancy, usurped authority. might be left beyond him: namely, that no elder or Minister of the Church should challenge unto himself, or accept it, if it were offered unto him, any other authority, than that is allowed by the spirit of God, but chiefly to be ware, that he usurp no authority which is forbidden by the word of God. For wherefore do we detest the Pope and his usurped supremacy, but because he arrogateth the same unto himself, not only without the warrant of God's word, but also clean contrary to the same? Bridges All this section we confess with our Brethren, and gladly subscribe unto it, save that we wish it not, as though it were only to be done, and is not done: but we trust it is performed already. If it be not, let our Brethren prove the contrary. Now if the reasons and authorities that have banished the Pope, do serve to condemn all other usurped authority, The learned disc. pag. 78. that is practised in the Church: why should not all such authority be banished as well as the Pope? And good reason too, that all other usurped authority, that is practised in the Church, Bridges should be as well banished as the Pope. But do our brethren mean by these speeches, of all other usurped authority, that is practised in the Church, that there is any such practised in the Church, meaning the church of England? For, these words are uttered so covertly, that we might seem in granting the consequence, that such should be banished: No such authority nor steps thereof except in these new devices. to grant withal, that there is some such in the church of England, remaining and practised yet among us. But we deny that there is any such, to our knowledge, or by the Laws approved in this Realm. And if there be any steps thereof: I doubt they will rather be found in the trake of our Brethren themselves, sooner than in any part of that authority which is allowed to our prelate's. We can allege against the Pope, and rightly, that which S. john baptist did answer to his Disciples. The learned Dis. Pag. 78. No man can take unto himself any thing, except it be given him from heaven. john. 3.27. john. 3.27. And that saying of the Apostle to the Hebrews: Heb. 5.4. No man may take upon him any honour (in the Church of God) but he that is called of God, as was Aaron. Insomuch that Christ himself did not give himself to be an high Priest, but he that said unto him: Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee. He saith in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedech. Phil. 2.6. Now seeing these rules are so general, that the Son of God himself was not exempted from them, but showed forth the decree wherein he was authorised: by what rule can any man retain that authority in the church of God, which is not called thereto by the word of God? Bridges. All this again being granted unto, beateth more our Brethren the Learned Discoursers that it doth our Bishops. Mastershop Our Brethren take upon them more in these their pretended reformations, than either they have hitherto done, or I think ever will be able, to show their warrant and calling, authorizing them thereunto, by the word of God. Likewise we can allege again, against the supremacy of the Pope, The learned disc pag. 79. & 80. to prove that Peter was not superior to the other Apostles, that which our saviour Christ saith to his Apostles, Luke. 22.26. Luke. 22.26. And Math. 20.25. Math. 20.25. Mark. 10.42. Mar. 10.42. It shall not be so among you, but he that is greatest amongst you, shall be as the youngest, and he that ruleth as he that serveth. And Mat. 23.8. Math. 23.8. You have but one Master, which is Christ, and all you are all brethren. If these places prove, that the Pope ought not to be above other Ministers of the Church: why do they not likewise prove that the Ministers are equal among themselves? And for the most part, all those arguments and authorities of Scripture, that are used to confute the usurped authority of the Pope, are of as great force against all other usurped authorities of one pastor over another. Bridges These sentences of our saviour Christ, having been before alleged by our Brethren, page 28. & 29. have been already sufficiently answered, that they neither forbidden the titles, nor the authority, that we acknowledge in our Bishops, by the confession of the best writers even among our Brethren themselves. Which sentences as they are rightly alleged against the supremacy of the Pope, to prove that Peter was not (such) a superior to the other Apostles, as the Papists do pretend: so are they not rightly alleged, to prove that he ha● never any kind of superiority, but no such kind of superiority, as the pope falsely claimeth in the name of Peter. For, not only all the ancient Fathers, and all the best writers, acknowledge, (as we have seen) some superiority in Peter, such as cotrarieth not these sentences: but also S. Paul is most plain herein, that S. Peter had a kind of superiority, if not to all, yet to many of the other Apostles. And for these sentences, Luke 22 ●●. as we have already at large considered the poise of them: so the first sentence here cited, alloweth in plain words, both a Ruler among them, and a greatest: so that he be in humility and serviceableness, as courteous and diligent as if he were youngest, or as he that serveth. The other place here cited: You have but one Master, which is Christ, and all you are Brethren: proveth clearly, Math. 32.8. that the Pope ought not to claim that mastership which he requireth: but it proveth not, that (were he otherwise a true a true faithful Bishop) he might have no Mastership at all: for than our Brethren might not be called Masters, All mastership not forbidden in the ministry nor the title thereof. neither as we (and that worthily) call M. calvin, M. Beza, etc. Masters. But this sentence is against the Pope, not against them: because the pope, not they, would intrude himself into that absolute and supreme Mastership, and Lordship. Which properly and only belongeth to our Lord and Master, jesus Christ. But our brethren demand: why do they not likewise prove, that the Ministers are equal among themselves? And so they do, in respect of the supreme Mastership of Christ, and in respect simply of their Ministry: but, the reason why they prove not such an equality, as our brethren surmise, is, because they are spoken absolutely, against all kind of superiority and Mastership among them. And therefore, where they say, that, for the most part, all those arguments and authorities of scripture, that are used to confute the usurped authority of the pope, Usurped authority. are of as great force against all other usurped authorities of one pastor over another: Although this be but a lose consequent: yet we may well grant this conclusion, for usurped authorities. But till our Brethren can prove some such among us, as are usurped: all these sentences, arguments, and authorities, are but usurped, and wrested against their authority which is lawful. Therefore while we entreat of the authority of the Pastors, we must take heed that we open not a Window to popish tyranny, The learned disc. Pag. 80. in steed of Pastoral authority, and that we enlarge, not the bounds of authority, without the bounds of the scripture. We also like well the caveat of this conclusion. Would God our brethren would indeed take heed unto it. Bridges For if it be not taken heed unto in time: their Pastoral authori●● w●ll so enlarge the bounds thereof, that it will not only tyrannize over the authority of the Doctors, Our breath. good caveat against themselves. whom they clean debar from all public exhortation, reprehension, conselation, and application, and over all their Seniory of new Governors as we shall (God willing) see in this Discourse: but over all the Church. And it beginneth prettily well, to abridge the Christian Princes and civil Magistrates supreme authority in ecclesiastical causes, (as in part we have already seen) and all without the bounds of the scripture. But this their Pastoral authority, by that time their governing Seniory were every where settled and established, and had enlarged her bounds in every Congregation, would be meetly well repressed, as we have seen in the form of prayers printed at Geneva. And thus would one enlarge itself ●uer another, which might open, not a window, but the broad gates, to a worse than Popish tyranny, and still all without the bounds of the Scripture. Wherefore while we search the scripture, the only rule whereby the Church of God ought to be governed: The learned disc pag. 80. & 81. we find that in regiment & governance of the Church, the pastor, B. or elder, hath none authority by himself, separated from other. For in the Church there ought to be no Monarchy or sole absolute government, but that is referred particularly to our saviour Christ only, ●2. Tim. 6.7. jude. 4. Christ saith, search the scriptures, Tyrannising. for in them ye reckon unto yourselves that ye have eternal life, and they bear witness of me. john. 5.39. In searching the scripture we find this rule, Bridges. where the Apostle warneth Timothy: But abide thou in those things which thou haste learned, and which are of trust committed unto thee. God's word the rule of our faith & life. Knowing of whom thou hast learned them, and that thou hast from a child known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee skilful, concerning the salvation by the faith which is in Christ jesu. The whole scripture inspired from God, is profitable to Doctrine, to reprehension, to correction, to institution, which is in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, being perfectly instructed to every good work. 2. Tim. 3. And this we confess against the adversaries of the scripture, and with our Brethren, that the divine and Canonical scripture as the only rule, that containeth all things perfectly, concerning faith and the salvation which is in jesus Christ, to make the man of God perfect unto all good works: but that the holy scripture is the only rule, whereby the Church of God ought to be governed: understanding by these words, God's word hath not set down an only form of the Church's government. that the scripture hath set down a perpetual and general rule, of all the only order of the Church's form of external government, as well as it hath of faith, and of the moral part of man's actions and conversation: if we search the scripture never so much, neither we nor our brethren shall ever find it. For, the church of God may safely admit, according to the diversities of the states thereof, divers forms and orders whereby it may be governed. So that nothing be withal admitted, prejudicial to the Law, & to the Gospel, that is to say neither against faith, nor good manners, as S. Austen termeth it. Neither is all the Government of the Church, in the government or authority of the pastor, Bishop or Elder. The Prince's government of the Church of God. For the Christian Prince and civil Magistrate hath a government of the Church of God also, and there be divers approved forms, whereby princes and Magistrates govern the Church of God, in the divers parts and states thereof, besides the ecclesiastical government of pastors. And as for that here our Brethren say, the pastor, Bishop or Elder hath no authority by himself separated from other: These speeches are spoken ambiguously. It is true in one sense, that neither pastor nor yet Bishop (for I distinguish these terms that here are confusedly clapped together) hath any authority by himself separated from other in the regiment of the Church: but that he hath the same in common with all other in the church that be of his calling: and not like a pope as an A-per-se, as though none other should have it but he only, and all other from him: Neither hath any pastor, How the authority is not separate from other. or Bishop, or Elder any such authority by himself, that can properly be said, to be separated from other. For if it be separated from other, then it hath no government of them, nor dealing with them. Yea, Separate authority. we grant, that whatsoever authority and Pastor, or B. or elder hath, it is the Church's authority, because it is given unto them that are the parts and members of the whole Church, and to the Church's use and profit. As S. Paul showeth, Ephes. 4.11. etc. He therefore gave some to be Apostles, other prophets, other Evangelists, other pastors and Doctors, to the growing together of the saints, to the work of the Ministry, to the edification of the body of Christ. And the Apostle 1. Cor. 12. after he hath showed, how the spirit of God giveth separately his spiritual gifts, saying, verse. 11. But all these worketh one and the self same spirit, S. Paul's example of the mystical body compared to the natural distributing privately even as he will: he addeth: for as the body is one, and hath many members, but all the members of one body, when as they are many, are one body: so also Christ. For by one spirit we are all baptised into one body, whether jews or Grecians, whether servants or free, and all have drunk one drink, into one spirit. For the body is not one member but many. If the foot say, I am not the hand, I am not of the body, is it therefore not of the body? and if the ear say, I am not the eye, I am not of the body, is it therefore not of the body? If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling? But now hath God placed the members every one separately in the body? even as he would. But if all were one member, where were the body? but now there are many members, and yet but one body. Thus doth S. Paul reason, from the resemblance and proportion of the natural body, and the regiment thereof, to the mystical. So that, although, what gift, faculty, power, or government soever they have, it is not so separated from other by themselves, that it hath no Community with the other, nor is pertaining to them. For, it pertaineth to the whole in common, as we say also in the schools, of the soul or life of man: anima est tota in toto, & in qualibet part. The soul or life is whole in the whole body and in every part. But yet every faculty and power of the soul and life, is not in the whole body, nor in every part thereof, but in the member only, The respects of the community and separation. that is the proper organ to the same. And so hath every Bishop or pastoral Elder, some authority by himself, in the regiment & government of the Church, so separated from other, that other which have not the same office, have not the same authority. So that the community in respect of the benefit, bars not the separation in respect of the exercise of the authority, and therefore faith S. Paul, 1. Cor. 12.27. You are all of the body of Christ and members in part. And some hath God ordained in the Church, first Apostles, them Prophets, thirdly Doctors, than powers, than the gifts of healing, helpings, governments, kinds of tongues. Are all Apostles? are all prophets? are all Doctors? are all powers? have all the gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongs: do all interpret? So that, as in the first and second degrees here mentioned, the Apostles and Prophets had some power and authority in the regiment and governance of the Church, by themselves separated from other: so may we safely conclude of the Doctors here mentioned also (by which name our Brethren do here comprehend both Bishops and Pastors) that they had some power and authority of regiment and governance in the Church, by themselves separated from other in like manner. And this manifestly appeareth in their practice. The Apostle Saint Paul by his Apostolical authority in the Ecclesiastical regiment and governance of the Church, setteth down in diverse places diverse rules, some temporary, some perpetual, concerning orders, rites, and ceremonies of the Churches, without any jointure of those Church's authorities to whom he enjoined them. Yea, without so much as ask any counsel of them, or deliberating with them. And 1. Cor. 11.34. he saith in general: other things well I set in order when I come. 1. Cor. 11.34 He saith not, you and I together in joint authority: and yet (no doubt) he had the joint consent (compromitted to him before, and declared after) of all good men, in all those ordinances that he had made, or should make amongst them. But the authority was his, not theirs, & by himself separated from other, he exercised the same: I, not we, (saith he) will disp●se them. If our Brethren say that Paul was an Apostle, and they allege this rule, not for Apostles, but that in the regiment and governance of the Church, the Pastor, Bishop, or Elder, hath none authority by himself separated from other: although we have showed already that Saint Paul exercised sometimes the office of a pastoral Elder, which he did also in Corinthus: yet, Our bre. reason from Christ deba●reth Apostles and all from any separate authouritie. sith our Brethren annex this reason, For in the Church, there ought to be no Monarchy or sole absolute government, but that is referred peculiarly to our Saviour Christ only: How doth not this reason cut off Saint Paul even as an Apostle, and all the Apostle, and all other besides our Saviour Christ only? Did they take upon them the Monarchy, or sole absolute government, that is referred peculiarly to our Saviour Christ only? And what though no ordinary Bishops, Pastors, nor Elders, have in all things like authority as the Apostles had? Yet to take upon them this monarchy and sole absolute government peculiar to Christ only, they and all the Angels in heaven were as much debarred as any other. So then, by this our brethren's reason, the Apostles might have none authority by themselves separated from other, in the regiment & government of the Church: But we see how they had such separate authority: neither may we think, they invaded Christ's monarchy, or sole absolute government: and therefore Christ's monarchy or sole absolute government may stand entire, & yet may some other Ecclesiastical person have from Christ some authority by himself separated from other in the regiment and governance of the Church. For he that hath some part of the monarch authority, (and that not of himself, but representing the Monarch) committed to him, and that to him by himself, separated from other, doth not forth with take the Monarchy on him, or that sole absolute government, that is referred peculiarly to our Saviour Christ only, but the Apostles had and exercised so far forth some authority in the regiment of the Church by themselves separated from other: that they appointed other also to take such authority upon them, and give them rules of the same. Timothy's authority given him separate to himself both in teaching and governing. And as we have showed out of our Brethren themselves, that Timothy (whose example they would elude, under pretence that he was an Evangelist) was the Pastor of Ephesus, and the chief Pastor there, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Antistes, Bishop, and that their first or Archbishop: so Saint Paul that had it and used it by himself, giveth Timothy likewise authority by himself, separated (in respect of the authority) from other, and that not only in the function of teaching, but also in the Ecclesiastical and public government of the Church. For teaching, he saith 1. Tim. 1.3. As I besought thee to abide still in Ephesus, when I departed into Macedonia, that thou shouldest command some, not to teach other doctrine. And in the 4. Chap. verse. 11. etc. These things command and teach. Let no man despise thy youth, but be unto them that believe, an example in word, in conversation, in love, in spirit, in faith, & in pureness, till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, and to doctrine. Despise not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophesy, with the laying on of hands of the Presbytery (or Eldership.) These things exercise thou, in these things be thou, that they profiting may be manifest among all. Take heed● to thyself & to thy doctrine continued these things. For doing the same, thou shalt save thyself, and the hearers of thee. All which authority as it is peculiar to the proper duty of thepastorall office, and in common to Saint Paul, to the Apostles, Evangelists, Bishops, Pastors, & to all Elders & Ministers of the word by themselves separate from other: (in which part, neither any of them, nor all they, nor all the Angels in heaven, can make, nor teach any other Gospel:) so, for that which followeth in the next Chapter, consisting all or most of that authority, which our Brethren say, they now understand for power of government in the Church, the Apostle ascribeth also many parts, and those the chief and principal parts of that authority, to the rule and governance of Timothy by himself, separated from others in that authority, even as he did before in the doctrine. And in this respect with much better reason, that in these things both Paul and Timothy had, and the Bishops & pastors have more authority, as in matters that men might make, and some of them also alterable. As for example. Rebuke not an Elder (saith Saint Paul to Timothy, Timothy's separate authority. 1. Tim. 5.1.) but exhort him as a Father. The rebuking therefore of an Elder appertained to his authority in the government of the Church. But he might rebuke him by himself, and separated from other, that is, as well by his own pastoral authority separated from others authority, as privately by himself, or separating the Elders from other. Moreover (saith Paul to Timothy, verse. 11.) reject the younger widows. The rejecting therefore of the widows (to whom Beza ascribes an Ecclesiastical office) appertained also unto Timothy. And verse 19 Against an Elder admit no accusation, except under 2. or 3. witnesses. Not only therefore the hearing, and all the chief process in judgement, but the very admitting o● the accusation, appertained particularly to his authority by himself separated from other, though not so separated, that they might not sit with him, but that in the admitting and determining such accusations, even in the Consistory against an Elder, and the Elder a Pastor also: the authority of the negative voice is ascribed here to him, and in his person to a Bishop. This may also be referred (saith Hemingius) unto the honour of Priests (or Elders) that the Bishop should not give care, Hemingius in 1. Tim. 5. to the slanderers of the life and fame of them, except they were convicted before, by lawful witnesses. For if he would hearken to tale tellers, without evident knowledge of the cause, it cannot be but that oftentimes he should give over hasty judgement, and should be carried rashly against the innocent. Wherein he plainly ascribeth the authority of judgement (over a Pastor accused) to the Bishop. The proposition of this place is (saith Aretius) that a Bishop must endeavour himself, Aretius' in 1. Tim. 5. that the Ecclesiastical judgements may most ho●●lie be administered. He appointeth the parts from the division. For sin either is hidden, and therefore by witnesses to be convinced: or is notorious, neither hath the sinner need of witness, because the sin is evident, or else also he doth confess it. Of either of this kind he briefly treateth, but he beginneth with that that is hidden. As it is wont in great men, such as are the Precedents of the Common weal and of the Church, whose sin is not evident, for because of their authority. These if they be complained upon, inquiry must be made by witnesses. Signifying, that the complainers must not easily be believed. Moreover, that the fame and name of those that are good, must be favoured, that they be not openly defaced with every small rumour. First, here I take Priest or Elder, by office and age, that is, the Ministers must not be condemned, except diligent inquisition be had. Nei●her only the Ministers, but all persons of grave years. For unto whom God hath given a good name and gravity of age, it behoveth to worship them in the place of parents. Therefore diligent heed is to be had, that the defamers be not rashly believed against such persons. Moreover, because such Priests or Elders were judges and Senators Ecclesiastical, that corrected other for their sin, according to the reason of their fault: it is credible that they incurred the offence of many, insomuch that they should not want backbiters It was therefore a matter worthy of admonition, that nothing should rashly be credited against them. Neither followeth it thereupon, that witnesses should be had only in these, and in other they must proceed without witnesses: yea rather, because in these gravity is required: he teacheth that the same must be had in every Ecclesiastical judgement. In the mean time there are many light and childish matters, in which neither the integrity of the fame nor name is touched, The rule given to Timothy, is general to all present governors and Bishops wherein there is no need of like rigour. Let us therefore establish this for a common rule, that in all Ecclesiastical judgement the precedent or governor must have care, that in a godly and holy sort inquisition may be made of men's sins. Thus doth likewise Aretius draw this precept of Paul to Timothy, to a general rule▪ that in the consistory & in criminal causes, even against a Minister, whom he calleth also a President over the people the hearing, that the Bishop is a higher President above him, and hath the admittance, and his judging of the matter. And what differeth Beza herein from these: Bestain 1. Tim. 5. Against an Elder (saith he) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Greeks refer this to men of more ancient years, which to me seemeth very absurd. For although somewhat ought to be given to the hoar head, yet I see no cause why in this point the condition ought not to be alike. But in a Priest there is a far other reason, because it is certain that Satan layeth his snare chiefly against this sort of men. And for that cause none are so much thrall to slanders and backbitings. In hearing therefore the accusations of them, there is most need of great heedfulness. But thou wilt say, what is that? Hear me thinks some have stumbled, while they think that nothing is here prescribed of Paul, which in all judgements is to be observed. And therefore they sweat much in untying this knot, and do manifestly wrest the words of the Apostle, insomuch verily that some (which thing Erasmus out of a certain Epistle written by Saint Jerome to Marcelia rehearseth) do clean blot out all that member following, and then expound it: receive not, that is, receive not easily. Howbeit I do not suppose any difficulty to be here, for it is one thing to admit the accusation, and anotherthing to absolve, or condemn the accused. But this is the office of a judge, to hear any that will accuse, A judges office. whom afterward if they shall not thoroughly prove him guilty, he may chastise according to their deserts. But for all this, when as a Priest is accused, the Apostle would have a certain peculiar thing to be observed, that no man should be admitted, no not so much as to accuse him, except before hand, afore two or three witnesses, he shall cause his accusation that is to come, to be believed. So that the Priest be not strait way condemned, or the cause heard in his absence. But that after it shall appare that it will not be a frivolous accusation: That then at the length the guilty party shall be called, and that it shall be lawfully determined on the whole matter. But I find the cause of this Apostolical constitution to be two fold: to wit, By Priest or Elder, he meaneth Doctor or Teacher. because (as I said right now) none are alike thrall unto slander, as are godly Doctors. And then because in a manner no private judgement can be ordained against a Priest, sith that it must needs be joined with the public offence of the whole Church. Insomuch, that although he be absolved, notwithstanding some imfamie thereupon shall redound to the whole Church, and that there should be need of great caution, not only in judging him, but also in admitting his accuser. Moreover, we must note out of this place▪ that Timothy in the Ephesine Presbytery, was then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, (Antistes) the Bishop, as justine calleth him, not that he should do all things, as he listed, but that for his godliness and wisdom he should moderate all things, that all things in the assembly should be well done and in order. Thus doth even Beza also not only acknowledge Tymothie to have been the Bishop of the Church of Ephesus: but also that both he had, and every Bishop by this rule ought to have this authority of moderation, whether any accusation, (and how far forth) should be admitted against a Pastoral Elder, This authority was separate unto Timothy. and in hearing and determining the cause to be his judge. Which authority (in so great a Consistory as then and there was) being singled and separated out from other unto him: how had other any part with him of the same? And as it was thus in trial of matters pleaded before him: so if any Pastors were found to have openly offended, Timothy again in the next verse (and in Timothy every Bishop) hath authority given him over any such pastors openly to reprove them. And the reason is a●ded by the Apostle, That the other also (speaking especially of the other Pastors) may have fear. From hence (saith Aretius) is this noble argument drawn. Fear in the church is to be confirmed, Aretius. therefore Ecclesiastical judgements are gravely to be administered: so that, sith the Bishop's authority should be such, as should strike fear in the other pastors, it is apparent, they had not the same nor equal authority with him. And so Hyperius referreth all this in general to the authority of Bishops, though the matter be brought before the Church, and that the Bishops should seem to favour their sins, if he dealt not thus. And he concludes in these words, But of what matter the Priests (or Elders) may be accused and reproved before the Bishop, it were long to dispute. And the next verse declares yet further his separate authority, I charge thee before God, and the Lord jesus Christ, and the elect Angels, that thou observe these things, without preferring one before another, and do nothing partially. This contestation (saith Hemingius) wherewith as it were with an oath, Paul bindeth Timothy, declareth how hard the office of a Bishop is. How the Bishop should do these things. And it containeth a very serious admonition, lest that in the sight of so great witnesses, God the Father, Christ, and the elect Angels, (he calleth these elect, for the difference of the reprobate) he should do any of those things that pertain to the office of a Bishop, of private affections. But that he should do all things lawfully and orderly, to the glory of God, and to the edification of the Church, according to the prescribed Canons, preferring none to any thing for private causes. And speaking of the diverse readings of this sentence, he saith: all these readings although they differ in words, yet they offer the same sentence, that is to wit, a Bishop according to the Canons prescribed of Paul, should do and judge all things, esteeming more the verity of the cause, than the condition of the person. Which thing verily is in common commended to all judges, Exod. 18. Wherein (saith Beza) he is said of the Grecians, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The office of a judge. to give prejudicate judgement, that accounteth any man as excellent and choice. But a judge aught in judging to lay down all these opinions, as he that sitteth not to judge of the persons, but of the cause, etc. For a judge ought to weigh the rights of the pleaders, as it were in a balance, so that he should incline to neither part Otherwise it will not be a right judgement. But a judges authority in all such judgements i● the chiefest on the bench, A judges office is an office separate from all the bench. whosoever sit with him as assistant: neither doth he (howsoever he communicate with other in council & deliberation) join any with him in the authority of judgement: the Bishop therefore being such a judge, in these matters pertaining to the Ecclesiastical regiment and governance of the Church: we find by searching of the Scripture, that a Bishop hath authority by himself separate from other, clean contrary to our brethren's saying. Neither hath the Bishop this authority only, concerning their lives and conversation. But for their very entry and admittance also into the ministery, all the authority of being ordained was to pass (by whom so ever they were elected) by his only ordaining of them, as appeareth further, verse 23. Lay hands lightly on no man. And although Beza here do abridge this his authority in ordaining Ministers, and say: Lay hands etc. that is, admit not every one lightly to have any Ecclesiastical function, to wit, so much as in thee is. For neither all the authority lay in Timothy alone, but by election made of the suffragies (or voices or the whole Church, as we have said, Beza restraining the Bishop's authority. Act. 14. d. 23. and appeareth by the elelection of Mathias, and of the Deacons. And then afterward, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Bishop, in the name of the Presbytery, did by the imposition of hands consecrate unto the Lord the elected party, as is abovesaid 4. d 14. But all this over nice mincing, serveth not the turn, for, The election of Mathias Act. 14 in the elections which Beza here citeth for example of like manner, there is great difference. In the example of Mathias, Act. 1. his election was by lot, and not by voices, nor any laying on of hands is there mentioned. In the Deacons, Act. 6. the multitude chose them, and the Apostles, not any of the other Elders, laid their hands on them. And as for the example, Act. 14. whereof although we have seen some what already, yet so often as our brethren lead us to this place, which is one of their principal sanctuaries to which they run: it shall not be amiss so often to show, that they claim a wrong privilege. And first, that it was done by the people's voices & holding up their hands, as a testification of their consents unto them, which the words of the text do not enforce. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but ordaining by the hand unto them, Priests (or Elders) by every Church: although Erasmus interpret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Erasmus. quum creassent per suffragia: and when they had created by voices Elders unto them: calvin. whom calvin followeth, saying: The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to discern by holding up the hands, as is wont to be done in solemnities or assemblies of the people. And Beza followeth him, saying: This word sprang of the custom of the Grecians, which gave their voices with their hands held out. Beza. Whereupon sprang that decree noted of Cicero for Lucius Flaccus, they stretched out their hands. And diverse others most excellent learned among our Brethren and us, follow that translation: and albeit our Geneva translation saith, And when they had ordained them Elders by election, but adding this note in the margin: The word signifieth to elect by putting up of hands, which declareth, that Ministers were not made without the consent of the people: yet (with the good leave and reverence of all these singular learned men be it spoken) not only no necessity driveth them to this interpretation: but I see not (though I would be right glad to learn) how it can stand with the sense and reason of the Lert. For first the text maketh there no mention at all of their election, The words of the text m●nc●ō not election. whereof we doubt not, but that they were not made without the consent of the people. But the question is, who did make, create, or ordain them? Whether the people together with Paul and Barnabas: Election. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 referred only to Paul and Barnabas. or Paul and Barnabas only? But it is most evident that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is referred only to Paul and Barnabas: and therefore whatsoever the people did in voice, or hands, in the election; the hands only of Paul and Barnabas were in the creating and ordaining of them. And although that the Heathen Grecians had such an use, that when a law or decree was to be approved of the people, they gave their consent thereunto in their great assemblies, by holding up their hands: yet to take the word here in such a profane sense, me thinks calvin answers himself sufficiently: Notwithstanding the Ecclesiastical writers use the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in another sense. that is to wit, in a solemn custom of ordaining, which in the Scriptures is called the laying on of hands. Moreover, by this form of speaking is excellently expressed the lawful manner in creating Pastors. Paul and Barnabas are said to choose the Elders. Paul & Barnabas modera●ors of the election Do they this alone by their private office? Yea tather, they permit the matter to the voices of them all. Therefore in the Pastors that were to be created, there was a free election of the people. But, that nothing should be done tumultuously, Paul and Barnabas (as it were moderators) had the government. Thus ought the decree of the Council of Laodecia to be understood, which forbiddeth the election to be permitted to the people. Thus writeth calvin. Wherein he driveth all to the election. But the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, importeth by his own interpretation, and by the ecclesical custom in the Scripture, the ordination by laying on of hands. A● for the election was another matter, which then in part pertained to the people. And yet therein Paul and Barnabas had a several higher authority by themselves, than any other had jointly with them. As for the decree in the Council of Laodicia, (which was holden about the year of our Lord 360.) the words and meaning are plain, Chap. 13. That it must not be permitted unto the people, to make election of them, that were to be promoted unto Priesthood. What tumults they had found therein, I remit to the Ecclesiastical histories. So that we cannot (as calvin doth) understand the words of the Council so, as that they only take away the moderation of the voices from the people: for that they never had so much, The people's election no necessary or any material part of making pastors. as to be moderators of their own voices. But the Counsels meaning is most apparent, that the people should no longer have any voices at all to elect the pastor. And therefore that ancient Council (in making this decree) declareth, that they took not the people's election to be any necessary and material part of creating, ordaining, or consecrating of a Pastor. But whatsoever authority our Brethren would renew unto the people, concerning election: What is that to the ordaining of him? The election maketh him but ordinable or capable to be ordained As for that example which Beza addeth, Imposition of hands. Act. 4. mentioneth indeed Imposition of hands of the presbytery or eldership: The imposition of hands of the presbytery. Which word if we should here understand, for a number of Elders, that laid their hands on him, (which calvin saith we need not do, and we have showed the contrary:) yet, neither followeth it of necessity, that they were any Elders that dealt in the government of the Church and not in the word, as Beza himself confesseth: neither that this imposition of hands on him, was at his first creating, minister of the word or pastor, but on some other occasion, and therefore saith Beza, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. id est, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. of prophesy, that is, to prophesy, or in prophesy, as Rom. 4. b. 11. or by prophesy, that is, the holy Ghost by the mouth of the Prophets so commending, as is above said, Chap. 1. d. 18. howbeit because mention is made of the gift bestowed upon him: I prefer the former interpretation. For it is more probable, when as he had already an excellent gift of prophesy, that he was chosen for a while, to wit, until he were of the Lord called to some other place, for he was an Evangelist. Which laying on of hands out of doubt did confirm the grace of God in him, as 2. Tim. 1. b. 6. But of Prophets, what was their function hath often been declared of us. Imposition of hands pertained to pastors. Of the presbytery 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, of the order of the Priests or Elders. In the which name it is probable, that the company is signified of all them, which laboured in the word, in the Church of Ephesus, as Act. 20. d. 27. and f. 28. For sometimes these names of Bishops and Priests, yea, and of Deacons also are general. See, Phil. 1. a. 1. a certain fellow translateth it the Senate, as in another place for the Church, he said, the common weal. Thus writeth Beza, of the imposition of hands, and of the presbytery, both counting the name Senate, too profane a name of the presbytery: and ascribing the imposition of hands, to those only that were labourers in the word: and that Timothy was a minister of the word before this imposition of their hands. But if now we shall understand, that in this place 1. Tim. 4.14. by laying on of hands upon Timothy, was also meant the ordaining or creating of him a minister of the word, as Saint Paul meaneth it in his precept to Timothy, 1 Tim. 5.22. and as calvin taketh it: let us see again what calvin saith thereon: He saith that grace was given unto him by prophesy. How? To wit, because (as we said before) the holy Ghost by Oracle appointed Timothy, that he should be chosen into the order of pastors. For he was not chosen only by the judgement of man, as is wont to be done, but the calling of the spirit went before. He saith it was given him with the imposition of hands. Wherein he signifieth, that together with the ministry he was also endued with necessary gifts. It was usual and solemn to the Apostles to ordain Ministers, by the imposition of hands. Separate authority. And veri●y of this custom, and of the original and signification thereof, I have touched somewhat before, and the residue may be gathered out of my Institution. The Presbytery: they which think this word is collective, put for the College of the Priests (or Elders) do in my judgement think well. Notwithstanding (all things weighed) I grant that the other sense, doth not ill agree ●hereto, that it should be the name of the office, etc. And because Beza referreth the expounding of this place, to the 2. Tim. 1.6. on these words: Wherefore I warn thee that thou stir up the gift of God which is in thee by the imposition of my hands. Let us see again withal what calvin saith thereon: There is no doubt but that Timothy was wished for with the common desire of the Church, and not elected by the private will of Paul alone. But it is not absurd, that Paul should ascribe the election privately to himself, whereof he was the chiefest author. Although here he rather treateth of the ordaining of him than of the electing, that is, of the solemn custom of his being instituted. Moreover, it doth not clearly appear, whether that when any was to be consecrated, all were wont to lay their hand upon his head, or one only in the place and name of all. My conjecture rather inclineth unto this, The separate authority of one in imposition of hands. that there was one only which laid his hands upon him. Howbeit, it may be doubted, whether this present imposition of hands be referred to his ordaining, because at that time the graces of the spirit, whereof Saint Paul treateth to the Romans▪ Chap. 12. and 1. Corin. 13 were conferred by imposition of hands unto many also which were not instituted Pastors. But I easily gather of the former Epistle, that Paul treateth here of the Pastor's office. For this place agreeth with that: Neglect not the grace which is given to thee with the imposition of the hands of the Presbytery. Whereby it appeareth that the hands of the Presbytery in the ordaining and consecrating a pastor might be well enough not the hands of many, but of one alone, that had principal authority above the other in that action. And as Paul testif●eth thus of his own manner of ordaining Timothy: so he proceedeth in his precept to Timothy, 1. Tim. 5.23. Lay hands lightly on no man. Whereon saith calvin: calvinus in 1. Tim. 5. There is no doubt but that he would put away envy from Timothy, and meet with many complaints, that oftentimes arise against the godly servants of Christ, which refuse to obey the ambitious prayers of any whosoever. For some accuse them of roughness, some of envy, some cry out that they be cruel, because they do not by and by admit those that vaunt themselves by any manner of commendation. Of which thing at this day we have too much experience. Paul therefore exhorteth Timothy, Sole absolute authority. not to go from his gravity, nor suffer himself to be overcome with preposterous studies. Not that Timothy had so much need of such admonition, as that by his authority he might repress those, which otherwise might be troublesome unto Timothy. First the imposition of hands signifieth the ordination, that is, the sign is taken for the thing itself. For he forbiddeth that he should of too much facility admit any, which as yet is not so tried a man. The Bishop's authority in set out by the authoriritie of Timothy. For some there are which for the study of novelty would haveeverie man though most unknown, to be promoted so soon as ever he hath set forth any one show or other that liketh them. It behoveth a grave & prudent Bishop to resist this importunate desire, even as Paul here commendeth Timothy to do. In which words calvin draweth this especial rule to Timothy, to a general rule to all Bishops to do the like. As likewise hereupon doth Hemingius. Hemingius He addeth (saith he) another Counsel, or an other Canon concerning those that are to be ordained to Ecclesiastical offices, that he should not lay hands upon any that is not fit or proved enough, that is, that he should ordain none to an Ecclesiastical function. For by (the Figure called) Metonimia, the sign is put for the thing signified. He requireth here a stout Bishop which should not admit every one by and by unto an Ecclesiastical office, but only tried even according to the former Canons. Aretius likewise draweth this precept to an ordinary and general rule for Bishops. Aretius. A Bishop (saith he) must do his diligence to be heedful and wary in Ministers that are to be chosen. For herein also is a fault, even in celerity and rashness of judgement, that a man should judge him to be fit, which is nothing so. Thus do all these, and a number more of excellent Protestants agree, that not only Saint Paul giveth this power of government in the Church, as a peculiar authority to Timothy to ordain Ministers, and to repel those that he thought unmeet: but also that herein and in the points aforesaid. Timothy is a pattern for all other Bishops to follow. Sith therefore Saint Paul maketh a rule hereof, and this rule stretcheth to the duty, and so to the authority of all Bishops: I marvel how our Brethren can justify that which here they affirm. That while we search the Scripture, the only rule whereby the Church of God ought to be governed, we find that in the regiment and governance of the Church, the Pastor, Bishop, or Elder, hath no authority by himself separated from other. As for the reason which our Brethren render: for in the Church there ought to be no monarchy, Political regiment. or sole absolute government, but that is referred peculiarly to our saviour Christ only, 2. Tim. 6.7. judae. 4. If their meaning all this while be, only of such government▪ we gladly grant the same, that none other than our Saviour Christ, hath such a monarchy, or sole absolute government, neither by himself separated from other, nor yet joined with other in the Church. Nor any (except the Pope only) that I hear of, takes it upon him. But this debarreth not, but that there may well be, and is, some monarchy, as in Christian Princes, and also of Bishops some absolute government of our Saviour Christ also. And therefore these two quotations. 1. Tim. 6 15. and judae. 4. are cited in vain. The learned disc. Pag. 81. And that regiment which he hath left unto his Church is a consent of his household servants, to do all things according to his prescription, as he witnesseth Matth. 18.19. Math. 18.19. If two of you consent upon earth upon any matter, whatsoever ye shall ask, it shall be granted to you of my Father which is in heaven. For wheresoever two or three be gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. Seeing therefore that our saviour Christ hath neither authorized nor promised to bless any other form of regiment, than that which consisteth of the consent and gathering together of his servants in his name: we hold us content with this simplicity, and therefore we are bold to say, that the authority of the pastor in public regiment or discipline, separate from others, is nothing at all. These words, that regiment, which he (meaning Christ) hath left unto his Church, Bridges is a consent of his household servants, etc. are spoken too generally. If they had said that Ecclesiastical regiment, it had yet been the more tolerable. For Christ hath left other political and civil regiment unto his Church, besides the Ecclesiastical regiment of it. True it is, that in that also there is a consent of his household: but neither so, that it debarreth the civil Prince's monarchy in the Church, and his government in many things by himself: The wresting of Christ's sentence. neither hath Christ prescribed all orders and laws in particular for the Princes and Magistrates to do all things according to his prescription of them. And this sentence Matth. 18. if it should be thus opposed to the regiment of Princes, Mat. 18. is manifestly wrested, and dangerously concluded, That our Saviour Christ hath neither authorized nor promised to bless any other form of regiment, than that which consisteth of the consent and gathering together of his servants in his name. Neither yet helpeth it the matter, to understand all this, for the only Ecclesiastical regiment. For although we deny not, but that those causes which appertain either to the civil or ecclesiastical regiment of the Church, should not be ordained nor imposed upon the Church, without any fully spoken: and much more that which our Brethren add, it is a consent of his household servants to do all things according to his prescription. For by this rule the Ecclesiastical regiment of the Church is in no other thing, than Christ hath prescribed. But our Brethren have granted, page 76. even in their last point of ceremonial matters, that the Church had lawful authority, to conclude a public ordinance of them, for order and comeliness sake, and for edification: and it is evident that many things are of their own nature indifferent, which may be so ordered and authorized by the Church, as our Brethren already have confessed. But the Church could have no such authority of them, or of any thing, if it be already by Christ prescribed: and therefore the Church's regiment is not only a consent (as our Brethren say) to do all things according to his prescription. For he hath made no prescription of these things, whether they should be done or no. Except they understand this to be his prescription, that they shall be done for order and comeliness sake, and for edification. But those points concern the ends wherefore, and the manner how they should be done, & not the things and matters that are done, or consented upon to be done. And it is one thing to do, or how to do the things that are consented upon to be done, and another thing to consent that such things should be done. For, the Church's regiment in these matters, consisteth most in the consent (as here is said) to authorize them to be done, The difference of the Church's consent, and of the Bishops and Pastors. and the Bishops or the Pastor's regiment, in the authority of doing or executing of them. But, for the consent of them to be done, what is this that they call here a consent of his household servants? Is it requisite, that express consent be had of all those that are Christ's household servants, that is to say, of every particular person in the Church? What if it seem otherwise to some one, or few, that will give no consent thereto, but dissent? Doth this cut off the Church's regiment? No. For, our Brethren, to prove that all things must be done with the Church's consent, allege this sentence: If two of you consent upon earth upon any matter, whatsoever ye shall ask, it shall be granted you of my Father which is in heaven. And must this consent then, of the regiment of the Church, be contracted to any two of the household servants: though the most part of all the other, that be no less servants, and faithful servants of the lords household, do dissent from them? But wherefore do our Brethren allege this sentence to this matter? To confirm their regiment in the Church, being in comparison but two, to two thousand, that have consented to the orders of the Church's regiment now established: and they dissent from our consent herein? Indeed, were it matter of faith in doctrine, and substance of religion, or any thing already prescribed, not only the consent of two, and the dissent of one, is better than the consent of all the rest in error (as we allege Gerson and Panormitane against the Papists, when they boast of consent and Counsels, against the manifest truth of God's word) but when we all therein agree with full consent, against all the errors and superstitions of the Papists, and yet in some matters of Ceremonies, of their own nature indifferent: and of those points in the Church's regiment, that concern comeliness, order, and edification, some servants of the household, descent from other some: whether is it better that many, and almost all, and the most experient, and that in matters of regiment, and counted as learned as any of the other, and the chiefest also in authority, yea, the Prince also having the supreme authority, and that in the public regiment of Ecclesiastical matters, should give place to two or three, or to a few persons dissenting: or that these few should leave their dissension, give place and consent, to the greater and better part of the company? And will God grant the requests consented upon by two or three, and not their requests consented upon by so many thousands, when they are also gathered in the name of Christ, as not only the people are in our public prayers, The sentence of Christ Mat. 18.19. more confirmeth our consents than our breath. but also all the estates of the whole realm, and chief parts of the Church of England, all which have often been assembled, and given already their consent, to the establishment of this form of the Church's regiment that we have? And therefore this promise of our Saviour Christ, if it may be drawn to matters of public Ecclesiastical regiment: doth more and more confirm us in our form established: that God approves it, and was in the midst of them that consented on it, and is still in the midst of our assemblies gathered in his name, when we direct our actions according thereunto. And now, seeing that our Saviour Christ hath neither authorized, nor promised to bless any other form of regiment, than that which consisteth of the consent and gathering together of his servants in his name: we hold us content with this simplicity, and therefore we are bold to say, that God hath promised to bless, and (as we have found the experience, if we have grace in thankfulness to acknowledge his manifold blessings) hath diverse ways already blessed our form of regiment, which with such consent, and gathering together of his servants in his name, is established. And our brethren have not to be overbold, but rather to fear & bethink themselves, how they gather themselves in consent and consort, against this authorized form of regiment: lest their gathering together breed a banding in factions of themselves, to dissipate the unity of the Church, & to make schisms amongst us. And now, where our Brethren conclude this Section, saying: And therefore we are bold to say, that the authority of a pastor in public regiment or discipline, separate from others, joint authority. is nothing at all: I will be bold also to say thus much: that it is nothing at all against our pastors authority, in public regiment or discipline. For (as they have described it) he hath none such given him, nor exerciseth any such (by any authority in this Realm established) that is separate from others, that is to say (as before our Brethren have expounded their meaning) a monarchial authority or sole absolute government. But that is referred peculiarly to our Saviour Christ only. 1. Tim. 6. v. 7. jude. 4. Otherwise, if they mean not such authority: I dare be bold again to say thus much, that not only this exception of Christ's Monarchical or sole absolute authority is alleged here in vain, & is nothing at all unto the abridging of the Bishop or Pastor's authority: but that also in manner and matter afore rehearsed, a Bishop or Pastor hath a great authority separated by himself, as the foresaid examples and precepts to Timothy have declared. Let us then see, what is his authority joined with others, & first, who are so joined in Commission with him, The learned Dis. Pag. 81. & 82. that without their consent he can do nothing. We say therefore, that the authority of Christ is left unto his whole Church, and so to every Church: that none may challenge Episcopal or Metropolitical authority as it is with us at this day over other, without great tyranny and manifest injury. That the Pastor or the Bishop can do nothing by his authority, in the government of the Church, without the consent of others joined in commission with him, for every particular act that he must do: our brethren have not yet proved. Yea, we have showed the clean contrary both in making Ministers, and in admitting, hearing, judging, and determining of their caused, by their own authority, without any joined in commission with them. Not that they did all things alone, but used the counsel and consent of others, and perhaps of the whole Churches: but that, they were not joined in commission with them, nor were their equals in the authority of those doings. Neither is this conclusion better than the antecedent: We say therefore that the authority of Christ is left unto his whole Church, Bridges. and so to every Church etc. For my part, I dare not be thus bold to affirm thus indefinitely and in general, that the authority of Christ is left unto his whole Church, and so to every Church. But that certain parts of the authority of Christ is left, and that in a certain legantine and ministerial manner, unto his whole Church, and so to every Church. And yet not so, that every Church, that is, every particular congregation, hath as full authority of that part, as the whole Church hath: but that, the whole, or to every Church, it is so left, that none may challenge Episcopal or Metropolitical authority, as it is with us at this day over other, without great tyranny and manifest injury: This indeed is a mere, we say it, not: we prove it. Against this our brethren's we say, as though all lay on their bare saying, and that whatsoever they say, we must hold it by and by for an oracle, or for such a principle, as the Pythagoreans did the saying of their Master, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he said it. We have heard at large what Saint Paul hath said to Timothy, and what a number of most excellent men in the primitive Church, and some immediately after the Apostles times, by the clear testimonies of the unsuspected histories, and awcientest fathers, and by the grant of the best late writers in the reformed Churches, have had both Episcopal, and also Metropolitical authority, as it is with us at this day over other, without any tyranny great or little, & without any injury manifest or hidden, at all. And if they might have it, they might challenge it. Yea, to challenge them for it, much more to take it from them, were rather not only the greater tyranny and more manifest injury of the twain: but to say, the authority of Christ is left unto his whole church, & so to every church that none in the church hath any power or exercise thereof over other: The confusion of our bre. equality is the greatest and most manifest confusion that can be. For by this rule we must not say (as our Br. here do) Let us then see what is his authority joined with others, & first who are so joined in commission with him, that without their consent he can do nothing: but we must rather say, Let us then see, what is his authority joined with others, and first, who are not so joined in commission with him, that without their consent he can do nothing: if the authority of Christ be left unto his whole Church, & so, to every church, that none may challenge it over other. So that now, there should not only be, no Metropolitical authority over Bishops, nor Episcopal over Pastors: but also no pastoral authority over the people. For, the people are some body (as I take it) both in the whole Church, and in every Church also. Yea, if these words which our Brethren so generally say, we say therefore, that the authority of the Church is left unto his whole Church, and so to every Church, be not restrained to that part of his authority, that consisteth only in the Ecclesiastical regiment of his Church: it will as much endanger all Magistrates civil estates, that they have no authority neither over other. For, they hold that also of jesus Christ, and it is a part of his authority over his Church. But, howsoever that may stand or fall hereby, the Prince's supreme authority in Ecclesiastical causes, over all persons Ecclesiastical and civil in their dominions, is clean taken away from them, even as well as the metropolical over the Bishops, or the Bishop's authority over the Pastors. Now, although this most absurd, Christ's promise. and most dangerous confusion of all authorities Ecclesiastical and civil might ensue hereon: Yet our Brethren having promised herein, that they would be bold to say these sayings: and having hethereto (though boldly, yet but barely) said them: they will now be bold, (as good reason is they should) to assay to prove them. For, seeing our Saviour Christ promised his presence and authority to every Church indifferently, The learned disc pag. 82 matthew 18.19.20. Math. 18.19.20. None may challenge any such prerogative afore other: but as the churches are limited out for order and conveniency, so is every one of them of like authority in itself: but because they make all but one Church, and one body of Christ, therefore there is but one authority in them, to determine of matters concerning them all. This argument still relying on this former cited sentence, Bridges Matthew 18.19.20. which properly treateth of the efficacy of prayer, where the faithful, although they be in never so small a number assembled, to make their petitions in Christ's name, are promised that God the Father will grant their requests, and that Christ also will be present among them: neither comprehendeth all the authority that Christ hath left unto his whole Church, or to any especial persons in the same: neither (if it be drawn to matters of government and authority) is any debar against any particular auth. of any Pastor, more than of any Christian Prince or magistrate. For, how followeth this? Christ will be present where 2. or 3. are gathered together in his name: therefore, where but one maketh his praiyers alone unto him, he will not be present? except our bre. can bring this exclusive, only, or, at the least, into this promise of Christ, that where 2. or 3. only, or two or three at the least are gathered together in his name, he will be present with them. If then, this follow not in prayer, whereof this sentence properly is spoken: how much less doth it hold, This sentence is principally spoken of consent in prayer, not is any deb●● to the prayer of one alone. if we stretch this promise of Christ, to matters of government in the church, as (I grant) it reacheth also thereto. As, to reason thus: Christ hath promised that where two or three be gathered together in his name, to consent on the establishment of any authority or government of his Church, his presence and authority shall be among them: therefore, if the Christian Prince either by himself, and his supreme authority, do establish any thing in the Church: or though he join other with him, yet not in authority, but as counsellors, or, though in authority also, yet, not as equal in authority with him: except he, and they, and all, gathered together in the name of Christ, be of the like authority in giving their consents unto the matter: neither Christ's presence will be with them, nor his authority will ratify their doing. If this reason hold not, but be an untrue and most dangerous resolution in these matters that are done of the christian Prince neither yet of him alone, but of other in consultation with the prince, but the only superior and supreme over all other which are all parts of the Church, and assembled about matters of the Church's Government: Our brethr. lose conclusion. doth it hold any more against Bishops and Pastors? How agreeth this even with their own assertions afterward? Pag. 114. of james his prerogative, in the assembly of the Elders at jerusalem: Was not the holy ghost among them because one had this prerogative? Neither helpeth it that they say this prerogative was only of order, & not of authority: for if it were not of authority, it were no orderly prerogative, but a tyranny. But they say, he may challenge no authority. If it be orderly given him, & so his due: why may he not challenge it? but yet they say, he may challenge no episcopal or metropolitical authority, How Christ promised his authority. as it is at this day with us. If it were so with them, in the ancient and holy Church yea in the Apostles times, as in this respect, it is at this day with us, even by Caluines own testimony (as he have heard) both for Episcopal authority, & that james his authority was itself Episcopal: then is this neither any tyranny, nor any let to the presence of the holy ghost, that one among them hath & challengeth episcopal or metropolitical authority afore the rest, as it is with us this day over other. Our bre. therefore make here a loose conclusion: All particular churches not alike indignity. that seeing our saviour Christ hath promised his presence & authority to every church indifferently, Mat. 18.19.20. Therefore none may challenge any such prerogative afore other, meaning such as Bishops and metropolitans do challenge. But since the words of Christ are spoken (as they say) indifferently. Why might they not conclude as well, any such prerogative afore other, as Christian Princes also challenge in the Church's Government? Indeed the matter that Christ there promised to ratify with his presence & authority, he promised the same to every Church (as our Bresay) indifferently: but he neither promised there or otherwhere his auth. to all and to every one in the Church indifferently: nor yet all kind of authority to every Church indifferently. Sith some Church may have some such prerogative, as appertaineth to dignity & pre-eminence, afore other Churches. jerusalem being a Metropolitical Church had a prerogative afore many other smaller Churches round about it, even in the Apostles time. And so (it appeareth) had Ephesus in Asia: Antiochia in Syria, etc. yea although no church might have any prerogative at all, afore other churches: yet doth not our Br. argument hold, from the churches to the pastors or B. in the Churches. Our bre. reason thus: Seeing our Saviour Christ promised his presence and authority to every Church indifferently, Mat. 18 19.20. none may challenge any such prerogative afore other. What is signified here by this word, none? but no person in the church: as much, & more to the purpose, then to say none, that is to say no Church. And if our Brethren would have none in the Church, The Church's authority. to have any such prerogative as appertaineth to the auth. of Government, in or of the Church afore other: what else were this, than to give every person in the church, equal authority? whether this would breed confusion or no, let themselves judge. If they say they mean by these words: none may challenge any such prerogative afore other: not, no person afore other persons, but no church afore other churches: and that they expound their meaning in the words following, saying: but as the churches are limited out for order and conveniency: so is every one of them of like authority in itself: although this also be not true, for diverse respects, in comparison of churches one with another: yet, what is this to the Question now in hand, for the B. or pastors authority in the Government of the church, whether he have any by himself, separated from other, yea, or no? Our brethren say, he hath none, and we say, he hath some. They, to prove he hath none, have alleged the promise of Christ Math. 18. And are come now to see what is his authority joined with others, and first, who are so joined, in commission with him, that without their consent, he can do nothing. Difference between ●he Church's authority and th● pastors authority in the Churches. Upon whom is all this spoken? & who is this, he, so often mentioned. Is this he turned into a she? that is to say, into a Church? and is this our Question, whether a church hath any authority by herself separated from others? or, whether a B. or pastor hath any authorty by himself separated from others? And what meant they by this conclusion? We say therefore that the authority of Christ, is left unto his whole church, & so to every church, that none may challenge episcopal or metropolical authority, as it is with us at this day over other, without great tyranny & manifest injury? who is here this none that may challenge no episcopal or metropolitical authority? do not B. & Archb. as it is with us at this day challenge this authority? And therefore, except they reason of the persons: their reasonsare not to the purpose. But they name the churches for the persons: because they challenge the authority in the right of their Churches: although in this controversy, their challenge is rather in the right of their office, than of their Churches. But as the churches are limited out for order & conveniency, The learned Dis. Pag. 82. Bridges so is every one of them of like authority in itself: but because they make all but one Church, and one body of Christ, therefore there is but one authority in them, to determine of matters concerning them all. To speak of the church, as the mystical body of Christ, I grant, it is all but one body, & but one church. Howbeit, in the respect, All the parts in one church have not one and like auth. have all the parts thereof one only, & the like authority: nor all, one only, & the like exercise of functions & actions. As I showed before, how Paul reasoneth, 1. Cor. 12. 17. If all the body were the eye, where were the hearing? if all were hearing where were the smelling? But now God hath placed the members every one of them in the body, even as he would. But when they say here, the churches are limited out for order & conveniency: in that respect, as they make th●m not all one Church, but in a different sense, different Churches: So is there less necessity, that all their authorities should be but one. For, as in that respect, they may differ in regiment, concerning many orders and conveniencies among them, this Church from that church: so may they differ also in pre-eminences and authorities of the same orders, and for determining of such different matters. But now although there were but one authority in the whole, and in every church, to determine matters concerning them all: yet if the same be not equally distributed among them all: in the whole and in every part alike: what letteth, but that both some churches, and much more some persons in the churches, may have some separate authority by themselves, and some more authority than other have and some prerogative also afore other? By which there appeareth to be a double authority of the Pastor, one with the several congregation, in which he is pastor, the other with the whole Synod or assembly whereof he is a member, and both these authorities we find sufficiently authorized in the Scripture, The learned Dis. Pag. 82. & 83. as shall plainly appear in the several discourses of them. First therefore, we will speak of his authority in his several church, in which he may do nothing without the consent of the church. Our Brethren do here divide again or subdivide the Pastor's authority. They divided it before, Page. 76. & 77. into the authority or power of government in the church, or authority in common Government with the Elders: and into the authority or power that belongeth to the proper duty of the Pastor himself. Which was somewhat an intricate Division. Bridges. Sith the authority or power belonging to his proper duty, is a great part of his public Government in the church. The Pastor's authority not one but indifferent. This authority now, which before they said, that they understood for power of Government in the church, they divide again, into a double authority: the one with the several congregation, in which he is Pastor: the other with the whole Synod or assembly whereof he is a member. If now their selves do here find, and that twice together, that in one function, there is not only a former double and different authority: but also of one of the former divided parts, a redoubled and different authority in the Pastors: how then did they avouch immediately before, that there is but one authority in them, to determine of matters concerning them all? but perhaps they mean that, of the church's authority: and here they speak of the authority pertaining to the pastors of the churches. But that helps not. For if the Pastor's authority, which he hath in common with the Elders (whom they make the church) be thus divided: then is the church's authority divided also. First therefore (say they) we will speak of his authority in his several Church in which he may do nothing without the consent of the Church. Sufficient authority. I would gladly learn, Bridges. where our Brethren have all these divisions and subdivisions, all these Canons and limitations of a Pastor's authority. For although it be here promised, Our Breath. division & positions besides the scripture. that we find them sufficiently authorized in the scripture: yet hitherto, here is no Scripture cited for them, save, 1. Tim. 6.15. that God is blessed and only mighty, the king of kings and Lord of Lords. And Math. 18.19.20. Which was before alleged to other purposes, although God wots very impertinently. But they promise us further, that, both these authorities we find sufficiently authorized in the scripture, as shall plainly appear in the several discourses of them. So that, here is yet nothing that we can find, which may be counted a sufficient authorizing in the scripture of these things. And therefore our Brethren in this their Learned Discourse made hereupon, do well and learnedly (in my opinion) to let all this pass that they have already alleged, as insufficient, and refer us to the hope of better proofs, in their more Learned Discourse to come, as shall plainly (they promise us,) appear in the several Discourse of them. But when we shall come also (God willing) unto those several Discourses of them▪ to search, whether these authorities and assertions of our Brethren, be sufficiently authorized in the Scripture: I doubt, we shall find that this sufficient authorizing in Scripture, is not any express and and plain testimony of the scripture: but only their own collection thereon. And if this be sufficient to make us reckon a thing sufficiently authorized (as in some cases we deny it not, if they can make it plainly appear, that it followeth by necessity of consequence, though verbatin● it be not expressed in the Scripture) if we must permit this in them, that their collections on the Scripture, must go for authorizing in the Scripture: why must not the same manner of authorizing, where we prove necessary consequence, be of as good authority on our parties? In the mean time between us both, for any thing yet by these our Learned Brethren alleged: till I see better proof thereof, either out of express and plain Scripture, or out of some necessary consequence of Scripture I yield not to this their double Canonised Canon, as shooting off nothing but a bare bold, we say: not, any Testimony or proof sufficiently authorized in the scripture: that the Pastor by his authority in his several Church, may do nothing, without the consent of the Church. Nothing (they say) hath no savour, and this hath no truth. It is so far from being sufficiently authorized: that it is more than sufficiently confuted, as already hath often appeared, and plainly in the manifest example of Saint Paul's precepts to Timothy, even by Caluines and Bezaes' own clear Confessions, besides divers others on the same. Not, that we deny, but that Paul and Timothy had the church's consents (for the better part among them) in what things soever they did by their authority in their churches: but, that in all things they asked not their consents before, nor that they which gave their consents had such a negative authority, but that if they would not have given them, Saint Paul and Timothy might have proceeded in some things against their consents: which when they were given, were not the sufficient or any authorizing at all, of Paul and Timothy's doings among them. The argument of the 11 Book. THE 11. book is of the third kind of Tetrarkes' which our Brethren call Governors: beginning first with the Churches diffused authority: & of confusion in the multitude: & of the appointing to avoid it certain officers for government: how the name of Governors and Rulers is understood, Rom. 12. & 1. Cor. 12. how these governors must rule every several congregation, & how their government stretcheth to all matters. How these governors authority is to be moderated. And first for the election of these governors, who should choose them, & what qualities they must have. What elders were elected, Act. 14. And what elders are mentioned. 1. Tim. 5.17. & of the 3. conclusions that our brethren would have us learn out of that testimony. How the name elders is common to Pastors & governors, & how the words may be well understood of relation between the civil officers then among them & the pastors. How the words infer not such governors as our brethren imagine: and how that although they might be so understood, yet they infer no perpetuity, as well of the one sort of Elders, governing & not teaching, as of the other of governing & teaching elders. How the words infer no such distinction of eccl. elders the one teaching & governing, the other not at all teaching but only governing: but rather seem to infer a distinction of the travels, than of the function: or if of the function to incline to the distinction between past. deac. or between those Pastors that were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 antistates, B. and others, that laboured more in ministering the Sacraments then in preaching. How calvin dare not infer any such necessary sense as he conceiveth on this place, but only saith, it may be collected. How our brethren inveighing against them, make these governors, dumb & not teaching Bishops & preaching prelate's. How the Apostles words infer not their joint government with the Episcopal Elders. How the ancient Fathers that have expounded this Epistle, Chrysost, Oecumenius, Theodoret, Theophilact, and Ambrose, have interpreted this place, especially because Calvin, Beza & Danaeus allege Ambrose for these Elders. How Beza further allegeth Cyprian, with a full examination of Cyprian for them. How Snecanus likewise allegeth Cyprian & Tertullian with parsel of Tertullian for them, besides the examining of Clemens Alex: Irenaeus, justinus Martyr, Ignatius & Policarpus. How Danaeus allegeth the Ecclesiastical histories chiefly Socrates, with his allegations out of Augustine, Basil, Dionysius, Jerome and the canon Law, with the examination of the ecclesiastical histories, the Fathers, and the canons, for these Elders: and of the cause of these so learned men's mistaking in all these searchings for them, making all not only nothing for them, but clean against them, nor being ever able to prove not one such consistory, no not one such Elder. How Danaeus with Beza and calvin return back again to search the Scriptures better, for them Rom. 12.1. Corinthians 12. Ephes. 4. Act. 20.1. Peter 5. And of Caluines and Danaeus contradictions. Of Danaeus return again to the Ecclesiastical history in Sozomen, in which speeding as il as before, if not worse for any practice that he would find; he comes again to the scripture, searching for these Elders, Acts. 15. Acts. 21. Philip. 4 1. Tim. 3.1. Pet. 3.1 Corinth. 14. & jac. 5. And so home again to that, wherewith our bret. began the inquiry for them, at Act. 14. Lastly of the second point of moderating these Elders authority, by propounding all their actions to the people, to confirm them. And of the popular state & our Bret. fear (But not avoiding) of horrible confusion. And of the example they seek to avoid it by, in the manner of Saint Paul's excommunication of theincestuous Corinthian. AND first (say our Brethren) let us examine, Diffused authority. whether this authority be so diffused over the whole Church, that the hearing, The learned Dis. Pag. 83. trying and determining of all matters, pertaineth to the whole multitude, or to some special chosen persons among them, meet for that purpose. COme they now in almost at the last casts, saying: Bridges. and first let us examine, whether this authority be so diffused over the whole Church, etc. Our Brethr. beginning to examine their former positions. What mean our Brethren hereby? That the first shall be last, and the last shall be first? Should they not have examined this before? They said in the former page, 82. that the authority of Christ is left unto his whole Church. And also before that page 81. That regiment which he hath left unto his Church, is a consent of his household servants. And that our saviour Christ hath neither authorized, nor promised to bless any other form of regiment, than that which consisteth of the consent and gathering together of his servants in his name. What else, can any of the servants of the household of Christ suppose, when they hear of this; but that where-so-ever they be diffused, they must gather themselves together, Diffused authority. either the whole church universally, or every whole Church particularly, and give their consent thereunto; or else, the matter whatsoever, is not authorized by the authority that Christ hath left unto his Church. And that he hath blessed none other form of regiment? And must it now be called in question, and examined, whether this authority be so diffused over the whole Church, that the hearing, trying and determining of all matters, pertaineth to the whole multitude? And why not, if the former sayings be true? Do our Brethren begin now, to call this a diffused authority? Diffused cometh near confused. And I Think, shortly they will find it confused too. And as they now begin to incline, to some special chosen persons amongst them, meet for that purpose: so by little and little, they will peradventure come down at length, to some authority of government even of one Pastor afore other in one congregation, and perhaps in one Diocese also, which is the thing that they now so peremptorily deny. Let our Brethren now therefore in their good mood, proceed. The learned disc. Pag. 83. The authority ●s the power of our Lord jesus Christ, granted unto the Church. Our Brethren said in the page before, that the authority of Christ is left unto his whole Church: here yet, they say more circumspectly: Bridges. the authority is the power of our Lord jesus Christ. Not that Christ hath left his authority unto the Church: but that, the authority which he hath left unto his Church, is not so the Churches, but that it still remaineth his authority. Nor, that he hath left that his authority to his whole Church, as they said before; but (as they say here) it is granted unto the Church. Which may well stand, if any part or persons of the Church have it, although the whole Church have it not. The learned disc. pag. 83. But (say they) because the judgement of the multitude is confuse, whereas God is not the author of confusion, but of order: and that we find in the word of God, certain officers appointed for government: we are bold to affirm, that that charge belongeth unto those that are such. Bridge's Here our Brethren in this Learned discoursing of the matter, hau● now at length found out, not diffusion, Confusion in the mult●tudes judgement. but plain confusion, in the judgement of the multitude. So that, we may now (I hope) with our Brothers good leave, dismiss in peace the gathering together of the household servants nor inquire after their consents: but for the consent only of certain officers appointed for government. And here our Brethr. say: they are bold to affirm, that that charge belongeth unto those that are such. This boldness of our Breath. is here yet the more commendable, that they fear not to repel the people's consent and judgement for fear of confusion. Whereas God is not the author of confusion, but of order. But it had been better (in my simple judgement) not at all to have set the multitude a-gogge, as having an interest of consent and authority, to hear, try, and determine all matters, only to bridle the Pastors and the Bishop's authority: than now, having brought them in, to thrust them out. Turpius eijcitur quam non admittitur hospes. Will the multitude hearing, that Christ hath given his authority to his whole Church, and so to every Church indifferently; & that that regiment which he hath left unto his Church, is a consent of his household servants: and that he hath neither authorized nor promised to bless any other form of regiment, than that which consisteth of the consent and gathering together of his servants, How o●r Brethren mock the multitude. (if they think themselves to be any part of his whole church, or of any particular Churches, and servants of his household) suffer themselves after they are gathered together to use their authority, and to give their consent, to be this mocked, & in the end be told; it pertaineth not to the whole multitude, but to some special chosen persons amongst them: because the judgement of the multitude is confuse, and God is not the author of confusion but of order? What offices are appointed in God's word for government. What maketh our Breath to ware so bold, to take away not only the Bishops & Pastor's authority of government; but thus also to mock & dally with the multitude? But (as matter of conscience moving them hereto) they say: we find in the word of God, certain officers appointed for government. And they say very sooth. But do they not find also in the word of God, The multitudes confusion. that Princes & Magistrates are certain officers appointed for government? If they say, they mean it of Eccl. government: do they not find likewise in the word of God, that Bishops & Pastors are certain officers appointed also for Eccl. government? But they mean certain other officers whom they will further describe anon. And if we should grant this also, and withal, that that charge belongeth unto those that are such: would it follow, O●r Brethr. too bold presupposals. that it belongeth only unto those that are such? Or that, there should be such always & in every congregation, to have that charge which those had; when they find in the word of God, that any such supposed officers were, according to the time & place appointed, for their extraordinary kind them of government? This is over much boldness to affirm, neither shall they find so much in the word of God. But let us now see, where they will find it. And that doth S. Paul plainly declare, where he putteth a difference of the several offices of the Church, The learned disc. Pag. 84. whereof he nameth Governors for one. 1. Cor. 12.29. and Rom. 12.8. Let him that ruleth do it with diligence. Our Breath. have found out these sentences, ●. or 4. times already, and we have seen at large, the discussing of these places. Bridges. But because they find it again, let us crave pardon of the readers, once again to peruse them, lest any should think, when they allege any testimony for proof, Several offices, and yet not▪ several officers. besides their bare sayings, that we slightly shook it off. They say, S. Paul doth plainly declare it, where he putteth a difference of the several offices of the Church, whereof he nameth Governors. Our Brethren do well indeed to say, several offices: but our question is now, of several officers. For although by some of these several offices, may also several officers be understood: yet not so, but that more than one severally of these offices, yea, many of them jointly, were competiblie sometimes to one man, According as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith. (as S. Paul saith, Rom. 12.) for as we ha●e many members in one body, Rom. 12. and all the members have not one office: so we being many are one body in Christ, and every one, one another's members. Seeing then we have gifts t●at are diverse, according to the grace that is given unto us: whether Prophecy, according to the proportion of faith, or the ministery in ministering: either he that teacheth, in doctrine: he that exhorteth, in exhorting: he that giveth, in simplicity: he that ruleth, in carefulness: he that hath mercy, in cheerfulness. Might not one man have diverse of these gifts or offices? divers gifts and offices in one officer. May not he that prophesieth, teach? Nay, is not prophesying mixed with teaching, yea a teaching itself? And have we not showed sufficiently how teaching may be joined with exhortation, and exhortation with teaching? And may not both of them be joined with the ministery, or with an office as some translate it? And may not giving and showing mercy, The Governors. be joined together, as well as they may be separated a sunder; And why then may not he, that hath all these gifts (as some have had them all) rule also, as well as he that hath but some of them, or but the gift of rule only? Yea may not these words here of him that ruleth be understood also of civil officers or governors, and not only of Ecclesiastical? And have we not also heard, that some excellent writers among our Brethren, do so expound here the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he that governeth? And therefore no certainty of our brethren's governors, can be gathered out of this place. And as for the other place of 1. Cor. 12.28. the Apostle said before, ver. 7. etc. But unto every one is given the manifestation of the spirit to profit. For to one is given by the spirit the word of wisdom, to another the word of knowledge by the same spirit, to another faith in the same spirit, to another the gifts of healings in the same spirit, to another the operations of powers, to an other prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another the kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. But all these things worketh one and the self same spirit, This place also 1. Cor. 12. showeth not whether one might not have ●o than one of these gifts. dividing to every one, even as he will. So that, no certainty neither, can be affirmed here, in what measure these gifts were given. Whether one to every one, or to one more. And this seemeth the more probable, that some had more than one of these gifts, because many of these are coincident, and distinguished not so much by diverse officers, as by diverse offices of these gifts. And even so, for that which followeth, ver. 28 And some indeed hath he placed in the Church, first Apostles, secondly Prophets, thirdly Doctors, than powers, afterward the gifts of healings, helpings, governances, kinds of tongues; Are all Apostles? Are all Prophets? Are all Doctors? Are all powers? Have all the gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do● all interpret? Did not all these gifts concur in the Apostles here first mentioned, and some of them in the Prophets, and in the Doctors? Yea, when he cometh to the repetition of this gift, and should by order (as he doth the other) mention the gift of governing, The Apostle includeth the governors in the other officers. which our Brethren here especially discourse upon, & urge more than the other; the Apostle, though he reck●n up other severally, yet, as though governing might be better included in the other, he repeateth it not, nor saith: are all governances? As he said before, are all Apostles? Are all Prophets? Are all Doctors? are all powers? But either containeth it in one, or some, or all, of the former offices or gifts: or else passeth it in silence, as not so necessary as the other, and yet the other are not ordinary offices. And so he omitteth helpinges, except in the gift of healings he include it. Besides that, he expresseth not here also, any more than in the other place Rom. 12. what kind of government in the Church he meaneth. Whether civil only, or Ecclesiastical only, or both of them mixed, or separate. And how then can our Brethren so boldly affime, that S. Paul doth plainly declare these officers, that must be joined in commission with the Pastors or with the Bishop, and give their consent with him, in the hearing, trying, and determining of all matters? But now upon the bare allegation of these two places, our Brethren proceed to this conclusion. Therefore there ought to be in every Church, The learned disc. Pag. 84. a Consistory or signory of Elders or Governors, which ought to have the hearing, examination and determining of all matters, pertaining to discipline and government of that congregation. The premises inferred not this conclusion, S. Paul speaketh not at all in those places, of every Church, and congregation: Bridges. nor how many offices ought to be in every of them: Our Brethr. bold conclusion for their signory, upon the Apostles only naming of Governors. nor of any consistory or signory at all of Elders or Governors in them: nor of the hearing, examination, & determining of all matters, pertaining to discipline and government of that congregation: nor who, or how many of them ought to do these things: nor of any certain perpetual and ordinary platform of officers, or offices, to the whole Church, or to every particular Church and congregation. None of all these points are here either plainly declared, or inclusively insinuated by S. Paul: and yet see, how our Brethren when they are once grown to be bold to affimre one point out of God's word, for these officers, more than the word of God leadeth them unto: dare from one point, proceeding to another, wax bolder and bolder, & in the end so bold, not now only to affirm plainly all these things: But to make a flat and plain conclusion on them, and that a necessary; that, The overthrow of all Prince's government. therefore there ought to be in every Church, a Consistory or Signory of Elders or Governors, which ought to have the hearing, examination and determining of all matters, pertaining to discipline and government of that congregation: and then indeed farewell, not only our former questions of women's government: but of all Prince's government, women or men, in any of their dominions. For, here is not only mentioned discipline, but also government: and not in Ecclesiastical matters only, but in all matters pertaining to the government of that congregation: and not only the hearing and examination of all matters, but also the determining of them all. And all this, not to be done in some, but in every Church, and in every congregation in the Realm, yea, in the whole world. And all this, to be done, not by any officers of the Prince, but by a Consistory or signory of Elders or Governors chosen among themselves, not any officers of the Prince, being so much as mentioned among them: no, nor now when it cometh to the conclusion, either Pastor or Bishop is joined with them. So that both the Pastor and the Bishop is now so far removed, Both Bish. and Pastor's government excluded. from having any authority of governemnt in the Church, separated from others by himself: that he may keep it by himself have he any, for with them (in conclusion) he getteh none, Moderating the governors. they will have all separately by themselves. Are not these matters (trow we) in this Learned Discourse of our Brethren, properly concluded, and to the great beautifying of God's Church, and to the quiet establishment of this Realm? O Brethren, Brethren, it is more than high time to look to such a signory, How violent the beginning is of this signory. the very peeping out of whose heads, and the first appearing in the Discoursing of them, shall begin his course, on this course fashion: and under pretence of putting by the Bishop, and of joining with the Pastor, shall so exclude the Princes established authority, and set up such a strange new government among themselves, and that in every particular Congregation, that is, in every parish Church, both with us in England▪ and throughout all Christendom. But now, to mitigate all this, lest it might grow into shrewd suspicion of most dangerous troubles, innovations and confusions of all Realms and states, by giving too great authority to the Segnories of these congregational Elders and Governors: Our Brethren adjoin hereunto (with great circumspection) certain cautions of moderation. Which authority of theirs (say they) nevertheless aught to be moderated, The learned disc pag. 84 that their judgement may be rightly accounted the judgement of the holy Church. I think they would say, of the whole Church. But the term holy, is well-inough. For verily, if the Church be not the holier this signory might breed a mystery of great mischief and unholiness, Bridges. except their judgement in choosing and the authority of those that be chosen, shall the better be moderated. Let us therefore mark our Brothers moderating of these Governors, to bridle and repress all these inconveniences. Which thing consisteth in these two points. First, that the Elders be elected and chosen by consent of the whole Congregation, The learned disc. Pag. 84. men of godliness and wisdom, in whom the whole Church reposeth such confidence that they commit unto them their authority, in hearing and determining such matters, as without horrible confusion they cannot perform themselves. I looked here, for the moderating of these Elders, that their authority should have been so restrained or limited, Bridges. that either they should not deal in all matter of government, Our Brethr. manner of moderating th●ir Segn. auth. or not proceed over far therein. But our Brethren talk of no such moderating of them. Their moderation consisteth in two points, whereof the first is, for their election, that the Elders be elected and chosen by the consent of the whole congregation. What? And shall neither Prince, Magistrate, Bishop, Pastor▪ nor any officer civil or Eccl. have any stroke, over and above the whole multitude of the congregation, in the election of them, which shall deal in all matters of government? This first point, is a point as dangerous, Electing the governors. as any of the residue. And how shall the whole congregation give their consent in the electing of them? Shall they do it by some other chosen persons among them, that shall give their consent for them? How the whole congregation shall choose the Elders. And than who shall choose them, that shall choose those, that shall choose these Elders, chosen for them? Or shall every person of the whole congregation by himself, or all of them together on a huddle, choose them? And what if they cannot consent upon them? Shall the half, or greater part, go for the whole: when the other half, or the lesser part of the whole congregation dissenteth from the election? And how then will they chose such men of godliness and wisdom, as they imagine? And what also if the greater part themselves of the congregation, want wisdom to make such choice of them? Or affection of love, hate, fear, hope, The wisdom and godliness of the greater part. etc. overcome their wisdom? As we see it doth oftentimes, not only in few, but in multitudes. And the greatest part hath not always the greatest wisdom, nor greatest godliness. Whereupon ariseth the common saying: maior pars vincit meliorem, the greatest part overcomes the better. And our greater part must be accounted for the whole, or else no choice at all will be made among them. And where then shall our men of wisdom and godliness, by the consent of the whole congregation be elected and chosen? Well (say they) yet they shall be men of such wisdom and godliness as in whom the whole Church reposeth such confidence, that they commit unto them their authority, in hearing and determining such matters, as without horrible confusion, they can not perform themselves. And can they not give their consent to the hearing & determining such matters, without not only confusion, but horrible confusion? The horrible confusion of the whole congregation● dealing here in. And yet can they give their consent to choose such persons without horrible or any confusion? And how is it said, to be their authority in such matters, whereof they themselves cannot perform the hearing & determining without horrible confusion? And is the authority then, not the Governors, but the people's authority? And the Governors do but represent the people, whom they govern? And are chosen only as the peoples or the whole congregations debities or executioners, to do that for them, that they can not perform themselves without horrible confusion? And is this the people's only remedy to repose such confidence in other, that they commit all their authority, unto the authority of these Governors? And may not these committees themselves upon such confidence committed unto them, commit as horrible confusions, and breed as foul dissentious and disorders, as may the people themselves? Are not all these points, (besides a number more, and perhaps more horrible, that experience would teach us) confused and intricate? Governors. And hereto also (say our Breath.) may be referred that, which is said of election of Pastors that the Apostles Paul and Barnabas did ordain by election of the congregation, The learned disc. pag. 85. & 86. Elders unto many Churches Act. 14.23. because the name of Elders is common both to Pastors & Governors and is used in the scripture to comprehend both at once, Act. 4 23. as it appeareth manifestly by S. Paul 1. Tim. 5.17. 1. Tim. 5.17. Those Elders that govern well are worthy of double honour, especially those that labour in the word and doctrine. Of which testimony we learn these three things: first, that there be Elders in the Church, which meddle not with teaching, but are occupied altogether in governing. Secondly, that the Elders which labour in teaching, otherwise called Pastors, are joined also in government with them▪ which teach not. And thirdly, that the name of Elder, comprehendeth both sorts of Elders. And especially in the place before alleged for election, there is great reason to lead us to think, that the Elders for government, are as well understood, as the other for doctrine, because it is written in the same place, that after they had ordained them Elders in every congregation by election, as having set the Churches in perfect order (which could not be, Act. 14.23. except they had established discipline as well as doctrine) they committed them to the Lord, in whom they believed. To confirm that which our Brethren have so boldly affirmed, that there ought to be in every Church a Consistory or signory of Elders or Governors, Bridges which ought to have the hearing, examination and determining of all matters pertaining to discipline and government of that congregation: Our Brethr. to prove what ought to be, tell us what may be. they allege here again the example of the scripture Act. 14.23. which they have before twice or thrice alleged and is sufficiently answered unto. But their proof for the election of these Consistory governors, standeth upon no certain ground by our brethren's own confession. For they say not: hereto also must be referred that which is said of election of Pastors, etc. but, hereto also may be referred, etc. So that this example relying at the most, but on conjecture of probability, can make no sound plea of argument, that so it must be alleged. Nevertheless upon good hope to prove it, our Brethren will assay to bestow an argument on it. And (if they reason at all) thus they reason: The name of Elders is common to both, to Pastors and Governors, and is used to comprehend both at once: Our Brethr. argument for their governors. But Paul and Barnabas did ordain by election of the congregation Elders unto many Churches: Therefore, by these Elders that Paul and Barnabas did ordain unto many Churches, is comprehended Pastors and Governors both at once. This conclusion in sensu coniuncto may be granted. For, what doth this conclusion let, but that these Elders were Pastors and Governors too both at once, being Governors in that they were Pastors? The Elders Act. 14. If they mean it of distinct persons and offices: then, if the mayor of this argument mean, that the name of Elders is so common to both, that is to say, to Pastors and governors, as distinct persons, that it is used always to comprehend both at once: I deny the Mayor. The scripture is most manifest to the contrary, and their selves also. Otherwise, granting the Mayor, that it is so used now and then: to show that it is so used in this place here cited by our Brethren in their Minor: how will they prove it? Which if they do not: where is the argument? Our Brethr. own prows that that place Act. 14. is understood of governors that are Pastors. But what need we seek further confutation of their Minor, than their own Learned discourse hereon? Have not their selves alleged this example for Pastors, Page. 33. treating there only of the Pastor's proper duty, and joining this place, Act. 14.23. unto the conciliation of these, 1. Pet. 5. and Tit. 1.5? Yea, what other are their own words here present? Do they not say: And hereto also may be referred that which is said of election of Pastors? And whereas the text saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they restrain here the word, Presbyters, Priests or Elders unto the Pastors. So that, by their own exposition they do but hale and draw this place, to prove such governors as are not Pastors. I speak not this, that I utterly deny, there were any such Elders in the Apostles times, as were chief governors, little dealing with the public ministery of the word, What governors those Elders were that meddled nothing with the word. in such places as they wanted Magistrates that were Christians: but that these Governors (as we have seen at large out of Gualther) upon, 1. Cor. 12. and out of Gellius Snecanus on 1. Cor. 6. were rather as Magistrates among them in those times. which persons having received of the spirit of God the gift of government, the name of Elders (I grant) accordeth also well unto them. And so, both in the old Testament and in the new, the Civil governors are called Elders. But these were not Eccl. Elders. And that this place Act. 14.23. is to be referred to no other Elders than Pastors, the testimony also of calvin (even where he acknowledgeth that there were such Elders, as meddled not with the ministery of the word) doth manifestly herein confute our Breath. When they had created Elders. Hereupon (saith calvin) it appeareth that it sufficeth not for men to have been once endued with the doctrine of godliness, & to hold a sum of the faith: except they make continual encreasementes. Therefore, Christ not only sent the Apostles that should spread abroad the Gospel: but also he commanded that Pastors should be ordained, that the preaching of the Gospel should be perpetual and in daily use. This order set of Christ, do Paul and Barnabas observe, when they assign Pastors to every Church, lest that after their departure, the doctrine should cease and become silent. Whereupon this place teacheth, that the Church can not want the ordinary ministery, Acts. 14. neither can they be accounted Christians before God, save those that willingly are disciples all the race of their life. Whom Calu. understands for Elders. Act. 14. I expound it that Elders are here called those, unto whom the office of teaching was enjoined. For that there were certain which were only censors (or controllers) of manners appeareth out of Paul, 1. Tim. 5.17. So that even here, where calvin allegeth the other testimony that our Brethren also do, yet he clearly cutteth off this Testimony, Act. 14. 23. to infer any proof at all of these Consistory governors, and Elders that are not teachers. Neither do our Brethren here thus violently draw in their Governors, under the name of Elders, where it is apparent that Pastors are meant only: but also the word which should yet better prove, that it is meant of Pastors, that is to wit, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the ordaining of them by hands, to carry the better show that it was not of Pastors only, but of Governors, they translate it thus: They did ordain Elders by election of the congregation. Where the word neither speaketh of, nor necessarily inferreth, any election at all, and much less of the congregation, but only, of ordaining or creating with hands, signifying the consecration of them, by laying on of hands upon them. Which ceremony was not used in those that were Governors only as were these controllers of manners. For although there might be such at that time civil Elders (the people being in such case) elected among them: The Civil officers had not imposition of the Ministers hands. yet can it not be showed, that they had also the imposition of hands. Although peradventure that profane or civil order of holding up their hands among the Grecians, for which Beza citeth Cicero, might be well used in the election of them. And albeit calvin also interpret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, quum creassent suffragiis, when they had by suffrages (or voices) created Elders: and mention also (as we have seen before) the heathen manner of holding up of the hands: yet, as noting this to be too profane, he saith: notwithstanding the Ecclesiastical writers use the name, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of ordaining by hands in an other sense, to wit, for the solemn custom of ordaining that in the Scriptures is called, the laying on of hands. And therefore, where he applieth this to election, and that also to the people's election, although he give the moderation of the election, not to the people, but to the Apostles: yet if the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, be understood Ecclesiastically (as the Ecclesiastical writers use the name) for the solemn custom of ordaining, that in the scriptures is called, laying on of hands: then cannot this word betokening ordaining, be drawn to election, and much less to the election of the people, that had no authority of the laying on of hands, neither in ordaining nor in electing This therefore may suffice hitherto to answer the minor of our brethren's argument. But they (as though all were safe and sure, The Elders 1. Tim. 5.17. if they only strengthen their Mayor) go about to confirm it by an other place, saying: Because the name of Elders is common to both, to Pastors and Governors, and is used in the scripture to comprehend both at once, as it appeareth manifestly by S. Paul, 1. Tim. 5.17. those Elders that govern well, are worthy of double honour, 1. Tim. 5.17. especially those that labour in the word and doctrine. This confirmation of the mayor is here needles, to prove that the name of Elders is common to both, (that is to wit) Pastors and Governors, and to comprehend them both at once. Where the name of eldersis common to pastors and governors both at once. For as we have said) even so it doth in every place, where the pastors are called Elders▪ Because that in the nature of their Pastorship an Eccl. government is comprehended. Especially, Hebr. 13. ver. 7. and 17. Where the pastoral Elders are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Governors. So that, pastors and Governors, may both of them at once be very well comprehended in the name of Elders. But our Brethren mean it here not only so: but that the name also comprehendeth sometime, as well Elders that were Governors and not Pastors, as Pastors and Governors. For, I think they will not say Pastors are not also Governors; though no such Governors as they mean. Neither do we deny, that the name of Elders comprehendeth Governors that are no Pastors. The name of Elders taken generally for governors. For (as we have said before) the name of Elders was an ordinary and general name for the judges, the head officers, and Magistrates of the people. But that either this place, 1. Tim. 5.17. confirmeth that place, Act. 14. 23. to be understood of both sorts of Elders, especially, of Elders that were Governors and not Pastors, as it is of Pastors that were Governors: that will be too hard (I think) for our Brethren to prove. Yea, (to let alone the confirming of that place, Act. 14.) I doubt it will be somewhat hard also (except they will press me with the authority of our Brethren only themselves, that so think) to prove any necessity of understanding this place, 1. Tim. 5. (understanding Ecclesiastical officers) for such a double kind of Elders, some meddling with teaching, and some not meddling with teaching, as they gather thereupon and infer, saying: Of which testimony wae learn these three things: first, The learned disc pag. 85 that there be Elders in the Church, which meddle not with teaching, but are occupied altogether in governing. Secondly, that the Elders which labour in teaching otherwise called Pastors, are joined also in government with them which teach not. And thirdly that the name of Elders, comprehendeth both sorts of Elders. Elders Magistrates. Oportet discentem credere, The learner must believe. And we are bound and that of necessity, Bridges. to learn and to believe, all that the holy Scripture teacheth us: but not all that men shall gather thereon, except they prove unto us with all, We are not bound to learn our Brethr. collections. that their teaching followeth in necessity of consequence thereupon. This place neither in express words teacheth these three things, nor they teach, nor can teach, that these three things which here they set down, follow (by any necessity of consequence) on this testimony. And how then do we learn thereon these three things? For my part, I will offer myself to become their scholar to learn them gladly, if they substantially (as Learned discoursers should) can teach them. The first thing that our Brethr. say we learn hereon. And thus forward (as one ready to learn) I will show myself before hand, concerning the first and chiefest point, that here, in this inversed order of these three things, is proposed: that I deny not but freely grant, Saint Paul's words may indeed be well enough understood of such Elders in the Church, as meddled not with ordinary and public administration of teaching the word, but only with government, being chosen among themselves in those days, as their civil Christian rulers, or petite Magistrates, to compose and take up their controversies, that they should not strive and go to law, before the heathen superior and public Magistrates, to the obloquy of the Gospel. And that they were not only (as calvin calleth them) controulers of manners only: but meddling also in the oversight of Ecclesiastical causes, as the civil Christian Magistrates do now (God be praised) more openly, and with more authority than at that time, because the chief civil Magistrates were not then Christians: and yet the general direction and oversight for manners pertained in duty unto them. But what necessity inferreth this: that because there were such Governors then; therefore now also, we learn that there be Elders in the Church, The Magistrates are the governing & not teachinh Elders in the Church. which meddle not with teaching, but are occupied altogether in governing? For, although this be granted, that there be Elders in the Church, which meddle not with teaching, but with governing, meaning the Civil Christian Magistrates, for they both be, and be in the Church, and that lawfully: yet, what are our Brethren the nearer, for the proof of such Elders as they here contend for, except they will make them, the civil Christian Magistrates? But understanding by this word Elder, such Ecclesiastical Elders as they suppose: although again I grant them, where they say, there be Elders in the Church, etc. If in this word be, they signify the time present: that indeed there be such Elders in the Church as they would have, that is to say, there be such in those Churches of our Brethren, in some other Countries, or the French or Dutch in usual: Perpetuity of those Elders. notwithstanding I learn it not by this place, 1. Tim. 5.17. that there be any, but rather that there were some, though not such in all points, as they imagine they were. And doth this follow that because we learn likewise, and more clearly, and with more apparent warrant and nature of the offices, that there were Apostles, Evangelists, and Prophets in the Church: therefore we learn there be Apostles, Evangelists▪ We learn in the scripture that there were Apostles, etc. but not that there be. and Prophets in the Church still among us? But if our Brethren mean by these words, we learn that there be Elders in the Church, etc. That is to say, there ought to be, and that perpetually, and that in every Church and congregation, such governing Elders as they, pretend, which meddle not with teaching: that, we learn not here, nor they prove, nor (I think) shall ever be able to prove, that S. Paul here, or he or any other, in any other place of all the Scripture, Difference between there be, & there ought to be. doth teach or touch it. If our Brethren say that the words of S. Paul infer a perpetual necessity, that there should be Elders governing the Church, which should be labourers in the word and doctrine: admitting therefore that he speaketh here of 2. distinct sorts of Eccl. Elders in the Church, Presupposing there were then 2. such kinds of Elders, yet though the one were perpetual, it followeth not that the other was so the one meddling with teaching, the other not: if the one infer a perpetual necessity of the office, so doth the other. I grant again, that both there, and in other places, S. Paul's words infer, and so do others also in the scripture, a perpetual necessity, that there should be Elders governing in the Church which should be labourers in the word and doctrine. Albeit he speaketh there, either of those that were then, or should be at any time in the Church, what honour they should have: which was the Apostles purpose in these words: The Elders that govern well are worthy of double honour, especially such as labour in the word and doctrine. And I pray you, was not S. Paul, and the other Apostles, Evangelists, and Prophets, Elders also, and worthy of as much honour, as were those Elders, who and whatsoever? And yet are now and long since, these functions ceased, for any necessity, or ordinary need or exercise of them in the Church. Though, more or less, there have still been in all ages, (at leastwise there ought always to have been in all ages,) labourers in the word and doctrine. And therefore admitting there were then together in the Church, such distinct offices, the duty to have them honoured accordingly, inferreth no such necessity of perpetuity; that if the one continue in the Church, the other also must continue. For than we should still have Apostles, except our Brethren can teach it, and we shall learn it better; than that this place will infer any necessity, or continuance of it. Now, as we see here, that we can not learn this by any necessity of the Apostles words, Collection on 1. Tim. 5.17. that there be, that is to say, there ought to be in the Church, that is to say, in every congregation; Elders, that is to say, a Consistory or signory: not meddling with teaching, that is to say not meddling in the public administration of the word & sacraments: Our Brethr. own exposition on their own words. but are occupied altogether in governing, that is to say, which ought to have the hearing, examination & determining of all matters, pertaining to discipline and government of that congregation: for this is their own exposition of their words: admitting still that the Apostle speaketh here of two divers sorts of Elders, that aught in good order of teaching these 3. things to have been the first point, which our breath. should have taught us, & we to have learned, & they have here placed it last: so, let us now see, what necessity driveth us first or last to learn, on these words of the Apostle, 1. Tim. 5.17. that there were such Elders then in the Church, & that Paul there meaneth of such Elders, as meddled not with teaching, but were occupied altogether in governing. For first, S. Paul saith not this in plain words. It is our brethren's collection. Colligere hinc licet (saith calvin hereupon) it is lawful to gather, that there were then two kinds of Elders, because all were not ordained to teach. For the words do openly sound, that some governed well & honestly, to whom notwithstanding the parts of teaching were not committed. And indeed out of the people were chosen grave and tried men, which together with the Pastors in common counsel & authority of the Church, administered the discipline, and were as it were the Censors or controllers in correcting manners. calvin saith here, it may be gathered, and so already (to search out the matter better) we have admitted it, Whether these Elders were controllers of manners only that such there were, and yet not such neither, as our Brethren prescribe, nor calvin agreeth fully to himself of their authority. For where he saith here, that together with the Pastors in common counsel and authority of the Church they administered the discipline, and were as it were controllers in correcting manners, on the former place, Act. 14.23. he saith, fui●se enim quosdam duntaxat morum Censores, apparet, 1. Tim. 5.17. that there were certain (Elders) the controllers of manners only, (for we can not so expound it, that they were the only controllers of manners, sith the Pastors were controllers of manners also) it appeareth out of Paul, 1. Tim. 5.17. And here when he cometh to the place that he referreth us unto, he leaveth clean out this duntaxat, only: and giveth them together with the Pastors in common counsel and authority of the Church, the administration of discipline. Thus doth calvin with this contradiction, or wavering in his speeches hereon, infringe the authority of his own collection. Why Calvin gathereth this collection. But what maketh him, or any other of our Brethren, to think this so plain and necessary a collection. On S. Paul's words, that there were two kinds of Elders in the Church, the one meddling with teaching, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 1. Tim. 5.17. and the other not, but occupied altogether in governing? It is because the Apostle useth this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 chiefly, especially, most of all, or above all other? And must needs this specially of the persons, make a specialty also of the functions? Might they not as well be all of one function, and yet for some specialty in their labours, either in gift, or in travel, or in diligence, or in dexterity, or in success, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 have a more special recommendation than some other? And yet no dispraise unto the other, which though they were ministers of the word also, yet some of them, according as they excelled in diversity of gifts, might be most employed otherwise. The Apostles were ministers of the word and meddled with teaching, before they chose Deacons: and yet they say, The example in the Apostles themselves. it liketh us not that leaving the word we should minister to the tables, which plainly argueth, that, they laboured not so much in the word and doctrine before, as they did after, and yet then were they Elders meddling with teaching, and according to that time governing well also, and deserving double honour, though not in comparison of their labours in the word and doctrine, after they had chosen the Deacons to help them. Yea, The example in the Deacons. the Deacons also were not excluded from meddling with teaching, as appeareth both by Stephen Act. 7. and by Philip. Act. 8. When Paul and Barnabas were chosen out by the holy Ghost, unto the work whereunto he called them, which was a work in both of them meddling with the word, Act. 13. yet because S. Paul meddled more with the word than Barnabas did: not only the Licaonians called Barnabas jupiter, and Paul Mercury: but S. Luke addeth the reason thereof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Because he (to wit, Paul) was the guide or ruler of the word, that is to say, the chief teacher of it, who laboured more in the word not only than Barnabas, but than all the residue, 1. Cor. 15.10. and yet meddled with teaching, as well as Paul did. The specialty therefore of labouring in the word, The labouring in the word. more chiefly and above other, debarreth not other, but that they may meddle with teaching also, yea and be of the same function in that behalf: neither S. Paul maketh his distinction, of meddling with the word, but of labouring in the word and to express the more painful or effectual labour therein, he doubleth his speech, saying, that labour in the word and doctrine. And calvin himself construeth these words thus, qui bene praesunt. They that rule well, that is, which faithfully and stoutly travail in their office. And they that labour in the word and doctrine, that is, they which are intentive or earnest in teaching the word, referring it not to the diversity of the office, but to the diversity of the industry in the office. Unpreaching Prelates government. I speak not this neither so peremptorily, that of necessity we should on the other side conclude that he speaketh there but of those Elders only, that were all Elders of the word, and yet that he commendeth some more especially than others, for their more especial labours in the word: but that we may thus also construe his words, with probability and reason enough, for any thing herein to the contrary. And thus sith neither these words, 1. Tim. 5.17. infer any necessity of such Elders as meddle not with teaching, but were altogether occupied in governing: nor yet, if they had meant any such Elders then, they infer any rule of perpetuity, that there should be such still: and what their government was, is not here set down, nor insinuated, and not only some enlarge it, some restrain it, but calvin himself, which is the chiefest (if not the first) that so construeth these words, is so contradictory to himself or uncertain and varying therein: how shall we learn this first point, (except our Brethren shall teach us better) that there be Elders in the Church which meddle not with teaching, but are occupied altogether in governing? meaning such government, of such Elders, & such necessary being of them, in such Churches of every particular congregation, as our Brth. here do pretend & urge on this testimony. Now as we can not as yet, upon any necessity of consequence, out of this sentence, The second thing that our Brethr. say we learn on this testimony. 1. Tim. 5.17. 1. Tim. 5.17. Learn the first point: so I (in my dull head) much less the second, that the Elders which labour in teaching, otherwise called Pastors, are joined also in government with them, which teach not. For admitting again, that there were 2. kinds of Elders in distinct function, intended in this testimony, the one meddling with teaching, the other not: and both governed, as it is said here generally, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Elders that rule well: where with all, is not to be forgotten how Paul to express their well ruling useth the very word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that Beza ascribeth to Timothy, not only for an Elder of the word, but also for such a principal Elder of the word, as Beza calleth out of justine, antistitem, Our Brethr. call these Elders not teaching Bishops, and so make them unpreaching Prelates. a Bishop. So that, unless our Brethren will make each Elder of the signory in every Congregation a Bishop, and so set up unpreaching Prelates like the Popish dumb Bishops: they can not so properly expound it of Elders not meddling with the word, as meddling with it. But understand it either ways as they list. (For so they call them B. as we have seen in Beza & the Geneva note, on Phil. 1.1) yet doth not this sentence make their governments join with the Bishops and Pastors teaching. Yea, in the one and better half, that is in the government of teaching the word, they they selves do disjoin their governments. And if (as we have seen out of Gualther) they were only politic and civil Christian governors: except our Brethren will give politic and civil jurisdiction also to the Pastors: how do they join in government? Yea how do our Brethren here say, Two sorts of Elders. that the Pastors are joined in government with them which teach not? and yet in their form of Common prayers and ministration of sacraments, both that which was set out in Geneva, and that which now of late is set out again at London by our Brethren, they do confess (which I have often before noted) that the pastors and Ministers chief office standeth in preaching the word of God and Ministering the sacraments, so that in consultations, judgements, elections, and other ecclesiastical affairs, his counsel rather than authority taketh place. And this they say is approved by calvin. And yet calvin plainly saith (as we have heard before) that these Elders not teaching, together, The pastors authority clean set out of joint by the joint authority of these new governors. with the pastors in common counsel and authority of the Church, administered the Discipline, and were as it were the censors to correct the manners. Are not those sayings clean contrary? or do they think to help all with these words? that the Prayer book speaketh of his chief office which indeed it doth: but, so, that it debarreth from him (in the other inferior matters all authority quite and clean, and leaves him only to bare Council where calvin giveth him and them both Council and authority in common: and likewise our Brethren here say that the pastors are joined also in government with them. Which saying of our brethren is yet far better than his abridging, abasing, or rather annihilating of the Pastor's authority in the government of the Church, and giving all to these not teaching Elders and only counsel to the pastors. Howbeit the said books of Common Prayer, do after ward clean again contrary themselves, saying, in the title of Elders: whose office standeth in governing with the rest of the Minist. in consulting, admonishing, correcting & ordering all things pertaining to the comely direction of the congregation they differ from the Ministers in that they preach not the word nor minister the sacraments. In which words, they give the Pastors not only counsel but authority, and (as do our Brethren here) join them in Government both together. Which though of the twain it be the better, yet to join these Elders not teaching in equal and joint authority of Ecclesiastical Government with the Pastors, neither is it convenient, nor our Brethren have proved it, nor we learn it by any plain words, or necessary consequence, out of this testimony, 1. Timothy. 5.17. And as for the third point, which should rather have been the first, or second, that the name of Elder comprehendeth both sorts of Elders: The third thing to be learned What the n●me of elder comprehendeth. for such Elders as our Brethren here plead, they can not prove it, at leastwise, as yet they have not. Notwithstanding, (taking Elders, as we have said before) though this place of Saint Paul do not infer it, and so we learn it not also out of this testimony: yet in other places we learn it plain enough, Chrysost. in 1. Tim. 5. and freely grant in the church two sorts of Elders. Now although this may suffice to answer our brethren's testimonies out of S. Paul to Timothy, that we can not learn by any inferrence of this place, there were such Elders then, as our Brethren gather that there were: yet on this occasion, to proceed a little further herein, either for our brethren's fuller satisfaction, at least wise for the plainer opening of the matter, to any indifferent, or not to much forestalled judgement: The conference of this testimony with that that goeth before and after. it is the more probable by all likelihood, that S. Paul in this place, meant not any such governing Elders as meddled not with teaching, because the text itself (if we peruse that that goeth before, and that cometh after) speaketh of such Elders as either our Brethren themselves understand for Elders in age, not in office, as ver. 1. rebuking not an Elder: or if in office, of such only as meddled with teaching, so well as with government. As immediately after his proof of this testimony, S. Paul proceedeth saying: against an Elder admit no accusation, except under 2. or 3. witnesses. Which our breath. confess, is spoken of an Elder meddling with teaching, as we have before at large declared. And as for all the ancient fathers (at least, those which I have red) gather in their Commentaries thereupon, no other kind of Elder, than such as meddled with teaching in their Government. chrysostom Homil. 15. writing upon this place, saith: on this wise, The Elders that govern well are worthy of double honour, The examination of the ancient interpreters of this testimony. most of all they that labour in th● word and doctrine. For saith the Scripture, Thou shalt not moosle the mouth of the Ox that treadeth out th● corn, and the Workman is worthy his reward. He calleth in this place obedience and the yielding of necessary things, honour. For that which followeth: Thou shalt not moosle the mouth of the Ox that treadeth out the Corn and the Workman is worthy his reward signifieth this. And therefore, when he commanded Widows to be nourished with honour, it should be referred to their necessary living, that it may serve to suffice them that are widows indeeede. And again: Honour the Widows, that is, those that are in poor estate. For how much the poorer she is, the more she is a Widow. He setteth down the testimony of the Law, and addeth the testimony of Christ, and both of them agree together. For the Law saith: Thou shalt not moosle the Ox's mouth, that treadeth out the Corne. Thou seest how he would have the Doctor to labour. Truly there is no other labour to be compared thereunto. He addeth the Testimony of Christ. For he that is hired is worthy his reward, let us not therefore look only to the reward. But let us now also hear the precept. He that is hired (saith he) is worthy his reward. If any therefore shall be dainty or remis: he indeed is not worthy. Except any shall be the ox treading out the Corn, and bearing the yoke, he shall draw against the cold and against the thrones, nor departed till he have done: he is not worthy. It behoveth therefore that the doctors have their living abundantly ministered unto them, lest they faint or be weakened or be occupied in the least matters, and deprive themselves and others of the great, that they may labour the matters that are spiritual, having no regard to the secular things. Such kind of persons were the Levites which had no care to the things secular, in such sort as had the laity. For the caring for the Levites was permitted to them, (to wit, to the Laity) and by law were appointed for them revenues, tenths, Gold, first fruits, vows (or offerings) and many other things, but these things were by the law worthily permitted to them, that only sought the things present and earthly. I may boldly say therefore that the prelate's (or governors) of the Church, aught to have nothing but their living and their appareling, that they should not be drawn with lusting after these things. But what is that he saith with double honour? think we, that it is spoken of double, for that it is stretched to the widows and to the Deacons (or ministers) or else is it put, of double, that is to say, of grace? let us not therefore, look only to that that he said he is worthy of double honour: but let us much more mark that which he added, they that govern well. But what is it to govern well? hearken to Christ saying: the good pastor layeth his life for his sheep. To govern well therefore is this, Chrysost. in 1. Tim. 5. Homil. 15. to spare none of them for their government sake. Chief, saith he, they which labour in the word & doctrine. Where now are they that say, there is no need of the word and doctrine? sith with such study Paul admonisheth Timothy saying: meditate these things, in these things be thou. And again, Intent to reading and consolation, for doing this thou shalt both save thyself and them that hear thee. And these he commandeth chiefly of all, to be honoured, & he addeth the cause, saying: for they sustain much labour. And how right is this? for when as another watcheth not, nor is pined with care, but is every where secure and quiet in his daily talk & companies, this man is stricken with care & continually appleth meditation, especially if he be unexpert of external discipline: who seethe not how much he is to be preferred before other: sith that he hath exposed himself to so many labours? for he is laid open to be torn in pieces with tongs innumerable, one blameth him, another praiseth him, another defaceth him, one calls in question his memory, another his style. Great constancy hath he need of, to bear these things. And very much it ferdereth the edification of the Church, if the prelate's do excel in the grace which except they have, very many things of the discipline eccl. shall perish. Therefore after he had said, it behoveth a doctor to keep hospitality, to be courteous, to be unreprovable: Theodoret in 1. tim. 5. he reckoneth this also, and addeth a Doctor. For to what purpose is he called Doctor, but that he should teach? but perhaps thou wilt say, that he should teach philosophy, by the example of life. These things are vain: For the Mastership of words is necessary also, and therefore Paul saith, chiefly those that labour in the word and doctrine. For where as he treateth of matters of opinion, what place hath the holiness of life? What force hath that? Neither yet will I praise that sermon which swelling in haughtiness followeth the boast of outward cunning, but that which hath much power and juice, which is weighty in sense and full of Wisdom. He hath no need therefore of furniture and pomp of speaking: but of intelligence and of force meet to utter that, that he thinketh aught to be uttered. By these words it appeareth that Chrysostom taketh S. Paul's words to betoken no other Elder Governing Ecclesiastical Discipline, than such as meddled or ought to have meddled with teaching. Theodoret mentioneth no such elder interpreting this place. And that the more they excelled therein, Paul meant they were worthy to be more honoured. As for other kinds of Elders not teaching at all, he mentioned here, or commended none. As for the reference of any other compared unto these Elders (whom here also he calleth Doctors, not knowing of any so nice distinction between Doctors and Pastors as our Brethren devise) which might seem by this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to insinuate some other kind of Elders: besides the comparison of those that labour more or less in the word and Doctrine: he taketh it to also to be spoken, in comparison of those Elders, that were either the forenamed Elder Widows, or else, of the Deacons or Ministers of the church, without mention of any other, save of the Laity, that provided of maintenance of the Clergies livings. And here he maketh an agreeable probation, between the state of the Levites and of the laity, in the state of the old Law under Moses: and the state of the new, under this general precept of Christ, the workman is worthy of his reward. And as for the outward Discipline of the Church, he maketh the same to appertain to those Governing Elders, that labour also in the word and Doctrine, showing what pain they take till they be grown to experience therein. Of other unpreaching Prelates or Ecclesiastical Governors of the Church, or Churches Ecclesiastical Discipline pertaining to any such Elders, as were Ecclesiastical Governors, not teaching at all: neither here nor any where else chrysostom maketh any mention. But, as in this place, so in all other, he useth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Presbyter, Priest or Ecclesiastical Elder, only for such as are Ministers of the word. And that this is the very meaning of chrysostom: Theophilactus his abridger doth clearly expound it. He calleth Honour (saith Theophilact) as appeareth in that which followeth, the things that are bestowed for their maintenance. For they that instruct other, must abound in those things, that are necessary for the life of man: least being distracted with the care of them, them omit the fuuction of preaching. But he inferred it should be double, in respect of the Widows or of the Deacons. But wherein all the World are they, which affirm, there is need of a kind of a kind of good life, and not of speech, wherewith other may be instructed? Which question Oecerinus, repeateth yet plainer, saying: But But where now are they that say, he that governeth hath no need of speeches nor of Doctrine, but of like only? Hark, hark (good Brethren) and answer to your call for Ocumenus plainly calleth for all such as say there were some such Ecclesiastical Governors of the church, that would meddle all with manners and Discipline of life, and nothing in speech and teaching doctrine. Neither can ye post it of to those that preach the seldomer, or cannot preach: for these do the best they can, and teach yet some way or other: it least, it is their duty and profession. But your Governing Signors profess only ruling, and remove teaching. Theodorete having noted on the first verse of this Chapter, 1. Tim. 5. rebuke not an Elder, and said, non dicit hic sacerdotem. etc. Theodoret mentioneth no such elder interpreting this place. Hear he nameth not a priest, but one that is waxed old: when he cometh to this 17. verse, the Elders that govern well: etc. without any distinction, as naming there only such as were Ministers of the word, he saith: so laudable a thing is Doctrine. He putteth double honour for more ample. So that, if Theodorete had thought that Paul had also meant here▪ any such kind of Elder, as meddled not at all with Doctrine, there is no likelihood, but he would also have expressed it. Especially saying before on the 4. Chap. ver. 14. Despise not the grace that is in thee, which was given thee by Prophecy, with the imposition of the hands of the Presbytery or Eldership. Here he called Doctrine, Grace. But the presbytery here he calleth those, which received the Apostolical Grace. So also hath the holy scripture called them Elders which were honourable in Israel Likewise here Theodoret had good occasion, to have noted these Elders governing the Ecclesiastical regiment of the Church, not meddling with teaching, if he had thought Saint Paul had meant of any such kind of Elders. The commentary that is added unto Jerome, saith: The commentary on Tim. added to Jerome. The Elders that rule well: are those that fulfil their office▪ are worthy of double honour, both of the office and of the Doctrine: chiefly they that labour in the word and Doctrine: He said not of all that have the Word, but that labour in the word. But he commandeth him to ordain all that have it. As who say, all the Elders are ordained into the office and Ministry of the word, Ambrose in 1. tim. 5 as having the word, and so are to be honoured with a double honour, both for their office, and for the word sake, whereof they be officers, but they are most of all to be honoured with this double honour, that are painful labourers therein, whether Jerome in the name of Presbyter, Priest or Elder understand in any place, such Elders as our Brethren pretend: we shall here more afterward. But calvin allegeth Ambrose, and so doth Beza, and Daneus, for these Elders governing the Ecclesiastical Discipline, Caluins' allegation of Ambr. for the governing & not teaching Elders. and not meddling with teaching of the word. calvin having alleged (as we have heard) on this testimony, 1. Tim. 5.17. that we might gather there was such Elders, saith: Ambrose complaineth that this manner was worn out of use, through the slothfulness or rather the pride of the Doctors, while they only would excel. But what is this unto this place, 1. Timothy, 5.17. Upon the which, Ambrose hath only these words: The Elders that rule well, etc. The good and faithful dispensers or stewards are not only to be judged worthy of high honour, Ambr. interpretation of this place 1. Tim. 5.17. but also of earthly, that they might not be made sad for want of maintenance, but rather that they might rejoice of their faith and Doctrine. For if he be not humbled with need, he will become more earnest: and authority will increase in him, when he seethe himself even in the present time to enjoy the fruit of his labour. Not so that he should abound, but so that he should not want. And this is all that Ambrose there saith hereon. Manifestly acknowledging in this sentence, but one kind or function of Elders to be spoken of, and those to be Dispenser's of the Word. And as for other kind of Elders not Dispenser's nor meddlers with teaching at all, he meddleth not at all in this place with them. True it is that on this first verse of the fift Chapter, Rebuke not an Elder but exhort him as a Father. etc. Ambrose in 1. Tim. 5.1. He saith before: For the honourableness of age, he that is the greater in years, is to be provoked to do well, with gentleness, that he may take the admonition the more easily. For he that is warned, may be afraid least he should afterward be rebuked, which is unseemly for a signior. For verily among all nations old age is honourable whereupon also the synagogue and afterward the church, had Seniors, without whose counsel nothing was done in the Church. Which thing by what negligence it grew out of use, I cannot tell, except perhaps by the sloth of the Doctors, or rather by their pride, while they alone would seem to be somewhat. Thus saith Ambrose, but whether they had no parts at all in meddling with the word, because they laboured not altogether therein, as the Doctors did, or what their office was, if they had any peculiar office, or only so reverenced for their age, that their only counsel was asked, or whether they joined in authority and government in common with the Pastoral and teaching Elders, S. Ambrose doubtful speech of other governing Elders besides the doctors. or when they came into the Church, or how they began, or whether it were but only a continuance, or imitation of the jews order in the Synagogue, or there were any commandment of them, either from the Lord, or from the Apostles, or whether there were any such in the Apostles times, or whether they were in every congregation, or but in some principal and great Churches, or how long they continued, in every or any Church where they were, or when they ceased or grew out of use, whether all at once, or by little and little: none of all these things (which were very material to our consideration of them) we can learn on these words of Ambrose. But it seemeth (sith they were gone so long before S. Abrose time,) that he confesseth he did not know how they were clean worn out of use: Whether it were likely or no, that they were thought convenient to remain, it is apparent they were not counted so necessary, as were the offices of Bishops, of Pastors and Teachers, and of Deacons. For if they had so esteemed of them, they would have continued in the Church, as well as the other, at least wise in some places, neither negligence nor sloth, nor pride, either of Doctors, or of any other, nor of all the Church, could have ever so clean, and that so long time before S. Ambrose, and so many hundred years since, have abolished them. But if this yet satisfy not our Brethren for Ambroses judgement upon these other Elders that were not Labourers in the word and Doctrine: because he saith they were such Governors, as that nothing was done in the Church without them? Albeit that also may be lmitted in the understanding of such consent or assistance, as wherein the Deacons were ever ready at hand, atttendaunt on the Bishops and Pastors yet why might it not then (if we will not understand it, neither of those temporary civil officers, that were at that time as Magistrates among them, such as Brentius, Gualther, Snecanus, and other do say, that then they had:) be well enough understood, even for such Elders, who though they were not the Bishop or the Especial Doctors that our Brethren distinguish from Pastors: (which Doctors laboured most in the word and Doctrine, though they joined exhortation and application to their Doctrine, (as did the Pastors) yet these other not so much labouring in that manner, sith there was nothing done in the Church without them, (except our Brethren will count teaching nothing) it argueth (if they dealt more or less in all things, that were to be done in the Church,) that they were not clean excluded from all teaching. Cyprian. But whatsoever office those Elders had, that Saint Ambrose saith, was grown out of use: it is plain impossible, that he being himself an Archbishop and approving so far forth (as we have heard) the superior separate authority of every Bishop one in a City: and reckoning them to succeed in the Apostles places: should withal conceive, that they had ever any such office of joint-authority in all things, yea, in excommunication with the Bishop, as our Brethren ascribe unto them, but the contrary thereof, we shall see after (God willing) further in the practice of S. Ambrose himself. In the mean time, because this Testimony out of Ambrose, doth not yet sufficiently describe unto us, what kin officers these were: (for if by the sloth or by the Pride of the Doctors these Elders decayed: then be like they had some kind of teaching:) yet lea●●e our Brethren having no better testimony than these uncertain words of Ambrose, should under pretence of reviving these old Elders dead and buried long ago, obtrude unto us some new young Elders, missebegotten and fathered in these old Elders names, let us now see further what other Elder Fathers, for these Elder Governors, that meddle not with teaching, and yet join in common Government with the Pastors, our Brethren allege also besides Saint Ambrose Beza that said in his confession of the christian faith, Cap. 5. de eccl. artic. 32. Bezaes' testimonies for these Elders. But that the Elders were chosen by suffrages, or at least by the approving of the whole company, as it openly enough appeareth out of Ambrose, complaining that certain men transferred this right unto themselves: addeth héereunto: and out of Cyprian also, of whom we may eftsoons understand that matter, Ambr. in 1. Tim. 5. Lib. Epis. 2. Epis. 5. & lib. 3. epist. 10.14.15. & aliis deinceps. that the Bishop governed a College of Elders, not that he should there reign: but that according to their sentence, he should govern the Ecclesiastical policy, especially while at that time the African Churches were not helped of the Magistrate but rather most cruelly vexed. By the leave still of this so excellent man, whom otherwise (save in these matters of Discipline and Government) I honour as highly as any of our Brethren do, and herein withal reverence dissent from him (as I have before of him, and of all other our like reverent brethren protested) this which here Beza saith, that it openly enough appeareth by Ambrose (quoting Ambrose in 1 Tim. 5.) that the Elders (which there Beza speaketh of) were chosen by suffrages, or at least by the approving of the whole company: neither any choosing of them either by suffrages, or by approving of the whole or any of the company, appears, openly or darkelie, enough or at all. Ambrose mentioneth no such matter, in all the whole Chapter. How openly enough Ambrose there speaketh of these Elders, we have already seen. It is not so open enough, that we can learn thereby, either what office, or authority, or ground thereof they had: nor yet where, when, nor how they began, continued or ended. And therefore it is not so open enough, but that to prove, these Elders which our Brethren would bring in to be like unto those: and to bring warrant enough that we are bound to receive and choose them: I think our Brethren would wish it were more open and apparent than Ambrose maketh it: And so would I wish also, that we might once certainly know, whether we must needs choose them, or we may choose, whether we will choose them, yea or no: supposing they had been such, as our Brethren suppose they were: which neither could be, nor hath any probability, but all contrary, by the testimonies, conjectures and reasons that we have seen. But because, if it be not open enough, Beza will open it more by Cyprian, that was Ambroses ancient, by almost two hundred years. Let us search likewise what his Quotations out of Cyprian, will open unto us, and whether in his time which was about the year of our Lord, two hundred and sixty, there were any such Elders as meddled not with teaching, that Governed the Ecclesiastical Discipline and spiritual jurisdiction. For so Beza in the beginning of this article saith, Whether Cyprian mention any such Elders. that the spiritual jurisdiction was committed to them. Now to prove this, after he hath done with Ambrose, he addeth: and out of Cyprian also, of whom we may eftsoones understand that matter, that the Bishop Governed a College of Elders, not that he should there reign, but that according to their sentence he should govern the Ecclesiastical policy. Or ever we come to see by his Quotations, what manner of Elders soever these were, whether such as Beza goeth about to prove and our Brethren urge, yea or no: (let that fall out after, as it shall:) this is first worth the noting, that the Bishop governed the College of these Elders, and so was above them. And that not for an action or two, or for any set days▪ Months, or years: but continued, as the College continued, during his time, except he were deprived of his life, or deposed of his dignity, or exiled from his Country, This government of the B. was permanent in him or otherwise absent, or fled, as then Cyprian himself was fled from his College, by reason perhaps of the personal persecution against him. And yet he remained still, as well absent as present, the Governor of them. Yea, but (saith Beza, not to reign there, God forbidden, we should allow any bishop to reign over those, of whom he hath the Government. Let that be upbraided to the Pope. We hold ourselves content with this, that Beza saith, he should rule the Ecclesiastical policy. Yea but (saith Beza) according to their sentence. And what rule is that, if they give the sentence, and he only rule according to their sentence? do not they rather rule than he? 〈…〉. or is he any better than their servant, Officer, or executioner of their sentence, and they his Governors, not he theirs? therefore that should be opened yet more plain, what is meant by their sentence, and how far it stretcheth. Or else it is not yet made by Beza open enough, to whom the Government doth belong, to him or to them. But so far forth as belongs to him, he still is all their superior therein. Now then, if it shall fall out, that this College of Elders over which the Bishop is Governor, shall prove to be a College of such Elders, as meddled as well with teaching of the word, as with the Government of Ecclesiastical Discipline: and be of those Elders that be his Brethren in the office of Eldership, which we call (of Presbyters) priests: then have we here again the permanent superiority of Bishops over Pastoral Elders, whereof we have so much before debated. But Beza goeth about another matter clean contrary, to prove that this College of Elders were of such Elders as were not meddlers with teaching of the word. Bezaes' confession that these Elders governing with the B. were in the time of persecution. Which if they were, as we shall see anon, by trial out of these Epistles of Cyprian: yet saith Beza, that this was then▪ when as especially by that time, the Churches of Aphrica were not helped of the Magistrate, but rather most cruelly vexed. And what meaneth Beza to come in with this, Especially of that time of heathen Magistrates and their persecution? when Gualther maketh the same reason, that there were such Elders not teaching (though not Ecclesiastical Governors as our Brethren imagine) in the Church then, when as there wanted Christian Magistrates and Princes: what other thing did he infer thereon, but this? that now sith there are Christian Magistrates and Princes●, and that the Government of Ecclesiastical matters so well as temporal pertaineth to them▪ as we also acknowledge, and that most rightly in the Queen's most excellent Majesty (and if in her, then in the right of all other Christian Princes,) that therefore, this defect being now furnished, this supply of these Elders is needless and no longer necessary. Yea, and should now be prejudicial to the authority and Government of Christian Princes. And what other thing saith Gualther there, but that this reason of Beza doth infer? Our Brethren reason on S. Paul words, 1. Tim. 5.17. That because S. Paul bringeth in these words, How Bezaes' words confirm Gualters. Especially those that labour in the word and Doctrine: therefore there were other governing Elders, that were not teachers. And may not we reason as well and much better? that sith the Elders which were no teachers, but only ruled the Eccl. Discipline, were then, when as especially at that time the churches were not helped of the Magistrate: therefore being now helped of the Magistrate, there need no such Elders to be the rulers of the church's Discipline. But let us now see by the search of these Quotations, Cyprian Elders. that Beza citeth out of Cyprian for these elders, what manner of Elders they were. Whether not meddling with teaching, (as Beza and our Brethren pretend) or Ministers of the word and Doctrine. And first, for the second book of his Epistles, the fift epistle: which is here first by Beza quoted, the superscription is thus. Cyprianus presbyteris & Diaconis & plebi universae salutem. Cyprian to the Elders, and Deacons, and to the whole people, Greeting. Cypr. lib. ●. epist. 5. Hear are Elders named before Deacons, as the Deacons before the people. But whether they meddled with the word or no, as yet appeareth not. But by the like style in his other Epistles precedent, when he writeth to other, or writeth of other, whom he calleth Presbyterus, and apply to them the name Sacerdos: we may he bolder (before hand) conclude that he meaneth in that name, no such Elders as our Brethren plead for. Cyprian commendeth to these Elders, Deacons and people, one Aurelius whom he had ordained a Reader. And in the beginning of his Epistle saith: In the clerk that are to be ordained (most dear Brethren) we are wont to consult with you, and in common counsel, to weigh the manners and merits of every one. In these words he telleth them what he w●s wont to do with them, in ordaining of the Clergy. But he saith not that they had the authority thereof so well and as far forth as he, and that they joined in Common government with him, but in common counsel, and that only to consider of their conversation: nor that he was so necessarily bound thereto, but that, when he himself apparently knew the party to be fit (as he commendeth this Aurelius to be) he was not then bound to consult with them thereon, How far Cyprian dealt with the Elders in giving Ecclesiastical orders. but he himself without any further consultation, might ordain the party, as here he did this Aurelius. And he saith Merebatur talis Clericae ordinationis ulteriores gradus & incrementa maiora, non de annis suis, sed de meritis aestimandus, sed interim placuit ut ab officio lectionis incipiat, etc. Such an other as he deserved further degrees of the clerical ordination▪ and greater advancements, not being to be esteemed by his years, but by his merits. Nevertheless it pleased me in the mean season, that he should begin from the office of reading: because both nothing doth more agree unto the voice that hath confessed the Lord by glorious preaching, than with celebrating the Divine Lessons, to sound out afterwards the high words: he which hath uttered the Martyrdom of Christ, to read the Gospel of Christ from whence the Martyrs are made, to come to the pulpit after the stocks: to have been beholden there of the multitude of the Gentiles, and here to be beholden of the Br. there to have been heard with the wonder of the people standing about him▪ & here to be heard with the rejoicing os the Brotherhood. Know ye therefore (most dearly beloved brethren) that this man was ordained of me, and of my Colleagues which were present, because I know that you do both willingly embrace and wish, for many such to be ordained in our Church. Hear he speaketh of Colleagues indeed, that joined with this holy Archbishop Cyprian in ordaining this man a Reader. Cyprians joining Elders with him in imposition of hands argueth they were elders of the word But he showeth that all the action was at his pleasure, and that he mought have given him higher orders if he had pleased. But what is here to prove that these Colleagues, though he governed them, were of any College under him, or were not Elders meddling with the word? yea rather because he speakketh of ordaining, and that he joined them with him in the ordaining, and that action was done by imposition of hands, which we have seen before, was only of those that were Ministers of the word: why should we not think that these colleages, were elders that meddled with the word and teaching, when the reader whom they ordained meddled with it? Hear is at least (to begin with) a good conjecture, that these Elders meddled with teaching, when they joined thus far in the ordaining of Teachers: but here is nothing at all, whereon we may conjecture, that these Elders did not meddle at all with teaching. The next testimony that Beza quoteth out of Cyprian, for these governing Elders not meddling with teaching, is in the third Book the tenth Epistle. Cypr. lib. 3. epist. 10. And here he beginneth as he did before (save for the people) Cyprian to the Elders and Deacons his brethren, Greeting. Whom he meaneth here also by the name of these Presbyters, priests or Elders, and in what matters they meddled, appeareth more plainly by this Epistle. Verly I wished (most dear brethren) that I might have saluted with my letters, our whole Clergy entire and safe. But because this malicious tempest, which hath beaten down our people for the most part, hath from hence also added an heap unto our grieves, insomuch that in the slaughter thereof, it hath wrung in a portion also of the Clergy: we beseech the Lord that we may salute you, whom we know to stand in constancy, and in the virtue (or power) of faith, being protected hereafter also through the mercy of God. And although the cause compel me, that I myself ought to hasten and come unto you, first for the longing and desire of you, which thing is one of my chiefest wishes: and then moreover, that those things which the common profit about the Government of the Church requireth, we may treat of (or handle) them together, and may file them being examined by the counsel of many: nevertheless it is rather thought good, yet a while in the mean season, to keep a privy corner and rest, in respect of other commodities, which appertain unto the peace and health of us all. Whereof a reason shall be rendered to you, of our most dear Brother Tertullus. Who for his other care which in godly works he greatly employeth, was also the author of this counsel, that I should abide wary and refraining, nor rashly commit myself unto those places, where I was so often inquired after and sought for. Reposing myself therefore on your love and religion, which I have known sufficiently, I do by these letters both exhort you, and command (or charge) you, Et horror & mando. that you (whose presence there is not envied, nor so much dangerous,) occupy my room (or steed) about those things to be done which the religious (or Ecclesiastical) administration doth require. Vice mea fungamini. And again his concluding his Epistle he saith: but unto that which our Elders Donatus, Novatus, and Curdius have written unto me, I being alone could write nothing again, sith that from the beginning of my Bishopric, I have determined to do nothing of mine own sentence privately, without your counsel, and without the consent of the people, but when as by the grace of GOD I shall come unto you, then will we treat in common of those things that are either done or to be done, according as mutual honour doth require. In this Epistle (as in the other) he saith he will treat together in common with them, How Cyprian joined in common counsel with the elder his authority reserved. of those things that concern the government of the Church, and therein do nothing without their counsel: Howbeit he maketh this nothing else, but his own determination with himself so to do. Neither giveth he to them in common any joint or equal authority with him in these things, as of their right and office, otherwise than as he made them his deputies in the authority thereof. Yea, he not only exhorteth them, but commandeth and chargeth them to stand in his steed. And all this he doth in his absence, which recommendeth the more his authority in his presence. Although therefore in his presence among them, he would in all things consult, examine and (as he saith) file out matters with the counsel of many (for, plus vident oculi quam oculus) yet can we not gather thereupon, that this their counsel and treating in common argueth the authority of Governing those things, to be in common also among them. For, where he attributeth to these elders thus much, The Elders council & the people's con●ent. that he would do nothing without their counsel: he addeth, & without the consent of the people. And consent is more than counsel (for a man may give his counsel, and yet, it may be done without his consent: but if it shall not be done without his consent, than he hath a greater stroke therein, than in giving his advice or counsel) & shall we say then, that the people also had the authority, and that greater authority to, in the government of the church's discipline, than had these Elders? these humble and courteous speeches therefore, or these his doings (so far. as here he saith, mutual honour required) argue not the peoples, Noua●us. nor the Elders & deacons joint-authority with him. Yea our brethren their-selves give not this authority and government to the Deacons. And yet here Cyprian, look what dealing in the Government of the Ecclesiastical Discipline he yieldeth to the Elders: he joineth the Deacons jointly with them. But admit now, that these Elders and Deacons had joint authority in common with him, in the government of the Church's Discipline: still our Question is, who, and what manner of Elders these were? whether Governing Elders not meddling with the word, as Beza and our Brethren do affirm? but if we shall better consider this, that here he maketh them and the Deacons to be his Deputies: That these Elders to whom Cypr. wrote were ministers of the word although the Deacons were inferior, but were not excluded from meddling in the Ministry of the word: What likelihood is there, but that these Elders their superiors, were Ministers of the word also? and what unlikelihood is there not in this? that if there had been any other kind of Elders, to wit, pastoral Elders, higher than both of them, as they must needs either grant that there were, (if these that he writeth to were not Pastoral Elders, or else, that they wanted Pastors and Ministers of the word and Sacraments) that he would make these Elders and Deacons his Deputies, rather than the Pastoral Elders amongst them? the Pastor's being of the same function of eldership that himself was of, and so might much better represent him, he only differing in degree of dignity and authority of Government over them. One of Cyprians elders was Novatus a teacher of puritanism But to make it yet more plain, when as he mentioneth also in this Epistle, three of these Elders, Donatus, Novatus and Curdius, whatsoever the other were, this Novatus (for I can find no other Novatus but one, that was in Cyprians time, and one of his elders,) not only meddled but overmedled with the word. And both wrote unto him, and afterward much troubled him, breeding a most dangerous Schism and heresy in the Church, and all under a pretence of more severe Discipline and purity, and yet was himself, when he was well sought out, a most impure and licentious man. This Novatus being an elder of Carthage, where Cyprian was Bishop, fled from Carthage to Rome, and there also broke forth into such factions, as we have seen before out of Eusebius, Cypr. epist. li. 2. epist. ●. Lib. 6. Cap. 33. Whereupon Cornelius the B. of Rome, writeth of him unto Cyprian. Whom Cyprian answering, Lib. Epist. 2. Epist. 8. saith: Concerning Novatus, The description of Nouat●s. there was no need to show us from thence: when rather by us Novatus ought to have been showed unto you, that he was always desirous of new matters. Of covetousness unsatiable, furious in ravening, puffed up with arrogancy, and an unsensibleness of a proud swelling, ever known there unto the Bishops in an ill sort, condemned by the voice of all the priests, as an Heretic always, and faithless, evermore curious that he might betray, flattering to this end that he might beguile, that he might love never faithful, a fyre-brande and fire to kindl● the flames of sedition, a whirlwind and Tempest to make Shipwrecks of the faith, an adversary of tranquillity, an enemy of peace: to conclude, Novatus departing thence from us, that is to say, Novatus schism and severing the brethren from the B. and from the clergy. the storm and the Whirlwind departing from us: quietness was partly made, and the glorious and good confessors, which by his inciting were gone from the Church, after that he was gone from the City, came to the Church. Again, The same Novatus is he, that amongst us first sowed the flames of discord and Schism, which here severed some of the brethren from the Bishop. Which even in the very persecution itself, that he might turn away the minds of the brethren, was another kind of persecution unto our people. It is even he, which by his faction and ambition, made Felicissimus his Catchpole a Deacon, neither I permitting it, neither writing of it. And sailing with his tempest to overturn the Church at Rome also, he hath there attempted the like and even such parts, Novatus his making of a B. and of a Deacon. pulling a portion of the people from the clergy, cutting asunder the concord of the brotherhood, that held well together among themselves and loved one another. Certainly sith that, according to the bigness thereof, Rome ought to go before Carthage. He hath there committed greater and more grievous things, he that here against the Church made a Deacon, made there a bishop. Neither let any man marvel at this in such kind of men. The evil are ever carried mad in their fury. And when they have committed their wickedness, they are vexed with the conscience itself of their wicked mind. Neither can they abide in the church of God, which have not holden the Discipline of Gods making, and that which is Ecclesiastical, neither in the conversation of their doing nor in the peace of their manners. The pupils whom he hath spoiled, the Widows whom he hath defrauded, the church's money which he hath denied, require these punishments which we see in his fury. Novatus unnaturalness towards his father, wife & child. His Father also died for famine in a Village, and yet afterward when he was dead, he buried him not. With his foot he strake his wives belly, whereupon she travellinge before her time, was delivered of her child murdered. And dare he now condemn the hands of them that make the offerings, when he himself is worse than his feet were, with the which his Chilyde that was borne was slain? His conscience misgave this guiltiness of his crimes long ago. The Presbytery. For this cause he made sure reckoning, that he should not only be called out of the Presbyterye, but also excommunicated, and the Brethren urging it, the Day of his trial approached, in the which before as his cause should be handled, if that the persecution had not come before it. Which he taking hold of, with a certain kind of vow that he might escape and save his condemnation, committed and intermixed all these things, (as he which was to be cast out of the Church and excluded) prevented the judgement of the priests, by his voluntary departing: as though, to have prevented the sentence, were to have escaped the punishment. This presbytery consisted of such Elders as were Sacerdotes, Ministers of the word & sacraments. By this invective of Cyprian, it is not only most apparent that this Elder Novatus was a Minister of the word and sacraments: but that also these consistories or colleges of Elders, in such great cities as Rome & Carthage, that with the Bishops were assistants in the government of the Ecclesiastical Discipline, were not of such Elders as meddled not with the word: but were of such Presbyters priests or Elders, as were also called sacerdotes. Which in the Epistle before this that Beza next citeth, is called of Cyprian, the corpse of the priests. Lib. 3. epist. 13. Where, after again he hath inveighed against this Novatus, whom there he calleth Novatian, he saith: for therefore (most dear Brother) the corpse of the priests is abundant, coupled together with the glue of mutual concord and bond of unity: that if any of our college shall attempt to make an heresy, The college of the Elders a corpse of priests and pastoral Elders. and to rend and waste the flock of Christ, the other should help, and as profitable and merciful pastors should gather together into the fold the lords sheep. And thus by the occasion of this one schismatical Elder, we find not only a profitable warning for us all to take heed, of making schism in the Church under pretence of greater purity, and innovating new orders of more severe Discipline: but also, which is the point we now rely upon, that these Colleges of Elders, whose counsels the Bishops used in the Government of the church's discipline, were colleges of pastoral Elders. Cypr. Epist. li. 3. epi. 14. But to search it yet further with Beza, let us proceed unto his next quotation, Epist. 14. even the next Epistle to that we last cited, although we have partly seen the same already, for the superiority of Bishops over pastoral Elders. Wherein Cyprian writeth to the Elders and Deacons as before. The occasion was▪ because they admitted some to the supper of the Lord, and to the peace of the Church, who had fallen in the time of persecution, and had not before their receiving, publicly confessed their offence, and declared their unfeigned repentance. Whereupon saith Cyprian: I have long held my patience (most dear Bre.) as though our shamefast silence should gain quietness. The Elders claim of government. But when the immoderate and cutted presumption of some, endeavoureth by their rashness to disturb both the honour of the Martyrs, and the shamefastness of the confessors, and the tranquility of the whole people: I must not hold my peace any longer, lest too much silence grow to the danger, both of the people together and of ourselves. For what danger of offending the Lord ought we not to fear, when as some of the Elders, The Elders claiming all the Churches eccl. government to themselves is the contumely and peril of the people. neither mindful of the Gospel, nor of their place, neither thinking of the judgement of the Lord to come, nor of the Bishop that now is placed over them, claim all to themselves with the contumely and contempt of their governor. Which thing was never done at all under our ancestors. Yea, would to God they claimed not all things to them, with the overthrow of our brethren's salvation. I can wink at and bear the contumely of our Bishopric, as I have always winked at it, and thoroughly borne it. But there is now no place of winking at it, when as our Bretherhood is beguiled by certain of you, who while without the reason of restoring them to salvation, are desirous to be plausible: they do rather hinder such as are fallen. For, that it is a most heinous offence which persecution compelled to be committed, even they also do know that have committed it, when as the Lord and our judge hath said: He that shall confess me before men, Luke. 22. I will acknowledge him also before my father which is in heaven. But he that shall deny me, I will also deny him. And again, Mark 3. All sins shallbe forgiven to the sons of men, yea blasphemy; but he that shall blaspheme against the holy Ghost, shall have no forgiveness, but is guilty of aeternal sin. Again the blessed Apostle said: ye can not drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of Devils; ye can not communicate at the table of the Lord, and at the table of Devils. He that concealeth these things from our Brethren, 1. Cor. 10. beguileth the misers, as though that they which truly repenting them, might satisfy unto God the father for mercy by their prayers & works, should be seduced, that they might perish the more. And those that might erect themselves, might the more fall. For when in lesser sins, the sinners declare themselves penitent at a just time, The Elders presuming to restore the penitents without the Bishop. and come to the confession of their sins, according to the order of discipline, and by the laying on of the Bishops and the Clergies hands, they receive the right of communicating: they are now (in the raw time of the persecution, yet continuing, the peace of the Church itself being not yet restored:) admitted to the communicating, and their name is offered up, and having not done their penitence, their confession of their sins being not yet finished, nor the hand either of the Bishop or of the Clergy being as yet laid upon them; the sacrament of thanksgiving is given unto them. When as it is written, He that shall eat the bread or drink the cup of the Lord unworthily shallbe guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But now are not they guilty that know not the law of the Scripture, The Eccl. gone. teachers. but they are guilty that are the Governors, and do not declare these things unto their brethren, that they being instructed of their Governors, might do all things with the fear of God, and with the observation given and prescribed of him. Moreover, they cause the blessed Martyrs to be envied, and set at strife the glorious servants of God, with the Priest of God; The Bishop's authority over these governors teachers. that when as they that are mindful of our law shall have directed their letters to me, and shall have requested that the desires of every one may be examined, and the peace to be given, when as our mother herself shall have first by the lords mercy received peace, and that the divine protection shall have brought you again unto the Church: these men taking away the honour which the blessed Martyrs, which the Confessors keep unto us, contemning the law and observation of the Lord, which the same Martyrs and Confessors command to be holden, The governors ministers of the Sacrament. do communicate with those that are fallen, and offer, and deliver the Sacrament of thanksgiving, before the fear of persecution be extinguished, before our return, before almost the very departure itself of the Martyrs. When as the Martyrs yea if so be through the heat of glory not so much looking upon the scripture, should desire any thing more than they ought, contrary to the law of God; they ought to be admonished of the Elders and Deacons suggesting (or declaring it) as it hath always in times past been done. Thus doth Cyprian most clearly show, that these Elders (whom also he calleth by the name of Governors.) Not only with the Bishop laid their hands on the penitent, but administered the supper of the Lord unto them. Which thing they doing without the offenders due acknowledgement of their faults: nor they preaching the law of God and repentance to them, as they ought to have done: and laying their hands on the penitent, or ever their Bishop was returned: as Cyprian rebuketh them for these presumptions; so by this he declareth, that these governors consistorial were such Elders, as we call Priests, that is, Ministers of the word and sacraments; and not such Elders as meddled only with governing and not teaching, as our Brethren and Beza do pretend. And because Beza quoteth yet an other testimony out of Cyprian, to wit, the 15. Epistle, for proof of these Elders: it behoveth us to see that also, lest we should leave any thing out that our Brethren affirm. And so far (for my part to my poor skill) as I find aught in them, although I grow over tedious thereby. Yet I more covet the full bolting out of the truth, and through satisfying the desire even of the most scrupulous & curious reader, in so hot and great controversies, especially as this is of this Eldership than I fear the glutting of them, that care not much for these questions, or willbe easily though with reason answered. The Elders and Deacons teachers. The 15. Epistle is written to his brethren, the martyrs and confessors in his Church, who having written to their Bishop Cyprian, for the orderly admitting into the communion of the church, Cypr. Epist. lib. 3. Epist. 15. such as had fallen; he returneth this answer to them. The carefulness of our place and the fear of the Lord compelleth me (most valiant & most blessed martyrs) to admonish you by our letters, that of whom the faith of the L. is so devoutly and so stoutly conserved, of the same also the law and discipline of the Lord may be reserved. For sith all the soldiers of Christ ought to keep the precepts of their Emperor; then much more convenient is it, that you should more obey his precepts, which are made unto other an example, both of virtue & of the fear of God. And verily I believed, that the Elders & Deacons which are there present, warned and instructed you most fully, concerning the law of the Gospel, Both the Elders and Deacons were teachers. even as also in times past it hath always been done under our ancestors, that the Deacons resorting unto the prison, should with their counsels and with the precepts of the scriptures, overrule the desires of the Martyrs. But now I know with most great grief of mind, that not only the commandments of God are there not declared: but as yet they are rather hindered, in so much that even those things also which of yourselves are warily done, both concerning God, and honourably concerning the sacred Priest of God, are again undone by certain of the Elders. Who neither thinking on the fear of God, nor of the bishops honour, when as you directed unto me your letters, by the which your requests were to be examined, and that you craved I would give peace unto certain that were fallen at such time as the persecution being finished, we should begin to come together in one with the Clergy, and be recollected: they contrary to the law of the Gospel, and to your honourable petition, before the accomplishment of their penitence, before the confession made of the most grievous and extreme trespass, before the hand of the Bishop and the Clergy laid upon them for their penitence, durst offer (he meaneth prayers and thanksgiving) for them, The Elders were the ministers of the Sacrament. and give them the sacrament of thanksgiving, that is, durst profane the holy body of the Lord. And verily to them that were fallen, pardon in this point might be granted. Who being dead, would not make haste to be quickened? Who would not hasten to come to his health? The governors, Teachers, and Pastors. But it is the duty of the Governors to keep the commandment, and both to instruct them that either hasten, or be ignorant, least that they which ought to be the Pastors of the sheep, should become their butchers. For, to grant those things that should turn to ones destruction, is to deceive him, neither is the fallen reared upon that fashion, but by the displeasing of God, Bezaes' mistaking. he is rather pushed down to his ruin. Let them learn therefore even of you that which they ought to teach you, etc. What can be plainer spoken than these speeches, to declare that these Elders which Cyprian writeth of, were such Governors, that both the ministration of the word and sacraments pertained to them, How greatly Beza and our Brethr. are deceived in the college of Elders governors that Cyptian mentioneth and were such as in plain terms he calleth Pastors, and that they ought to teach? Thus have we seen how all these Epistles which Beza citeth, for a college of governing Elders not meddling with teaching of the word, to have been no such kind of Elders, as he and our Brethren do imagine but clean contrary. And though his quotation proceedeth further in a generality, & alys deinceps, and in other Epistles following: yet in none of his Epistles, Epist. lib. 3. Epist. 16. either following, or going before, can I find that he mentioneth any such Elders, as he and our Brethren do conceive. In the 16. Epistle, speaking of the Presbyters, Priests or Elders, he saith: whom our Elders and Deacons ought to have warned, that they might nourish the sheep committed to them, and by their divine mastership, instruct them unto the way that is to be prayed for. In the 17. Epistle, he saith: I marvel, most dear Brethren (writing to the Elders and Deacons) that unto many my Epistles which I have often sent unto you, ●pist. 17. you have written nothing again. When as either the Profit or the necessity of our brotherhood should verily be thus governed, if that we being of you instructed, may file our counsel for the ordering of matters. notwithstanding because I see I have not ability as yet to come unto you, and now the summer is begun which time afflicteth men with continual and grievous infirmities: I think good to help our Brethren, as those that have received libels from the Martyrs, that if they be prevented with any hurt or danger of infirmity, they should not expect our presence. But that before any Elder being present, or if an Elder shall not be found, and their end begin to urge them, they may declare the confession of their trespass, before a Deacon also, that he laying his hand upon them for their repentance, they may come unto the Lord with the peace, Their feeding and comforting of the other repenta●tes. which the Martyrs in their letters given unto us, have desired. The other part of the people that is fallen, nourish ye them with your presence, and refresh them with your comfort, that they fall not away from the faith and mercy of the Lord, etc. In the next Epistle, writing again to the Elders and Deacons, (having received letters from them of the same matter) he saith: Epist. 18. I have received your letters (most dear Brethren) in the which ye have written, that your wholesome counsel unto our Brethren is not wanting, that setting aside this rash haste making, they should give unto God a religious patience, that when by the mercy of God we shall come together, we may treat of all kinds, according to the Ecclesiastical discipline. Cypraians' Colleagues. Especially, when as it is written: Remember from whence thou hast fallen; and repent. But he repenteth, Apoc. 2. that is meek and patiented to the commandments of God, and obedient to the Priests of God▪ and winneth the Lord, with his serviceableness and workers. Howbeit, because you have signified, that certain are immoderate, and do urge hastily to receive the communion, and you have desired a form to be given of me unto you for this matter: know ye that I have fully written for this matter, in the last letters that I wrote unto you. And so telleth them (as before) how they should lay their hands on them, and absolve them. In the next Epistle, writing yet further unto them on this matter: Epist. 19 he saith, But I have read also the letters of all the Confessors, which they would have made known by me to all my colleagues, and the peace that they have given to come unto them: of which matters so that a reason be apparent before us, what they have done after the fault committed: which thing, sith it tendeth to the counsel and sentence of us all:) I dare not judge it before hand, and claim to me only a matter common. And therefore let them stand on the Epistles which I last made, an example whereof I have also sent already to my colleagues (he meaneth by this word Colleagues not the Elders of his College, for he wrote to them, Whom Cyprian here meaneth by his colleagues. but other his fellow Bishops) who have written that that which we have decreed liketh them, etc. Here with some things he will not meddle alone, but with his Colleagues. And yet this decree he made alone, and in his absence, as appeareth by the two former Epistles, In the 22. Epistle, writing to the Elders and Deacons, he saith: Epist. 22. Lest any thing should be hidden from your conscience (most dear Brethren) what is written to me, I have sent you a copy of either Epistle, and I believe, that which I have written again to you, misliketh you not. But this also I ought by my letters to declare unto you, that upon urgent cause I sent letters to the Clergy being in the city: and because I should write by Clerks: albeit I know that many of ours are absent, and as for those few which are there, do scarce suffice unto the daily ministery of the work: it was necessary to constitute some new which should be sent, wit ye therefore, that I have made Satyrus' a reader, and Optatus the Confessor a subdeacon. Whom we had made a good while since, by the last common Clergy Counsel. When on Easter day we gave once and twice the reading (or the lesson) either unto Satyrus' or to Optatus. With the Priests (or Elders) Doctors and Readers we constituted a Doctor of the hearers (by the name of Doctors he meaneth the Catechisers, The Bishop with the Priests, or Elders. Doctors & readers constituteth a doctor of the hearers. as we showed of Pantenus, Clemens, Origene, etc.) examining whether all things agreed unto them, that aught to be in those that are appointed for the Clergy. I have therefore done no new thing in your absence, Cyprians Clerks. but that which began long a-go, by the common counsel of us all, is promoted (or advanced further) necessity urging it. Thus again doth he in his absence promote to higher orders in the Clergy (as need required) those whom before by their Counsel, he had begun to choose into the Clergy. The Elders above the Doctors. But still. for these Priests or Elders, they were in the number of the Clergy, such as we have before showed, being Pastors, whom he placeth before the Doctors or Catechisers. In the 24. Epistle, Epist. 24. (allowing in his absence, a portion of his own stipend, to help the poor persecuted amongst them) he calleth Rogatian compresbyterum his fellow Elder. Not that he had like authority to him, as Bishop: but, that he was of the same Priesthood or Eldership of the word and Sacraments, that Cyprian was. And the next Epistle he directeth unto nine other Bishops, whom he calleth Coepiscopis his fellow Bishops, item Compresbyteris & Diaconis in metallo constitutis martyribus, etc. and also to his fellow Elders, and to the Deacons placed in the mines, the Martyrs of God the Father Almighty and of jesus Christ the Lord & God our Saviour, etc. And thus calling the one company his fellow Bishops, being none of them Bishop of Carthage, where he only was the B. though absent, & yet was not Carthage being so great a city destitute of Pastors: and calling the other sort Compresbyteros and placing these Elders between Bishops & Deacons, and withal distinguishing them from both of these; and giving them the term that S. Peter doth, of Compresbyter, fellow Elder, which S. Peter ascribeth to the Pastors: it is most manifest that he meaneth only by those Elders such as were ministers of the word and Sacraments, but not Bishops. Epist. lib. 4 Epist. 4. In the next and last book of his Epistles, he speaketh little of them, and writeth seldom to them. In the 4. Epistle writing to two Elders that had been constant in persecution; he citeth unto them as part of their duty, this sentence of Christ, Mat. 28. Go and teach all Nations, baptizing them, in the name of the father, and of the son, and of the holy Ghost, teaching them to observe whatsoever I have commanded you, etc. when ye shall show forth these precepts, you have kept the divine and heavenly commandments. To conclude, the last of all his Epistles, is not the least to confirm this matter, Epist. what was the dignity and office of these Elders, that were assistants to the B. in such great Cathedral Churches, & such famous Cities as was Carthage. Cyprian to the Elders and to the Deacons & to all the people his most dear and best beloved Brethren, greeting. Most dear Brethr. I have to signify unto you, that which I have thought appertaineth to the common rejoicing, An Elder chosen to be an Elder at Carthage. and to the greatest glory of our church. For, know ye, being admonished & instructed by the divine favour, that the Elder Numidicus is to be enroled in the number of the Elders of Carthage, and that he sit in the clergy, being famous with the most clear light of his confession, Cypr. Elders. and advanced with the honour both of virtue and faith, who by his exhortation hath sent before him a plentiful number of Martyrs with stones & fire. The E●der were married Which joyfully beh●lde his wife that cleaved to his side, when as together with other she was burned. He himself being half burned, and overwhelmed with stones, & left for dead. While that afterwards his daughter with a careful service of godliness seeketh the corpse of her father, where he being found almost dead, & refreshed, and drawn out from his companions whom he had sent before him, remained against his will. But this (as we see) was the cause of his remaining that the Lord would join him unto our Clergy, The Elders that sat in the Consistory of Carthage, were Sacerdotes. and would adorn gloriosis Sacerdotibus, with his glorious Sacred Priests, the abundance of our Elders being desolate. And verily, he shall be promoted, as time shall permit, unto a more worshipful place of his religion, when through the lords protection we shall come in presence. In the mean season, let this be done that is declared, that we may receive this gift of God with thanks giving, hoping that by the mercy of the Lord, such ornaments shall be also furnished, that renewing the strength of his Church, he will make our so meek and humble * Consessus. consistories, to flourish in honour. Whereby we plainly see, not only the bishops authority over the consistory of the Elders, in making this Elder Numidicus, an Elder in the clergy and consistory of Carthage: but also that he was a Preacher & exhorter of the people. And that Cyprian useth the name of Presbyter, and Sacerdos, indifferently, as betokning one and the same office for the which, we in English (wanting a proper name for Sacerdos) use the contraction of the other better and less offensive term Presbyter, calling them Priests, signifying here Elders ministering the word and Sacraments. And of other sorts, whom Cyprian calleth Presbyteros, Priests or Elders assistant to the Bishop in the government of the Eccles. discipline, I find no mention, nor inkling of them in all the Epistles of Saint Cyprian. Neither cite I him in those editions, that the Papists have of late corrupted him. And therefore I marvel not a little, that such an excellent man as Beza is (God be praised for his gifts in him) was so overshot to cite these Epistles of Cyprian, for a Consistory or College of such Elders governed by a Bishop, which together with him should have the spiritual jurisdiction, and the government of Eccl. discipline, that were not ministers of the word and Sacraments. As for that which Gellius Snecanus citeth also out of Cyprians Epistles Epist. 2. lib. 1. there is no mention there at all of any other of the Clergy, Gell. Sne●anus de discip. Eccl. 2. pa●s me●hodi. then only of Bishops, or of such Priests as he calleth Sacerdotes & pastors. Which Epistle being written to Cornelius Bishop of Rome, by Cyprian and a great number of other Bishops of Aphrica, joined in counsel with him: Tertulli●n he useth there this term Colleagues, meaning other Bishops that were of his own function. But if (saith he) there shall be any of the Colleagues, which when persecution urgeth them, thinketh the peace should not be given to our brothers and sisters: let him in the day of judgement render a reason to the Lord, either of his importune censure, or of his inhuman roughness. Is this any thing to any governing Elder in the Church that is not a minister of the word and Sacraments? As for any other Colleagues either of those that he wrote of, or wrote unto, or that wrote with him, in this or any other Epistle: I find none. Nor our Brethren can show any such Elders as they urge unto us, in all these Epistles, or any other work of Cyprian. But because Gellius Snecanus adjoineth also the testimony of Tertullian in his Apology against the Gentiles, cap. 39 which we have likewise already seen, Tertulllanus▪ in Apol●on●r. g●nt. cap. 39 for the manner and form of the primitive Church, in their public prayers: nevertheless, to the fuller search of these Elders which our Brethren would have, let us again consider what Tertullian saith, especially he going not only immediately before Cyprian, about the year of our Lord, 200. but being in such estimation with Cyprian that he always called him his Master. I will now myself (saith Tertullian) set forth the affairs of the Christian faction, that I which have refuted the evil things, may show the good. We are a body of the conscience of religion, and of the truth of discipline, and of the covenant of hope. We come together into an assembly and congregation that praying unto God (as though by prayers we strined for works) this force is acceptable unto God. We pray also for the Emperors, for their ministers and powers, for the state of the world, for the quietness of their affairs, and for the prolonging of their end. We are gathered together to the reciting of the divine scriptures, if so be that, the quality of the present time do compel us to give forewarning, or to reknowledge it. Certainly we feed our faith with the holy speeches, we erect our hope, we fix our confidence. Nevertheless, we thicken (or increase) the discipline of the masters, (or of the precepts) by provocations or inculcations. At the same place are also exhortations, chastisements & the divine correction: for the judgement is given with great weight, as among them that are sure that God beholds them. And it is the chiefest foreiudgeing of the judgement to come, if any man do so trespass, that he be banished from the communicating of prayer and of the assembly and of all the holy partaking. The Precedents or Governors are all of them approved Seniors, having obtained this honour not with price, but with testimony. What is there here in any of these words, to prove that these Elders which (as he termeth it) praesidebant did govern the congregations, meddled not with teaching? Or rather doth he not ascribe teaching to them? Clemens alexander. When 〈◊〉 saith, We are a corpse of the conscience of religion, of truth, of discipline, and of the covenant of hope? When he saith, their coming together was for prayers, and for recording the Scriptures? When having added how they fed their faith with the word of God, erecting their hope, and fixing their confidence, they join this withal, that nevertheless they do increase the discipline of the masters by their inculcations or often calling upon them? Or if we should construe these words Disciplinam praeceptorum, for the discipline, not of the masters, but of the precepts: so that we take it not that they did increase the discipline of men's commandments. And doth he not also join exhortations together with castigations of the divine censure? By all which and much more, we may well gather out of this place, that these Precedents or governors of these congregations were not such as meddled not with teaching. For if the Elders not teaching were governed (as Beza said) in their Colleges and corpora●ions, of the Bishops: how were these Elders the precedents or Governors or not rather the governed? And he speaketh of them that obtained the honour of their government or Praesidentship, not by price of money, but by testimony. All which accordeth with our Breath own sai●ngs, for the election of Bishops and pastoral Elders. And he speaketh of such tried and approved Elders, as Paul in pastoral Elders gave charge to Timothy. But when withal, he useth for their government, that very term which he used in other places, speaking also of the Christian assemblies, as in his book de Corona militis, where he saith: Eucharistia Sacramentum et in tempore victus, et omnibus, mandatum a Domino, Tertu●●de ●●rona 〈◊〉. etiam ante-lucanis coetibus, nec de aliorum manu quam de praesidentium sumimus. The Sacrament of thanksgiving is commanded of the Lord, both in the time of repast, & in all times, yea also in our assemblies before the break of the day, neither do we receive it at the hand of any other than of those that are our Precedents (or Governors.) Whereby it is plain, that those of whom here he saith, President probati quique, Sentores, the Seniors that are Precedents (or that govern) are every one of them tried (or approved) men: were every one of them none other, but such as ministered the Sacraments, & of consequence, teachers of the word. And of such Elders governing in the Church of Christ, & of none other, Clemens Alexand. le 6. Seromat. speaketh Clemens Alexandrius (who also was an elder in office, & in time was somewhat elder than Tertullian) li. 6. Siromat. He is in very deed (saith he) an elder of the Church & a true Deacon, that is a minister of God's will, if so be he do & teach the things that are of the Lord, not that as he is ordained of men, neither that he must be accounted righteous that is an elder, but that he which is righteous should be brought into the eldership, etc. Wherein making also afterward the degree of Elder to be in dignity different from, & placed between Bishop & Deacon: he acknowledgeth no such kind of Elder governing the Church in hi● time, Irenaeus. that is not a teacher of the word. Irenaeus con●ra haer. li. 1. ca 12. Lib. 2. ca 39 And the same also is manifest in Irenaeus, who in his first book against heresies, ca 12. saith against the heretic Marcus: Wherefore justly and aptly unto such thy blindness, the divine Elder and fit preacher of the truth inveighed against thee, etc. And in the 2. book, cap. 39 speaking both of Elder in age and office, he saith of Christ: And so he was a Senior (or Elder) among the Seniors, that he might be a perfect master in all things, not only according to the exposition of the truth, but according to age▪ sanctifying together also the Seniors (or Elders) himself becoming an example unto them, etc. And again, But because the age of 30. years, is of a young man of his first towardness, and stretcheth to 40. every one will grant that from the 40. or 50. years, he now declineth into an elder age, which age our Lord having, he taught, as the Gospel & all the Elders testify, which assembled together unto john the Disciple of the Lord. And the same thing did john deliver unto them. Now although herein Iraeneus foully over shoot himself in Christ's age, more regarding the relation and tradition of the Elders, than exactly considering the just time: yet still he acknowledgeth those that were called Elders, not in years but in office, concerning the Ecclesiastical state of Christ his Church, to be such as taught the witness & relation of those things that were delivered them by the Apostles, though they remembered not so well the Apostles reckoning. And this he hath more plain, li. 3. ca 2. when again we challenge them that are against the tradition, Li. 3. cap. 2. to come to that tradition which is from the Apostles, which is kept in the Churches by the succession of the Elders, they will say, they being more wise, not only than the Elders, but also than the Apostles, have found out the sincere truth. And li. 4. ca 43. Li. 4. cap▪ 43 Wherefore it behoveth us to hear these Elders that are in the Church, those which have their succession from the Apostle, as we have showed, who with the succession of the Bishop, have (according to the decree of the Father) received a sure grace (or gift) of the truth. And in the next Chapter: But such as of many are supposed to be Elders, but serve their pleasures, etc. from all such therefore we must abstain, & cleave unto these, which (as we have also said before) keep the doctrine of the Apostles, & with their order of the Eldership, show forth the sound word & their conversation without offence, to the information and correction of the residue. Whereunto alleging the examples of Moses, Samuel, and S. Paul, he saith: Even as the Apostle Paul when he was of good conscience, said to the Corinthians: For we are not as many are, adulterating the word of God, we have corrupted n●ne, we have circumvented none, such Elders doth the church nourish: Of whom also the Prophet saith: And I will give thee thy Princes in peace, and thy Bishops in righteousness. Of whom also the Lord said: Who therefore is a faithful agent, good, and wise, whom the Lord shall prefer over his family, justinus. to give them meat in time? Happy is that servant whom the Lord shall find so doing when he cometh. What can be plainer than this, to show that by the name of these Presbyters, Priests, or Elders in the government of the Church, Irenaeus always meant such, as were teachers of the word, and none other? justine the martyr in his defence of the Christians unto the Emperor Antoninus, Iustin●s martyr in Apolog. Christ. ad Antonium. mentioneth (as we have seen) one only governor of the congregation, whom he calleth the chief brother. But he telleth withal, that he maketh the exhortation to the congregation before the receiving of the Sacrament, & he offereth the prayers and thanksgiving▪ & first celebrateth the whole action of the Lords supper, & the Deacons deliver the bread & the cup, to every one present, & of other Elders or Governors among them, that I can find he maketh no mention. As for Ignatius, because our Bre. in their pamphlet of the learned man's judgement for the 3. kinds of Bishops, do allow of the Bishop mentioned in Ignatius: by as good reason they have also to allow of his Elders & Deacons. For almost in every Epistle (if they be the Epistles of Ignatius) he mentioneth especially these three, & maketh the Elders the successors of the Apostles. In the first Epistle to the Trallians, he saith: Be ye subject to the Elders, Ignatius ex●mpl● ad T●allian●●. as to the Apostles of jesus Christ concerning our hope, in whom persevering, we shall be found in him. And therefore ye must by all means please the Deacons, which are for the ministery of jesus Christ, for they are not ministers in meat and drink, but of the ministery of the Church of God. It behoveth therefore to keep their precepts, even as the burning fire. And let them be such, but as for you: reverence ye them as the Lord jesus Christ, because they are the keepers of his place, as the bishop is the form of the Father of all, but the Elders of the consistory of God, and joining together of the Apostles of Christ, for without them it is not the elected church, nor the collection of the Saints, nor the holy Congregation. And again. What is the Eldership but a holy institution of a counsellor or confessor of a Bishop. What also are the Deacons but followers of Christ ministering to the Bishop, as Christ to the Father, and working unto him a clean & unspottrd work, even as Saint Stephen unto the most blessed james, and Timothy, & Linus unto Paul and Anacletus, and Clement unto Peter. And in the 4. Epipistle to the Philippians: Yet I say to the Bishop and to the Elders in the Lord, that who soever shall keep the passover with the jews, or take up the solemnity of their feast days, shall be compartner with them that have killed the Lord and his Apostles. These and such other speeches of the Presbyteral Elders do declare, that whosoever in Ignatius name wrote them, for I dare not so boldly (as our Br. do) affirm them to be his, yet in writing thus of the Consistory of the Elders) yea, of the Deacons under them, he thought them both to meddle with teaching, Polycarpus Polycarpus. and with the administration of the Sacraments. As for the Epistle that is adjoined in the name of Polycarpus & the Elders with him, it is most manifest how they joined teaching to their governing. Let the Elders be simple, in all things, merciful, converting all from error, visiting all the sick, not neglecting the widows, the fatherless and the poor, but always providing good things before the Lord, and before men. As for any other that is more suspected stuff, I cite not. But be they suspected, or be they not, as I grant they are very ancient: so we can find in none of them, such Elders mentioned, as our Br. threape upon us that there were, neither yet in any ancient & authentic Ecclesiastical history. For as for that Danaeus writing of the office of Elders, in Christ. Isagog, part. 2. cap. 10. citeth, saying: Lites ●utem dirimere, etc. But to decide debates, and (as out of Socrates, lib. 7. cap. 37. may be gathered) to behave themselves as judges and arbiters, Socrates lib. 7. cap. 37. I never read that it was the function of Elders, or part of their office. This proveth nothing at all, that the Clergy of whom Socrates there speaketh, were not Ministers of the word and Sacraments: but rather seemeth to infer that the● were, The Eccl. histories for th●se Elders and that the Bishop of whom Socrates speaketh, would not hau● them draw too much away from their function, to the hearing and determining of such controversies. Albeit Socrates telleth that Silvanus the Bishop did it, when as he saw the Clerks to make a gain by the controversies of the strivers, that from thence forth he permitted none of the Clergy to be a judge, but taking the bills of those that made supplications, he preferred one faithful lay man, whom he knew to favour that which was ●ight and good, to have the hearing of those matters, and so he set free the strivers from contention and controversy. Here the Clergy that had the dealing in those matters, the Bishop by his superior authority took it from them, & appointed it not to the consistory of Elders, but to one lai● man. But to show more fully and plainly that Socrates always understands by the term of Elders, only such as we call Priests, to wit, Ministers of the word and Sacraments: Let us also see some testimonies out of Socrates, because Danaeus citeth him for these Elders. And I would gladly search all the testimonies & examples generally, if that calvin, Beza, & Danaeus, or any other author have aught, for the proof or but probability of these Elders. In the 3. Chap. of his first book, he saith: And on a certain time, the Presbyters, Eccl. hist. Socrati. li. 1. cap. 3. (Priests, or Elders) being present which were under him, (he speaketh of Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria) and the residue of the Clergy, he treated somewhat more curiously and subtly of the Trinity, and philosophically proved, that in the Godhead there is the unity in the Trinity. But Arius being one of the number of the Elders, which in that degree were placed under Alexander, a man not ignorant of the quirks of Logic, Danaeus all legation of Socrates. because he suspected that he would afresh bring into the Church the error of the African Sabellius, being kindled with the desire of contention, declined to an opinion clean contrary to the opinion of that African, and affirmed, that if the Father begat the son, he that was begotten had a beginning of his being. And that thereupon it is clear, that there was a time when the son was not, & that necessarily it followed, that he had his being of nothing. When he had concluded with this new kind of reason, and never before heard of: he stirred up many of them to seek after those matters, and of a little spark was kindled a great great flame, etc. Whereupon Alexander calling a council of many Bishops, he deposed (saith Socrates) Arius, and the fautors of his opinion, from the degree of the Eldership. By which it plainly appeareth, that these elders were ministers and teachers of the word. And to this not only accordeth Ruffinus, lib. 10. Eccl. hist. cap. 1. sai●ng: Ruffinus lib. 10. Ec●l. hist. cap. 1. A certain Elder at Alexandria named Arius, a man more religious in show and form than virtue, began to set forth certain wicked points concerning the faith of Christ, etc. And Theodoretus, lib. 1. cap. 2. yet more plainly: Theod●r●●us Eccl. hist. lib. 1. cap. 2. In these times (saith he) Arius which was in the company and order of the Elders, and had the authority of interpreting the divine Scriptures. When he saw the government of the Sacerdotal Priesthood or Bishopric, to be committed to Alexander, being impatient of envy wherewith he was chafed, he began to seek occasions of provokements, of discords and strivings. And albeit the dignity of the man, and his laudable administration, broke off the web of all slanders, yet could not envy let him rest. The enemy therefore of truth having gotten this fellow, he moved and stirred up the waves of the Church, and so provoked him, that he durst openly gainsay the Apostolical doctrine of Alexander. As for Alexander, he avouched the speeches of the divine Scripture, that the son is of the same dignity with the Father, and hath the same essence with his begetter. But Arius fight against the truth, called him a creation and a work made. Adding those words, that there was some time when he was not. Which things may better be known out of the Scriptures themselves. These things did he not only in the Churches continually, but also in other outward assemblies and meetings, and treating upon them house by house, he drew away as many as he was able. And yet to show further, not only that this order of Elders was above the Deacons, but that of Deacons they were made Elders: Sozomenus li. 1. cap. 14. saith: Of these disputations Arius was the author, an Elder of the Church of Alexandria which is in Egypt. Z●zomen●● lib. 1. cap. 14. Who although at the beginning he seemed very studious of the doctrine of Christ: yet was he a furtherance to Meletius, The Elders in the Eccl history. attempting new matters. Whos● parts when he forsook, he was of Peter Bishop of Alexandria ordained Deacon, And afterward of him cast out of the Church, when Peter deposed the fautors of Meletins, and improved Baptism. This Arius inveighed grievously against the Acts of Peter, and could by no means be quiet. But when Peter had suffered martyrdom, Arius craving pardon of Achillas, was not only permitted to exercise his Deaconship, but also was exalted to the degree of the Eldership. Afterward Alexander had him in great estimation, etc. By this it may not only appear that the orders and Senates of Elders in such great Churches as these, were Ministers of the word, but also were thereto promoted, having before been Deacons. When therefore we read in Socrates (as in the restoring of Athanasius, lib. 2. cap. 18.) th● Letters of the Emperor Constantinus directed unto the Bishops and to the Elders of the Catholic Church, saying: Moreover, unto the benefit bestowed on him, Socrate● lib. ●. cap. 18 this also we thought good to be noted, that all those that are enrolled into this holy number and company of the Clergy, may understand, that security is given unto all, be they Bishops or be they Clerks, that have holden with him: it argueth, that there was indeed such a company of Elders, whom here he calleth Clerks, but we cannot gather hereupon, that they were such as ministered not at all the word and Sacraments, but rather the contrary. For else if Athanasius the Bishop had been the only Minister of the word and Sacramente●, all the people of Alexandria had been destitute of the word and Sacraments all the while of Athanasius banishment. And to confirm this, that these Elders about the Bishops had not only the public ministration of the word, but also that some one or other of their number, was appointed to hear the confessions of such as were penitent, and in token of their unfeigned repentance, to enjoin them to submit themselves to some bodily chastisement, which thereupon was called penance: At that time (saith Socrates, li. 5. ca 19) the Church thought good, Socrates. li. 5 cap. 19 that the Elders which had the government of the order of enjoining penitence in every Church, was taken away. And that on this occasion: from the time wherein the novatians separated themselves from the Church, & refused to communicate with those, which in the time of the persecution raised in the reign of Decius, had fallen: the Bishops of the Churches added unto the Canon, that in every of the Churches there should be one certain Elder, which should be over the Penitencies, to the end, that those which after Baptism were fallen, should before the Elder appointed for that purpose, confess their offences. This Canon as yet among other sects remaineth ratified and firm. They only which confess the Father and the Son to be one in substance, and the novatians that consent in faith with them, rejected this penitentiary Elder. The novatians would never from the beginning suffer this to be so much as a hanger by. The bishops which now govern the Churches, although for a good space of time they have held this institution: notwithstanding in the times of the Bishop Nectarius, they changed the same, by reason of such an offence as then by chance was committed in the Church: a certain noble woman came unto the penitentiary Elder, confessing particularly such faults as after her Baptism she had committed. The Elder commanded the woman that she should give herself to fastings, and to continual prayers. Whereby together with the acknowledgement of her sins, she should declare a work meet for her repentance. The woman proceeding further in confessing, accuseth herself of another fault, and declareth that a Deacon had lain with her. For the which offence (by this means being made manifest) the Deacon was driven out of the Church, and a tumult was made among the multitude of the people. For they grudged not only against the offence committed, but also for the note of the grievous slander and reproach, that thereby was raised on the Church. When as therefore the sacred Priests were very much evil spoken on for this cause, Eudaemon a certain Elder of the Church, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. a Countryman of Alexandria, gave counsel to the Bishop Nectarius to remove the penitentiary Elder, and to give free power that every one according to his own conscience, should come to the participation of the mysteries. For by that only means it should come to pass, that the Church should be void of all spot of infamy. These things because (saith Socrates) even I myself had them of Eudaemon, I doubted not plainly to commit them to this our history. In which words, these Elders having this office among them, which pertaineth especially to the ministration of the word, 〈…〉 and all of them indifferently called Sacerdotes, as well as Presbyteros: it is again apparent, by Socrates whom Danaeus citeth, that these Elders were not such, as here our Brethren do conceive or pretend, but Ministers of the word and Sacraments, which in the next Chapter (save one) following, doth yet more fully appear. Where Socrates showing the diversities in diverse places, concerning Easter day, Fasting, Marriage Divine Service, and other Ecclesiastical observation, amongst other matters, saith on this wise. Moreover, I myself have known another custom to have grown in Thessalia, that there he which is a Clerk, if after he be made a Clerk, he lie with his wife whom he married while he was a lay man, is deposed from his Clergy. Whereas all the famous Elders in the East, yea, the Bishops and all, are by no law compelled to abstain from their wives, except it please themfelues. For even while they govern their bishoprics, not a few of them beget children of their lawful wives. He that was the author of that custom in Thessalia, was Heliodorus of Trica, a city of that region, of whose making are the amorous books, which he composed when he was a young man, and entitled them, The Aethiopian history (he meaneth that of Theagenes and Cariclea:) The same custom is kept also at Thessalonica, and in Macedonia, and in helas. Besides this I have known another custom in Thessalia, to wit, that they baptise in the days of the feast of Easter only. For which cause, all of them (except a very few) die without baptism. The Church of Antioch in Syria is set contrary to other Churches, for the Altar (or Communion table) is not set Eastward, but Westward. In helas, and at Jerusalem, & at Thefsalia, the prayers are made while the candles are lighted, after the manner of the novatians that are at Constantinople. In like manner at Caesarea of Cappadocia, The Elders were expounders of the Scriptures, and in Cyprus, * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. the Elders and the Bishops expound the Scriptures evermore on Saturday and on Sunday, at evening by candle light. The novatians that are at Hellespont, keep not in all points the like manner, as do the novatians that are at Constantinople, but for the more part they follow the order of the chief Church among them. To conclude, in all the forms of religions & sects, you shall never find two, that in * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. the manner of their prayers agree among themselves. Furthermore, at Alexandria an Elder preacheth not, which custom hath had his beginning, since the time that Arius disturbed the Church. Upon what occasion the Ministers at Alexandria ceased to preach. And here at length is noted, where only, and upon what occasion, the Elders preached not. Howbeit he saith not, that hereupon they were prohibited utterly the ministery of the word and Sacraments. For as he showed before lib. 2. cap. 8. the very Deacons out of whole order the Elders were made, did say the public prayers before the people. But this the Elders ceasing of preaching, how long ti●e after Arius troubles it began at Alexandria, & how long time it continued: he declareth not. But in noting the same (as such a strange and diverse order, different from all other Churches) it declareth, that it directly belonged to their office, and that in all other Churches the Elders were such, as were not prohibited to preach, & that they preached there also, before that occasion did fall out. And whereas as a little after he citeth (for not troubling the Church about indifferent things) the decree made by the Apostles, the Elders, and the brethren, Act 15.23. it appeareth that Socrates took also those Elders that are ther● mentioned, to be no other kind of Elders, than such as meddled with teaching. And so doth the very text insinuate, that those Elders were, when it saith, Act. 15.6. The Apostles and Elders came together to look to this matter. Which matter was a great controversy in doctrine. And calvin himself saith thereon: Luke saith not that the whole Church was gathered together, but those that excelled in doctrine and judgement, & they that by reason of their office, were lawful judges of this cause, it may be that the disputation was holden before the people, but least any should think that the people were admitted indifferently to meddle in the cause: Luke expressly nameth the Apostles and the Elders, as those that were more fit to take notice thereof. And to show further who these Elders were, he saith on these words: When there was great disputing: when as the grave men and public Doctors of the Church were chosen, neither yet could they agree among themselves, etc. And to show that these Elders in all other Church's wer● still of thi●●orte, Socrates proceeding to his 6. book, chap. 2. telleth, that when the Bishopric of Constantinople was vacant by Nectarius decease, which took away the penitentiary Elder aforesaid, and that they laboured much about the choosing of a Bishop, and some sought one, and some another for that office; & that they had consulted often thereupon: at length it was thought good to call from Antioch, for john an Elder of Antioch. For the fame of him was great, that he was meet to teach them, & very skifull in the gift of utterance. And in the seventh book (which Danaeus citeth) cap. 2. speaking of Atticus, which was afterward likewise made Bishop of Constantinople, Socrates lib. 7. cap. 2. he saith: When he first obtained the degree of the Presbytery, Priesthood, or Eldership, the Sermons which he recited in the Church, he made them with great study, and conned word by word: afterward by often use and diligence getting more audacity, he began to preach ex tempore (on the sudden occasion) and attained to a more popular manner of teaching. And in the 5. Chapter he ●e●●eth of Sabatius an Elder among the novatians preaching in his Sermon this false doctrine: Cursed be he who soever celebrateth the feast of Easter without unleavened bread. In the sixth Chapter be telleth of two Arian Elders preachers and interpreters of the Scriptures. Besides that, Chap. 16. he telleth of three Elders, Philip, Proclus, Socrates lib. 7. cap. 16. and Sisinius, that ●too●●or the Bishopric of Constantinople of which Sifinius by the desire of the people, he being an Elder not ordained in any Church within the City, but of Elea a suburb of the City, obtained the Bishopric. Whereby it appeareth also, that these Elders had several Congregations and Churches in and about the City, and were Ministers of the word and Sacraments in them. And although Proclus was afterward made Bishop of Cizicum, whom the City would not receive, but chose on● Dalmatius a Monk, and so Proclus went not thither, but continued in preaching at Constantinople, and afterward was made Bishop of that City, after Maximianus, which did lead a monastical life, yet by degree of dignity he was an Elder. So that these Presbyters, Priests, or Elders were not (as Danaeus supposeth) a Senate or a Consistory chosen from among the people assistant to the Bishop: and much less to every Pastor, (as our Brethr. affirm) governing only the discipline of the Church, but not meddling with teaching: Socrates never speaketh of such kind of Elders, but simply and plainly of such as we call Priests, and our brethren call Pastors. To conclude this no less appeareth in the last chapter (save two) of all Socrates History: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 even in Paulus the Bishop of the novatians. Who before his death calling together all the sacred Priests of the Churches that were under him, said unto them. Provide ye, while I am yet alive, that a Bishop may be appointed unto you. When they answered: The power of choosing the Bishop is not to be permitted unto us. For (say they) while one of us thinketh this, another that, we shall never name one and the same man. But we desire that you would design, whom you would have us choose. Deliver me then (said he) this your promise in writing, that ye will choose him whom I will name unto you. Which writing being made, and subscribed with their hand, raising up himself a little in his bed: he secretly (they that were present not privy thereto) wrote therein the name of Martian, which was one that had obtained to the order of the Elders, and therein had learned a rigorous kind of life, and at that time by chance was absent. And when he had sealed up the writing, and had brought the chief of the Elders to confirm the same also with their seals: he delivered it to, etc. I note this only that these novatians also, which were a kind of Praecisians in that antiquity, having for their precise austerity of life, cut off and divided themselves from all other Churches (albeit in substance and grounds of faith and doctrine not dissenting, but in profession of more severe discipline) not only had their Bishops in the chief Cities, and many Elders under them: but also that these Elders (as in all other Churches) were Saceraotes, Ministers of the sacred word and Sacraments, and not such as meddled not with teaching, or were equal in the Church's government with the Bishop. This we see was the continual and universal practice of the Church, from the Apostles times, until this age, when Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine began to flourish. Neither ani● thing as yet alleged by Beza, Calluine, Snecanus, and Danaeus out of Ambrose, or Cyprian, or justine, or Tertullian, or any other ancient father: or out of Socrates, or Sozomene, or any other Ecclesiastical Historiographer, that can prove their Ecclesiastical Elder governing only and not teaching: but all these (as we have seen) show the clean contrary. But yet we have not done. Augustis. Danaeus beside and before Socrates allegeth Saint Augustine Serm. 19 Danaeus his allegation of Aug. for these Elders De verbis Domini in Matthe●m, for proof of such governing & not teaching Elders▪ Now although there he no likelikelihood, we should find mention of those in Saint Augustine, that lived some what after Socrates' time, and the Father's aforesaid: yet because I would gladly see all, that for my part I can find in any of our brethren, for the practice & proof of these Elders, what office they had, both for mine own and for others satisfaction: let us view also what these words are, which Danaeus understandeth for these Elders. Saint Augustine treating of the stipends of soldiers, and of their spoils and havocks, saith on this wise: Illud autem quale est, quum ob errorem aliquem a Senioribus arguuntur, etc. But what manner of thing is that, August. de verbis Domini in Matth. Serm. 19 when for some error they are reproved of the Elders, and any of them is charged, why he was drunk, why he invaded other men's goods, why in his hurlie burlie he committed manslaughter: that he will answer, what should I have done? I am a secular man, or a soldier. Am I professed a Monk or a Clerk? As though it were lawful for every one that is not a Monk, or a clerk, to do that which is unlawful? Here indeed is mentioned this word Elders, & that in the Latin term, Seniores. But so generally: that whether he mean Senior or elder in years or in office: and if in office, whether civil or Ecclesiastical; and if Ecclesiastical, whether meddling with teaching, yea, or no: no, necessary certainty can be grounded hereupon. Is there any word here, or going before. or coming after, that may prove these Elders reproving these soldiers not to meddle with teaching? Or may we not rather (if we shall go by conjecture) a great deal more probably gather the clean contrary, that they meddled with teaching, & with reprehension, which is also part of the Ministers office? And namely the example that S. Augustine in the said sermon bringeth hereof (for S. john Baptists teaching the Publicans & soldiers their duty what they ought to do) doth plainly insinuate, that he meaneth here by these Seniors or Elders, the very teachers of the word, and Ministers of the Sacraments, as was john Baptist that reproved, taught, and baptised the soldiers. August. li. 1▪ Quaestionun super Genes. Quaest. 70. saith: In the Latin tongue Presbyter is called Senior. Li. 6. Locutionum joshua. Aug. li. 1. Quaest. super Gen. quaest. 70 Aug. li. 6. locutionum joshua Not every senior is an old man, but every old man may be called a signior: And in no place that I can find he useth the word Presbyter, as a term to be used among us, but either (as there) for an elder in years, or else, for an elder in office, & that not only Ecclesiastical, but also in the very ministery of the word & Sacraments. When the Manichees defaced & discredited the Clergy for their lives (wherein would to God our Br. would not resemble that practice of so evil men) S. Aug. commending the Clergy li. ●. De moribus Eccl. Cath. ca 32. saith: Aug. de mori. Eccl. Cath. li. cap. 32 Neither yet are the manners of the catholic church so straightened, that I should think their lives whom I have reckoned up to be only commended: Eld●ugustine the 〈…〉 for how many bishops excellent and most holy men have I known? How many Elders? How many Deacons, and such like Ministers of the divine Sacraments, & c? Likewise in his questions, Ex utroque mixtim, Quest. 101. where he proveth that the Elders are in office and dignity above the Deacons, August. quaest ex viroque mixtim, Quest. 101. v●●ng this name Sacerdos and Presbyter indifferently, and as betokening all one office, concluding thus: For except the Priest unto whom they own attendance, the Deacons are placed before all, meaning all the other inferior orders Ecclesiastical. ●o that Augustine acknowledgeth no such governing and not teaching Ecclesiastical orders, as our Breath. would have, preferring withal these Elders before the Deacons, and preferring the teachers and Pastors before these Elders, but not in the Church's government. If there had been any such in S. Augustine's time, other than the Priests, Ministers of the word, and between the Priests and the Deacons: he could never have placed the Deacons above all other, save the ministering Priests. Whereby it is plain, that he counteth Elders and Priests to b●e all one. Aug. in quin quaginta homilijs, hom. 5 at 7. Yea, Danaeus himself proceeding a little further, in this foresaid tenth Chapter of these Elders, allegeth Augustine héereunto, in his ●iftie Homilies, Homil. 5. &. 7. that the saying of isaiah, Clama, ne cesses, etc. appertaineth not only to Bishops but to Elders. The words of Augustine are these, Homil. 7. If ye mark diligently (most dear Brethren) ye know that all the Priests of the Lord, not only the Bishops, but also the Elders and Ministers of the Churches, are in great peril. For the holy Ghost witnesseth unto them, saying: Cry out, cease not, lift up thy voice like as it were a trumpet, and tell my people their offences, and the house of jacob their sins. Is not this, lifting up of the voice, a meddling with the word and public preaching or teaching? So that Danaeus must need confess, that these Elders which Saint Augustine mentioneth, were not such as meddled not with teaching, but were public teachers or Preachers of God's word. To conclude, concerning Augustine, here is nothing that Danaeus allegeth for Elders out of him Homil. 7. in 50. Serm. 16. in Math. & 18. & in Luc. 1. Serm. 24. that maketh any mention at all, or any inkling of suspicion for such Elders, as our Brethren imagine, and Danaeus would prove: but are all for Pastoral Elders, meddling with teaching. Neither only meddle not these places with any of these supposed Elders: but also no other place that I can yet find out, in all the Tomes and writings of Saint Augustine. But Danaeus allegeth not only Saint Augustine, but Basil, Dionysius, & Jerome. And in his seventh Chapter Isagog. Christ. part. 2. he ●aith. But these orders that are appointed for ever in the Church of God remaining in this earth and visible are few. Basil for the Elders, Which Basile upon the 33. Psalm, seemeth obscurely to revoke unto four kinds, to wit, that some of them should be as it were the eyes, as the Seniors: other like the tongue, as the Pastors: other like the hands, as the Deacons: other like the feet as those that attend upon the base ministries of the Church, as are the door keepers. It goeth hard belike with our Breath. for the proof of these Elders, when such obscure conjectures out of the Fathers, must underprop them. And here is alleged a sentence out of Basil, which notwithstanding Danaeus dare not avouch, to make any clear or plain assertion for these Elders. But he saith, that Basil seemeth, and that obscurely, to revoke (all the perpetual orders of the Ecclesiastical ministery in the Church) unto 4. kinds, whereof he maketh these Seniors or Elders to be the first, and compareth them unto the eyes. Indeed this is well added, to say he seemeth obscurely, for if we shall bring Basils' sentence to the light, there is not one word that maketh for these Seniors. Basil upon the 33 (or as we better accounted it with the hebrews the 34.) Psalm, verse. 15. Basilius in 33 vel. 34. Psal. ver. 15. The eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous, and his ears on their cry, hath these words: Even as the Saints are the body of Christ, and in part members: and God hath placed these in the Church as eyes, those as ears, other as having a proportion of the hands, other of the feet: so also the holy spiritual virtues (or powers) occupied about the holy place, some of them are called the eyes, to whom the care of us is committed; so the ears, which receive our prayers, and refer (or bring) them to God. But now this our virtue or power contemplative and helping of our prayers, he called the eyes and the ears. The eyes therefore of the Lord are upon the righteous and his ears on their prayers because all the action of the righteous is fit to be holden and considered of God. And to conclude, every word (sith nothing is of him spoken idly) standeth fruitful & very profitable. Therefore he saith here, that the righteous is continually both seen and heard. Thus saith basil. And is there any word here that may so much as but obscurely seem, to infer these our brethren's Governing elders not meddling with teaching, to be any of those that he calleth the virtue or power contemplative, which he resembleth in the mystical body of Christ unto the eyes? And who then are these which he compareth to the ears? if (as Daneus saith) he compareth the Pastors to the tongue, which he doth not, Ba●il nor obscurely by the eyes meaneth the Bishops. nor maketh there any application at all either of the tongue, or of the hands, or of the feet: but only of the eyes and ears. And likeneth the eyes to those, unto whom the care of us is committed. And the ears to those which receive our prayers, and refer or bring them unto God▪ Whereby as it is plain, that by the ears, he meaneth the Ministers, which make the public prayers unto God for us: So what letteth but by the eyes, to whom he ascribeth the spiritual and contemplative power of government, Basil and placeth them first and before the ears, we may well (for any thing here to the contrary) understand the Bishops. Whose very name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (betokening an overseer) is answerable to the contemplative virtue of the eye, and his office is in spiritual contemplation, more than these not teaching Seniors, whose government they make to consist, only in external discipline, and in the correction of manners. As for the hands, that he should mean the Deacons, is further applied than Basil went. For he resteth his application only on these two members, the eyes & the ears, saying: But now our virtue contemplative and helping of prayers, he called the eyes, and that the eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears unto their prayers, because all the action of the righteous is meet, that it should of God be beholden and considered. So that in the end, he driveth all, unto Gods beholding and considering the action of the righteous man, seeming to mean the minister of God, that directeth all his spiritual and contemplative power of seeing, that is, of taking care of us: & of hearing, that is, of offering prayers to God for us. And as for any resemblance of the tongue, he mentioneth not at all. But sith the prayers (namely public) not only proceed from the heart, but are uttered with the tongue, (the tongue also fitting well thereto) he concludeth, saying: And finally, every word (sith nothing is idly spoken of him) remaineth fruitful & very profitable. And therefore he saith here, the righteous man is both seen and heard continually. And can Danaeus or any other man, be his eyes never so good, see in this sentence, that Basil meant, there were 4. perpetual continuing orders of the Ecclesiastical ministry in the Church, whereof these Seniors not teaching, are likened to the eyes, and have the first place even above the Pastors? He had need have better eyes than I have, that should see this. And yet (I thank God) I can see thus much, that if Danaeus had but turned over the former leaf, and looked upon the 11. verse, that in the Psalm goeth a little before: we & other may easily see this, that Basil in plain words, ascribeth to the teachers of the word, and not unto any not teaching Seniors, the eye & oversight of the Church's discipline, saying: Hear (my children) hear me, Basil ascribeth teaching of the doctrine, to them that have the government of the Eccl. discipline. I will teach you the fear of the Lord. This is as the voice of a most loving master (or teacher) and of one that even by the Father's bowels allureth them to discipline. For the Scholar also is the son of the spiritual master. For whosoever receiveth of any the form of godliness, he verily is as it were fashioned of him, and brought forth into the light, even as a woman with child that beareth the infants fashioned in her womb. So Paul when all the Church of the Galathians did fall from their first discipline, being sotted with a certain drowsiness and astonishment of the mind, he taking them again, reforming and instructing Christ in them, calleth them his sons. And because after his grief, he erected them being fallen, and reduced them unto the duty of their faith: he therefore minded also to travel for their heaviness that were fallen a way. My children (saith he) of whom I travel again, till Christ be fashioned (in you). Come therefore (my children) hear me. What then hath our spiritual Father for to teach us? I will teach you (saith he) the fear of the Lord. This sentence (lo) of Basil even in the same treatise, is a great deal cléerer, and without all obscurity showeth, that he took those whom he afterward calleth the eyes, to be these that the oversight & care of discipline belongeth unto, declaring withal, that these are such spiritual Fathers, as to whom the teaching of the feat of God, & the instructing, exhorting, & reducing God's people unto the true faith, from all error & wickedness doth pertain, & not to Elders that meddled not with teaching. And to show this yet more plain in Basil: His book De Institutione Monachorum, translated by Ruffinus, an Elder also of Aquilegia, but withal, a teacher of the word, living in Hieromes time, doth sufficiently declare. Basilius de in s●itutiō. Monachorun. c. 16 Where Cap. 16. and treating of a governor of the Church, he maketh the Monk (for he proceedeth dialogue wise) to ask this question. Monachus. What ought he to think of himself which is a governor? And what manner of man ought he to be towards them whom he commandeth and governeth? Basilius. Verily before God, even as the minister of Christ, & the steward of the ministries (or rather, the mysteries) of God, fearing lest that besides the will of God, or besides that which is evidently commanded in the holy Scriptures, he either speak any thing, or command any thing, or be found as a false witness of Christ, or a sacrilegious person, or a bringer in of any thing that is strange, from the doctrine of God, yea, or leving out or going beyond any of those things that are acceptable unto God. But to the brethren he ought to be as it were a nurse that cherisheth her little ones. And he must be ready according to the will of God, & according as is expedient for every one, to communicate with them not only the Gospel, but his life also. Being mindful of the commandment of the Lord, and our God, saying: I give you a new commandment, that ye love together as I have loved you. No man hath a greater love than this, that he should give his life for his friends. Whereby it appeareth that Basil acknowledgeth no other Eccl. governors of the Church, but such Elders as were ministers of the word & Sacraments. And this also be saith of those that were the correctors or their breca. 17. Mo. Cap. 17. How shall we (O Father) reprove & amend him that offendeth? Ba. As it is written, the Lord speaking it, If thy brother shall sin against thee, The Ecclesiastical governors duty of public reprehension. go and reprove him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou hast won thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, take with thee another or two, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses, every word may stand. But if so hebe will not hear them, tell the Church. And if he will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as an Ethnic or publican. If perhaps this rebuking which is made of many, may fall out unto him for his health. And as the Apostle said reprove, beseech, comfort, in all patience and doctrine. And again, if any man obey not the word, note him by an Epistle, and keep not fellowship with him. Without doubt (he meaneth) for the participation of the table. Thus writeth Basil of his duty, especially, to whom the reproving of faults doth belong, that he should not only be a private admonisher, but such a public reprover also, as occasion requireth, and that with doctrine, as Saint Paul prescribeth to a Pastor. And if our Brethren will vnderst●●● these words, Dic Ecclesia, tell the Church, to be the only of Elders: then let those Elders be such reprovers, as here Basil applieth the Apostles sentence unto, that they teach doctrine with their reprehensions. So that if they be not with all teachers of doctrine, they cannot be the Church's officers for public Ecclesiastical reprehension. And as we see Basils' judgement sufficiently by these his writings: so for his own estate and his life, set out by Gregory Nazianzen, that was also an Elder under Basil, is apparent in Gregory's Monodia; who having before declared the parentage, the youth, the study of Basil, at length he cometh to this Eldership, Monodia Gregorij Nazianzen, de vita Basilij. and saith: Illum verò dei dispensatio pe● Sacerdotij gradus illustrem ac notum o●nibus fecit, ac inter Presbyteros constituit, non, etc. As for him the dispensation of GOD made him famous and known by the degrees of the sacred Priesthood, and placed him among the Elders, howbeit not by and by, and besides order, but by little and little, proceeding and being promoted by degrees and courses. In which words he manifestly showeth, that to he● preferred from one degree to another, till he come to a governing Presbyter, Priest, or Elder, was not to come to be one that meddled not with teaching, but to be Sacerdos, to wit, a Minister of the sacred word of God and of his Sacraments. For (saith Gregory) I praise not them that without order, are by and by promoted in the Church: I rather commend the Mariner's custom. For they make not their governor at the first dash, and on a sudden: but first they exercise and try him by all the offices of a Seaman. They will before see how he can row, and then placing him in the forepart of the ship, to know and perfectly to learn the winds, acquainting himself cunningly to shun the cliffs and rocks. Last of all, having been exercised in all the offices, they place him in the hinder part of the ship, and give him the stern in his hand, and make him governor. Likewise also in the discipline of war, first he is made a soldier, than a wiffler to set them in their ranks, and lastly he is made a Captain. The same is the manner both of the Physician and of the Painter, the one, that before he make his profession, he have conned many rules, and have seen and had in handling many diseases: the other to know how to mix and temper his colours before, and then to draw his lines and last of all to give perfect figures unto his colours. But we see (which is a ridiculous matter, or rather a lamentable) how a Bishop is made with tumult and confusion (he speaketh of that time when the Bishops were chosen by the election and voices of the people, The disordered making B. and Elders as the Ecclesiastical Histories are full of such tu●●●ts & co●●●●●ous) neither in order nor directly, but by viciousness and craft, not he that is worthy but he that is mightier. For he is not promoted that is exercised before, but he that is ignorant and rude of the Church's affairs, in so much that he cometh fresh from the secular life, as the Giants at Thebes for (as the poets feign) when Cadmus at Thebes in Boeocia, had sowed the teeth of Dragons, suddenly there sprang up Giants, armed down to the navel, and so making battle one with an other, were slain the same day. And even so we make Prelates of one days breed. And we having not learned what they be, do believe that they be wise men, which were fortified before with no degree, with no virtue, with no eloquence, having sustained no travail for righteousness, nor any thing at all for the Church. For he which only meditateth divine matters, and subdueth his body to the spirit, that hereafter he may be fit for a place in heaven, is gladly content to hold a low and inferior place among men. But he that is ignorant, and without learning, being puffed up and lofty, is advanced above his betters, nor is moved with the example of goodness or humility: but with all his endeavour only seeking honours, promiseth him-●elfe wit and wisdom (to springe) out of his power. Whereupon that of Demosthenes is true, to achieve a matter luckily besides worthiness; is an occasion for fools to imagine and think evil. But our basil as he is made a rule and example unto other of his other virtues: so also of a Priest and of the Ecclesiastical ordination. How Basil ascended to be an Elder or Priest by degrees. For even from the first swathing-bands of the Sacerdotal offices, he grew up by little and little, insomuch that he disdained not in any wise to be made a Reader of the holy scriptures, and then to be made an interpreter and expounder of them, even as David saith: Let those of the chair of the Elders praise the Lord: and so at length deserved he to be made a Bishop. Which place he never at any time sought nor ever wished. In which sentence, we not only see the complaint of Gregory, how many came to be Elders, yea and Bishops also in those days (as in all ages like corruptions, and complaints have been) but especially it grew then of the disordered and factions elections of the people: so for the purpose now in hand, we see hereby, that these Elders were the sacred Priests, whose office consisted not in governing only, but with ●ll in the ministery of the word and Sacraments. And how by degrees, 〈◊〉 ●x●●cising themselves in matters tending unto teaching, they attained, or aught to have attained, unto this Eldership & from thence such as excelled were, or aught to have been, promoted to be Bishops. Except it fell out otherwise, by extraordinary occasion in some rare and singular men, as in Ambrose, and Thalassius even in Caesarea where Basil was Bishop, etc. and of other Elders than these, here is no mention. Now when Basil was thus ordained an Elder. Gregory showeth how he exercised himself under Eusebius B. of Caesarea, Basils' exercise under his Bishop while he was Elder. how he laboured against the Heretics, in exhorting and teaching of the people, how he sent for Gregory to come & help him. And here Gregory setteth down Basils' example unto him. For (saith he) even as Barnabas in times past was present with Paul, to make manifest the truth of the Gospel, and common conflict of the faith: so came I, then unto my Basil, as his fellow against his fight with the Arians. Listen to the Epistle wherewith he called me. Make ready thyself, have regard to deliver me in this present conflict, and with us to meet them which desire utterly to overthrow us, whose boldness thou shalt bridle only with thy countenance, and shalt cause that they shall not make our matters go to wrack: and therefore all shall know how thou only (by the grace of God) dost govern our congregation, and that thou shalt easily repress every wicked mouth and the insolency of them that speak against God. But (saith Gregory) to return my speech to my purpose, basil returning to Caesarea, regarded nothing more than to pacify Eusebius to the end that he might overthrow the Heresy, and wholly to serve him, and be ready at his hand in all those things that were of God, that he might make apparent to all men, that all things which he had suffered of him (for Eusebius had been heavy before unto him) proceeded from the instigation of the Devil, that the common enemies of the faith might have the greater advantage by their raging. (as the Papists get now by our brethren's and our Bishops falling out, though the Bishops do all they can to pacify them, whereas Basilius laboured all that he could to pacify his bishop) but he when as he knew very well the laws of obedience, and of a spiritual life, he was attendant on him in all things, in hearing, in consulting, and in doing, he employed his spiritual and diligent endeavour for the bishop. And to say at one word, he grew as much into his favour, as before he seemed to be far from it. Basils' authority under the Bishop. For which cause Eusebius held indeed as bishop, the chief place, in the Church, but basil had the power of the Church and the authority. The one fate in the chief dignity, the other went about all the business. For there was a singular and wonderful concord between them. The one helping the other, and taking strength the one of the other, the bishop growing strong by the counsel and wit of Basil, and basil by taking authority of the bishop. To conclude, the bishop had the people, and he the bishop. And even as he that tameth a Lion, being inferior in strength, doth handle him gently, and make him tame by a certain art, The bishop's defect having been before but a lay man. by which means well near he assuageth & mollifieth the violence and fierceness of the wild beast: so basil the great behaved himself about Eusebius. For when he having been of late a lay man, and ignorant of Ecclesiastical matters, was exalted unto this dignity, especially at the same time that the flame of Arius heresy did bear the sway, he was not fit enough for this burden. Whereupon he wanted Basil to be his guide and helper, chiefly by whose virtue there was hope, that the matters would have prosperous and good success. And therefore it was not as some suppose, that Basil was under the Emperor julian, Basils' government. but he was bishop after the death of Valens. But when as he received the government & administration of the Church of Caesarea under the bishop Eusebius, he appeased all discords, he removed all privy grudges, he established their manners, not only with his words and excellent Sermons that he uttered: but also by the example of his life. For he endeavoured to help the people both with his spirit and his body, with his body by labour and exercise caring for them, by walking about every way, by courteous behaviour, and by helping them with his riches: spiritually, by teaching, by admonishing, and by giving to all men a measure and institutions of their life. Thus doth Gregory set forth the ecclesiastical government of basil and of his own government also, being Elders under the bishop in the Church of Caesarea, consisting as much and more in teaching, than in the correction and composing of manners and censures of discipline. And that these were not distinct offices in the diverse kinds of Elders, but they meddled with both together, and both under the bishop, ●n● h●w● God blesse● this ecclesiastical government, until basil himself after the decease of Eusebius was made their bishop. And then saith Gregory; after he had praised basil in this promotion: ●s for me, all men thought when they heard of his promotion, that I would forthwith depart (he meaneth from the place where he than was) and that I would go to him, and that I should have equal power with him they knew that there was such friendship and benevolence between us. But (I when as I shunned envy, least I should seem to occupy the places of those that were near him; and withal, lest they should falsely judge that Basil having received me, preferred me before other, for private friendship:) refrained and forbore myself as much as I could. While that in this behalf, I desired rather to yield to reason, than to my appetite. But he ceased not to call me, and now and then to complain upon my lingering. And yet he took my cause and excuse in good part. At the length, In the Consistory and order of the Elders one was called the first Elder. certain days after I came unto him, and when he would have placed me above the residue, and would have created me the first or chiefest Elder; I straightways refused it, and forthwith renounced the honour, for the cause which I have before declared. Whereby it appeareth, that there was in that great Cathedral Church a number of other, and as it were a Consistory or signory of them in this Eldership, and some one called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first Elder, which is all one with the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Arch-elder or chief among the Elders. But all under the Bishop, and all ministers of the word and Sacraments. And to show this better, he telleth afterward, how Valens the Emperor in Basils' time, and being desirous to see, and to terrify basil, and persecuting the professors of the truth: took 80. faithful Elders that were sent unto him, to entreat him to forsake his wickedness, and binding them put them in a ship to be driven with the winds, Socra●es lib. 4 c●p. 13. and at length burned them. Socrates telling the story at large, saith, that these 80. Elders were religious men of the eccl. order. And in proceeding further Gregory also telleth how basil defended a widow that fled to the Church, when she was haled to be married against her will. and when he was called in question for this fact, Tell me (saith Gregory in his defence) I pray you, what should not only Basil the great, but a simple priest have done? I omit his appeasing the controversy with the Archbishop of Tyana for calling the Bishops from his part of Cappadocia, Caesarea being the ancient Metropolitan Church, and so be conti●ue● while he lived. And after in the funeral of basil, sayeth Gregory: he was of the Priests carried forth in a Cophin through the City. All which here in basil being put together and considered: it showeth that in Basils' time, there was in his City and Cathedral Church▪ and with all in others, a Senate College, Eldership, signory or Consistory, of such Elders, under the Metropolitan Archb. and assistant unto him▪ both in the government of the Church and in teaching of the word, as (rising from one degree of ecclesiastical orders and offices to an other were attendant in the ministery of the word, till they came to this degree of Presbyters, Priests, or Elders, who were also called indifferently Sacerdotes. And of other Elders, such as our Brethren and Danaeus do pretend, we find no mention at all in basil. And therefore, sith we have all these clear testimonies, both of basil himself, and such as wrote of him, and were Elders with him: what need we stand harping about blind conjectures, which Danaeus himself confesseth, do but seem, and that obscurely, that there we such imagined Elders. As he fancieth. Now to strengthen this obscure seeming of basil, Danaeus proceedeth to an other witness, for these not teaching Elders, saying: Danaeus alleagation of Dionysius for these Elders. But Dionysius reckoneth only three orders in the Church, to wit, Bishops Elders and Deacons. Therefore they may be thus better distinguished, that of the perpetual orders in the Church, some are occupied either in the treatise of the word of God. Which Paul generally calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Prophecy, Rom. 12. verse, 6. or in the procuring of other matters which seemeth to be called of other by a general name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, governance, but of Paul it is called, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ministery or Deaconship, Rom. 12. Is not this conclusion properly inferred? That because (after Basil obscurely seemeth as is aforesaid) Dionysius mentioneth only these three Ecclesiastical orders of the Church: therefore these three may be thus better distinguished into these two, to wit, into those that meddle with the treatise of the word, and those that meddle with the Ecclesiastical government. Do not those that meddle with the treatise of the word, meddle with the Ecclesiastical government? And why then may it not be, that those which meddle with the Ecclesiastical government, as governors Ecclesiastical, may also meddle with the treatise of the word? What is there here in Saint Paul, Rom. 12. or any where else to the contrary, more in the one than in the other? But how followeth this argument from Dionysius particular, dividing the Ecclesiastical orders into three: to S. Paul's general division into two? And is Dionysius now with our Brethren become authentical, that he also must be alleged for proof of these Elders? What will T. C. think if he shall hear of this? If we allege any such suspicious fathers for never so mean a point. Lord how our Brethren triumph upon us. And yet we must take these for good proves, and credible witness at their hands, in this so weighty a matter. And for my part so will I, Dionysius ancient but not the Areopag●te. so desirous am I to hear any tidings of such Elders, in any of the fathers, that were in the ancient Church, be they never so much suspected to be forged. For I deny not, but that this Dionysius was of some antiquity, whom I take to have been also before basil, and whose testimony we have heard already cited by other our Brethren, though a mere counterfeit of that Dionysius the Areopagite which either he feigneth himself to be, or at least whose name he bears. Let us now see, what this Dionysius hath to prove these Elders. Dionysius (saith Danaeus) reckoneth up three orders in the Church that is to wit Bishops, Elders, and Deacons. And where doth Dionysius reckon up these three orders? Can Danaeus set us down any certain place, that we might see and consider of these words better? Dionysius. No I warrant you, but we must be feign to search for it, as well as we can, and we shall find it all at leisure. True it is, that even at the very first front and title of his first work we find by and by the name of Bishop, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Of Dionysius the Areopagite (or one that was a judge in the street of Mars) Bishop of the Athenians, unto Timothy Bishop, concerning the celestial Hierarchy, (or heavenly holy government. Here is Bishop named, which is one of these three orders, but our question is now upon these Elders. And lo good luck again, even immediately after the argument of the first Chapter, it followeth: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Dionysius the Elder unto his fellow Elder Timothy. Hear is indeed the name of Elder and of fellow Elder also, even as our Brethren cited before the sentence, 1. Pet. 5.1. the Elders that are among you, I exhort as a fellow Elder. But what Elders did S. Peter here acknowledge them and himself to be? Any other than of whom it followeth: And a witness of the sufferings of Christ, The Elders that Dionysius speaketh of were teachers. and a communicatour of the glory to come that shall be revealed, feed the flock of God that is among you, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. overseeing it, etc. doth he speak here of any elders or fellow elders, that meddled all with governing and not with teaching? And even so doth this Dionysius use the name of Elder and of fellow Elders, in this place. For not only in the words before, these are both of them called Bishops: but what a teaching Elder Timothy was, and was commanded to be: the scripture is plain, and we have heard at large out of S. Paul in both his Epistles written to him, among other things, namely for that purpose. Therefore here is nothing yet for any such Elders as our Brethren seek for, distinct from both Bishop and Pastor, meddling not with teaching, but all with governing; nay, this name of Elder as it is here taken, maketh clean against them. And the like style he useth in his ecclesiastical Hierarchy or holy government of the Church, and in the style of his book of the divine names. Save that there, he calleth Timothy Bishop of Ephesus. As also in the style of his mystical Theology. But when we come to the view of all the books, and of all the Epistles that he wrote: where shall we find these three reckoned up, Bishops, Elders, and Deacons? He hath in some seldom places the name of Bishop, as for the name of Elder, except it be in one only place, (besides the title aforesaid) which is the 8. Epistle: we shall never find it. Dionis. Epist. 8. But once is as good as a 1000 times, if it be to the purpose. Let us therefore see what this Dionysius saith in that place, for proof that there were any such eccl. officers as these governing and not teaching Elders. And to speak plainly (sayeth this Dionysius) in all things that are, they are distributed from the first to the second, according to their dignity, concerning the god order, & most righteous providence of them. And that those which are appointed of God to govern others, should give to them that are their inferiors and their subjects, the things that are, according to their worthiness. As for Demophilus, let him with reason cut off wrath and concupiscence according to their worthiness. And let him not violate his own dignity, but let reason bearing the rule, govern her subjects. For if in the market we see an household servant reviling his Master, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. and a young man reviling an Elder, either also the son reviling the Father, The name of Elder not for office, but age. and with all rushing on him and laying on stripes: we also should seem to be godless, if we should not running to them, hasten to help them that are the better, etc. What can we gather on this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place, but simply by the name of Elder, an Elder man in age, and the other a younger man the relation of the one to the other, the terms of Master and household servant, of father and son, the one going before, the other coming after, and both understood in their literal & natural sense; to conclude, the whole drift and circumstance of the place considered: who would fetch this so far, as to think that he spoke here, or so much as dreamt of, either an eccl. or a civil Elder? If it be replied, that the whole argument of this Epistle arose, upon a Priest that was beaten and misused: true it is indeed. But by what name calleth he the Priest or any priest Presbyterum? or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Sacerdotem, he that giveth the sacred word and Sacraments. Which word not only he useth more than half a score of times in this Epistle, and he hath once also even here the name of Bishop: but neither here nor any other where that I can find, he hath the name of Deacon. Not that he acknowledgeth no Deacons; but that he comprehendeth them (as I take it) in the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a minister or worker of the public services. And as in all places where he treateth thereof, he maketh indeed most especial mention of three eccl. orders, namely, in his eccl. Hierarchy, cap. 2.3. and 5. resembling them to the proportion of his celestial Hierarchy, in these three points of perfecting, illuminating, & purging, of whom the Bishop is still called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: the priest or Elder, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: and the third, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And so, even in this example within a few lines after he had named the Elder, that is, the old man aforesaid: he saith of all these three: The 3. degrees of eccles. orders that Dionysius acknowledgeth. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Thou thyself therefore distribute to thy concupiscence and to thine anger and to thy speech, the things that are according to their worthiness. But to thyself, let the divine public ministers distribute: and unto them, the Priests: unto the Priests, the bishops; and unto the Bishops, the Apostles and the successors of the Apostles. Where are here these Elders that meddle not with teaching? If they be neither contained in the Bishops, nor in the Priests (both which, meddle principally with teaching) then either they have no place at all, or they must be included in the 3. number of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, wherein he comprehendeth not only all the inferior officers of the Church, but Monks also. So that (I thinks) these governing Elders would be loath to be thrust down into so base a company. Although the purging be given unto them, which is somewhat answerable to the correction of manners, that they would meddle with all. Save that Dionysius also maketh these purgers, but to pull off the clothes of those that should be baptised, and to void the Church at the communion, of those that were possessed with foul spirits, or were not thoroughly taught their Catechism, and to keep back the lay people, The office of the purgers in Dionysius. and such other servile offices. If now, they disdain to be of the number of these purgantes; and will not become ministers of the word and Sacraments; nor with the Bishops be perficientes; nor with the Priests, be illuminantes: then Dionysius clean renounceth these Seniors that would be tantum dominantes, and will have none such in his eccl. Hierarchy. And therefore, if I might counsel such an excellent learned man as is Danaeus; he should never bring in Dionysius for these Elders. But either race his name out of his book; or else, how so ever an other have at his peril, counterfeited the name of Dionysius the Areopagite mentioned Act. 17. let not us cuunterfeite any thing in his name, but allege his words rightly as he uttered them. For he is wrong enough of himself. But right or wrong, sith we shall never wring any thing out of him, that may make so much as a shadow for these governing and not teaching Ecclesiastical Elders: let us now go to be better resolved of that more reverend Father's judgement, whom Danaeus also citeth for these Seniors. Danaeus in Christ. Isag. 2. part. ca 7. Danaeus proceeding in the 7. chap. aforesaid, 2. part. Christ. Isagog. saith: Caet●rum caetus, etc. But the assembly of the eccl. governors, that is of them that are set over every Church, is called the Senate of the Church, Hiron▪ add Rustic. It is also in the Canon, Ecclesia, 16. quaest. 1. lest perhaps any man should suppose, that this name now were of us first forged and usurped for ostentation. We think not that this name of the Church's Senate, is new forged or feigned by our Brethren. We think more reverently also of Danaeus, than to make any such forgery, usurpation, or ostentation of this name, the Senate of the Church. And we grant the name hath been used of other heretofore, albeit (as we have heard) calvin himself esteemeth the name of Senate to be some what too profane or secular a name, though we deny not but the name is reverent. Howbeit, our question is here, in what sense Jerome useth it, whether for such an Ecclesiastical senate of Elders, that are governors and not teachers, Jerome. as our Brethren would bear us in hand. And this is the point that Danaeus allegeth it for. If now Jerome allege it for any Senate of such Ecclesiastical Elders: then hath Danaeus and our Brethren gotten a good and a strong testimony, jeronimus in epistola ad Rusticum gallum. that there were some such Seniory of Elders in those days. But if Jerome allege no such matter: but rather the clean contrary, to wit, if he allege it for a senate of those Elders that were teachers: what then hath Danaeus or our brethren gained out of Hierom for these Governing and not teaching Elders? Now therefore to examine better this testimony also of Saint Jerome, in his Epistle written to Rusticus: we find that he wrote two Epistles to men of that name: whereof that which here is meant is the former, written to one Rust. Gallus a young man that was become a Monk. Howbeit such a Monk, as Erasmus well observeth thereupon, Erasmus bseruations of Ieromes example for the difference of the Monks in jeroms time, and the popish Monks in these days. saying: least that should offend any, that in this Epistle, (as neither also in the former) S. jerom commandeth none of those things, that are required of Monks in these days: he suffereth them to have the possession of household stuff, so it be moderate. He permitteth them to live with their Mother, with their Sister, to conclude, with any body men or women, so that they shun suspicious and dangerous company, He exhorteth him, he exacteth not, that if he had leaver live abroad: he should rather live in the fellowship of many together under the discretion of some Father, than to live after his own all alone. As concerning any certain Monastery or form, or colour, or matter of garment: there is no mention in any place. Only he would have such apparel, that neither with the sluttishness thereof it should savour of hypocrisy, nor with the neatness it should savour of pride. Now concerning the three vows which they call solemn: there is not one word. He praiseth in this man the study of eloquence, and that to attain learning, he traveled to Countries far distant. But we must remember, (which thing is manifestly apparent by these men's writings) that there was not in the age of Hierom, this kind of Monks, such as we see in our age, which would to God the world had them all as good, as it hath many, and so excellent over other in holiness, as they differ in apparel. In those days Monks were nothing else, but such as professed the contempt of the World, in a more severe life. Howbeit they obeyed their Bishop as other did, and exercised the office of Clerks even as other also. I do the rather by the way note this observation, least any should mistake that kind of life, when they read in these old Fathers, as in Basil aforesaid and in the Ecclesiastical History the names of Monks, lest they should think it maketh any thing for the maintenance of such superstitious sects as swarm in popery, & are expelled from us. Now then unto this Rusticus: being a young man, and such a kind of Monk writeth old Father Hierom this epistle, full of fatherly precepts and good council, how to behave himself in that profession. And at length (among other things) coming to this, he saith: Neque vero peccantium etc. Neither be thou carried away with the multitude of sinners, neither let the number of them that perish trouble thee, that thou shouldst think with thyself, what? and shall all perish then that dwell in the Cities? Lo they enjoy their goods, they minister to the Churches, they haught the baths, they despise not ointments, and yet are they commonly in every man's mouth. To the which I answered also before, and now briefly I answer, that in this present pamphlet I dispute not of clerks but instruct a Monk. The clerk are holy, and the life of them all is laudable. So therefore behave thyself, and live in the Monastery, that thou mayest deserve to be a Clerk, that thou defile not thy youth with any uncleanness, that thou mayest come unto the altar of Christ, even as a virgin out of her chamber, The B. separate choosing of Clerks. and that abroad thou have a good testimony, and that the women know thy name, but not know thy countenance. When as thou shalt come to a perfect age (if so be thou shalt live so long) and that either the people, or else the Bishop of the City, shall choose thee into the Clergy: do those things that pertain to a Clerk, and among them follow the better, because, in every condition and degree, the best are mixed with the worst. Nor leap thou out by and by to write, & be carried away with a light madness, be long time learning that thou teachest, give not credit to those that are the praisers of thee: Yea rather, to the mockers of thee willingly listen thou not. Whom when they shall have foad thee with their flouting, and shall after a sort set thee besides thyself. If thou shalt suddenly look about thee, The clerks were teachers. thou shalt either find the necks of the strokes bowing behind thee, or the Ass' ears to be solfaed with the hand, or the hot panting tongue of the Dog to be lolled out. (He meaneth, that with such beastly parts they will mock him behind his back, whom to his face they praised). Backbite no man, neither count thyself holy herein, if thou deface other men. We accuse oftentimes that which we do, and are eloquent against our own selves. We are carried with invectives against our vices, while the silent judge the eloquent. Grunnius coming forth to speak, with his pace like a snail, scrasly carped out, and that by certain yawning pauses, few words, that he would ra●her think he sobbed than he spoke: and yet when the table being set, ●he had laid forth an heap of Books, bending his eye brow, snuffling up his nose, and wrinkling his forehead, Phillipped with both his fingers, by this sign provoking this Shcollers to hear him. Then began he to power out his mere toys, and to declaim against every one. You would have said, he had been Longinus the Critike (or one that gives his judgement against every body) and a Censor (or Master Controller) of the Roman eloquence, to note whom it liked him, Et de Senatu doctorum excludere. And to exclude him out of the Senate of the Doctors (or of the Learned men.) This fellow is well moneyed, he is better liked in his dinners, etc. Here at length we are come to the word Senate, which Danaeus aimeth at, in saying: But the assembly of Ecclesiastical Governors, that is, of them that are placed over every Church, is called the senate of the church. Hieronimus ad Rusticum. But as Jerome speaketh all this sentence, in deriding the contemptuous and scornful invectives, of the rich and proud disdainers of all other, be they never so learned men: (and therefore that we might the more fully perceive his meaning, I have set down his Words thus at large) so what can be gathered hereupon, that he alluded to any Ecclesiastical senate of that time? Especially understanding the same for such an Ecclesiastical senate, as were governors of the church, and not teachers of it? Erasmus in his scholies coming to these words, De senatu Doctorum: apply them to an allusion of the Senate of Rome, saying: The Censors or Con●rollers office. For this also was lawful for the Roman censors (or Lord controllers of the Roman manners) to expel out of the senate: as Portius Cato removed out of the senate Titus Flamminius, junius Brutus removed Lucius Antonius, and others removed other, as Valerius Maximus recordeth, li. 2. cap. de Censoria nota. So that by these terms, de Senatu doctorum excludere, Jerome meant, that this Grunnius took upon him like a Censor or Lord controller, to exclude such and such as he pleased out of the senate, that is, out of the number of all those that are accounted Learned men. And is not this now a proper proof, to infer that in Heiromes' time, in every or in any congregation or church, there was a senate of Learned men and yet not teachers? If Danaeus will needs apply it to the state of a senate then present in the Church: yet where is here become this Ecclesiastical senate, that he would prove was then, by these words? If he say, that it is included in this word doctorum: what shall we call these? Learned men? or Doctors? if they were Senatus doctorum, a senate of Doctors: What Doctors were they, if they meddled not with teaching? Were they such as the common saying decideth: doctor a docendo sicut mons a movendo? and will our Brethren allow such Doctors, rather than they will not prove an Ecclesiastical senate of governing and not teaching? If he say, that by these words, he meaneth a senate of learned men, but not actively of Doctors or teachers, but passively, of such as are taught or learned. Doth not Jerome here deride those, that being their selves unlearned, will in teaching their scholars, inveigh against all other that be learned? And if he make here this arrogant ass, a teacher of scholars: doth he not much more allow the Learned themselves to be Teachers? Hier. words rather allow a senate of teaching then not teaching Elders. I dare not precisely say, of so dark and general words, what Ieromes meaning was, but (me thinks) the words Senatus Doctorum, sound rather for a Senate of Teachers, than for a Senate of those that were not teachers. But what is this unto our Elders? he speaketh there (as we have seen also) of clerk, and of a number of them, commending the life of them to be laudable, and willeth him so to live, that he may deserve to be made a Clerk, and if that (God lending him life) either the people or the Bishop of the City chose him into the clergy, that he should then live as a Clerk should do, and that he should follow the better sort of them: but what then were these clerk? (if perhaps they were this Ecclesiastical Senate) But so soon as ever he had spoken of these clerk (if Rusticus should be made one of them) doth he not strait ways say: leap not out by and by to be a writer, and be carried away with a light madness, be long time learning that thou teachest. And also in the same Epistle he said before, Haec dico etc. I say these things, that if thou be tickled with the desire to be of the Clergy, that thou shouldest learn that, which thou mightest be able to teach and mightest offer unto Christ the reasonable offering. Be not a man of arms, before thou haste been a young soldier, be not a Master before thou haste been a scholar. So that it appeareth, this Clergy were teachers, at least wise, their profession was not separate from teaching, though all among were not a like able, yea, the very Readers in the Clergy, chiefly had a kind of teaching even in reading. As for the Elders in the Clergy, Governing Elders, were much more Teachers. For he would not have Rusticus (when he should now become one of Clergy) such a Teacher as should find fault with other, The elders that our Br. would erect would be such as jerom reprehendeth. and be culpable himself of the same faults, specially in learning: nor to be like Gruninus a M. Controller, corrector & displacer of learned men, being himself unlearned So that I can see none so fit, that we may resemble these Governing Seniors unto, that are not Teachers, and yet are Censors or Controllers, (for calvin also giveth that term Censors, as we have heard) unto them: as unto these Elders that our Brethren plead for. For as they take not upon them to be Teachers, so they had not need, being their selves unlearned. At least wise, for the most part it would so fall out, that this Seniory in every parish could not be of Learned men: and yet must they be the Censors and controllers of the Learned men, and that not only for manners, but to see that the Learned teachers, teach no false doctrine. Which in many Parishes would be. S●t Mineru●●▪ A●d so the hoggish and rich Grimus, must gruntle and play th●se parts (that Jerome describes) against the learned teacher, & teach his teacher, being himself no teacher. But doth Jerome like of this? I think not, & yet this would often times a fall out, if our Bret. seniory were brought in, who would play Grunnius part more lively than he that were as jerom saith here, bene nummatus, plus placebat in prandii●, a well moneyed man, fit to please us with good cheer than with good doctrine doctrine? which fault our Breath find now in some unlearned pastors among us, and call them unpreaching priests and Prelates: and yet it should then be common, in these governing and not teaching, controlling and unlearned seniors among them. And so it should be, not senatum doctorum (as Hierom saith) but Senatum indoctorum, as our brethren and we too soon should ●●●de it. If it were not far worse, as it followeth afterward in Jerome, against these unlearned Controllers of the Learned Pastors, and yet flatterers of the people, saying: Nec mirum etc. Neither is it marvel, if he that was wont to feed many with his baits, come forth abroad, making a train after him, of the babblers that make a noise about him (or of the people giving him all their voices, & saying as this M. Senior Controller saith) Intus Nero, foris Cato, The description of such Controllers not teacher's totus ambiguus, ut ex contrarii● diversisque naturis, unum mo●●trum, no●āque bestiam dicere● ess● compact a●: iu●cta illud poeticum, Prima Le● postrema drac●, media ipsa Chim●r●. Nero within, Cato without, altogether doubtful, insomuch that you would say, it were one Monster, or a new Beast, Lucretius. compact of contrary and diverse natures, according to the saying of the Poet, a Lion is the formest part, a Dragon last is seen, the Monster Chimere placed is, within the midst between. And such a Senate compact of such as Grymsyre Grunnius, a Critical longinu● (if not rather such a blind longinus, as is said to have pierced the side of Christ● with his spear) such inward nero's, and outward Cato's, such Lions, Dragons and Chimers, might quickly creep into this Senate of unlearned Seniors, that would become the Electors of all Ecclesiastical officers, the Governors of all Ecclesiastical Government, the Censors and controllers of all the Discipline and manners of the Teachers, and themselves no teachers, nor able to meddle with teaching. ●o, Jerome alloweth not any Ecclesiastical Senate of such Seniors. But when Jerome mentioneth such Elders or Seniors, as he knew and alloweth (as he doth within a few words after) he saith: veritas angulos non amat, etc. Truth loveth not Corners, nor seeketh out Whisperers. It is said to Timothy: What Elders Hierom. alloweth of. against an Elder receive not strait way an accusation. Him that sinneth reprove before all, that the other also may have fear. We must not easily believe the slanders spoken) of that old age, which both their life forepast doth defend, and the term of their dignity doth honour. Here he plainly speaeth of Seniors not only in age, but in dignity. An● apply S. Paul's sentence to them, 1. Tim. 5.19. which w● have seen, ●oth by the testimony of Calvin of Beza, is spoken of such Elders, as are Pastors & teachers. Yea Danaeus himself so expounding it, & saying thereon: It is a transition (or passing from the one part to speak of the other) for now he treateth of the 2. part of this argument, Danae●s in 1. Tim. 5.19 to wit, what is the office of Elders themselves towards themselves and their Colleagues, lest any offence should arise on that part. For first, heed must be taken, least that they do excuse one another and spare themselves, while that notwithstanding, they correct other severely, and least that in them the old proverb have place, The mules do nibble one another. Let that sentence of Christ come rather to their mind, You are the salt of the earth, if the salt melt away, in what shall it be salted? you are the light of the World, Mat. 5. v. 13.14. And also those sayings, let your loins be gi●t, & burning lampe● in your hands. Luk. 1●. ver. 35. Yea and ●hose also of Peter, that the pastors ought to be an example in soundness of life and purity of Doctrine, and to shine before other. 1. Pet. 5.3. Therefore as on the one part, they must diligently take heed, that they wink not in their own, and in the sins of their Colleagues: so on the other part they must look, that they give not to froward men, and to such as refuse and shake of the yoke of Ecclesiastical Discipline, an entry unto an easy appeachement and accusation. etc. These are the only Elders in office th●● Jerome in this Epistle mentioneth. These Elders therefore and their Colleagues (as Danaeus termeth them) being these Pastoral Elders, and to whom these sentences and that which followeth, Ezech. 18 do appertain: what is here to relieve these other kind of Elders, not pastoral that are all governing & not meddling with teaching? Now, if our Brethren will but turn v● the other side of the leaf, before that where this word senate is of H●erome named, which here Danaeus taketh hold upon: we shall find perhaps such an Ecclesiastical company insinuated, as again may make a senate Ecclesiastical. The superior government of one in every company. Nulla ars etc. There is no Art (saith jerom to this Monk Rusticus) that is learned without a Master, yea the dumb living creatures and herds of wild Beasts follow their guides. Among the Bees there are their Princes, the crane's follow one another in a lettered order, or like the row of Letters.) The Emperor is one, the judge of the province is one. So soon as Rome was built, it could not have 2. brothers to be kings both of them together, and it was dedicated in Parricide (or in the blood of one brother murdering another) so that it is less marvel, if it have ever since been the city of blood from whence such horrible, murders, treasons and unnatural massacres ever have been contrived, even from the laying of the foundation of it: & yet less marvel, for there is now an Eccl. senate all of governing elders that meddle not with teaching: which in jerom▪ ti●● was not, nor he any of them, as he is now pictured: but let jerom go on: In the womb of Rebecca Esau and jacob made wars together. Singuli ecclesiarum episcopi, singuli archipresbyter● singuli Archidiacons, & omnis ord● ecclesiasticus suis rectoribus nititur. etc. The B. of the churches are but single (or one) the archpreestes but one, the Archd. but one, & every eccl. order resteth upon his governors. In a ship there is one governor, in a house there is one M. in every great army one ensign or standard is expected, and (least that in unfolding more things, I should accloy the reader) my speech by all these tendeth thereunto, that I might teach thee (saith jer. to Rust.) that thou should not be left to thine own choice, but to live in a Monastery under the discipline of one Father, and in the consort or company of many. If any thing in this epistle come near to the nature and matter (though not to the word) of Senate, but consort, & that ecclesiastical, it is here (me thinks) nearer touched, than where the name of the Senate of doctors, or learned men, was spoken of. But what is there here, to show whether all in this consort were seniors, & those that were seniors, whether teachers, or no? but teachers or not teachers, to whom is here the Government referred? to the consort? no but to one over them. The consort is of many▪ the government of all, is still referred unto one. Indeed he drives all this drift, to the Monastical state. The less (say I) it serveth to such an Ecclesiastical senate of Elders, as our Bre. refer it unto. Yea, but he borroweth examples not only from many natural & civil orders, but also from the Eccl. order of the church. we grant he doth so, & they much more should live in order, & therein be example to other If therefore any Eccl. senate be among the clergy: omnis ord● eccl. (saith jerom) suis rectorib●● nititur. All eccl. order resteth on their governors. And who then, or how many are these governors forsooth but one. Here are three orders of the clergy reckoned up, the deacons as the lowest, & they have their arched. for their governor: the Elders middlemost, and they are distinct here from the deacons, and from the B. and have their arch-elder among themselves, & over them all, in the senates of them. And the B. are chiefest over the several churches. Except we shall find in several provinces, archb. also over them. Which authority likewise jerom allowed among and over the B. though he make none but Christ the universal head and governor over all these in general, that the pope now taketh upon him. The orders and governments of that Jerome commends. But where is here this government of all this senate of governing Elders? & where are these governing elders that are not teachers? doth jerom here, or any other where, acknowledge any such order of eccl. elders, as meddled not with the ministration of the word & sacraments? jerom saith, that the names of Elders & B. were ●●rst used for all one office (as we have at large seen his opinion therein & how that use was altered) but doth he acknowledge any other presbytery Senate, College, Consistory or signory, of any other Presbyters, priests, seniors and Elders, than such as he saith, were 〈◊〉 called Bishops: or than such, as he calleth indifferently, (as well as he calleth Bishops) sacerdotes, and such as were more or le●se teachers, and Ministers of the word and sacraments? Hier. in epis. ad evagr. Doth he not say in his Epistle to Euagrius: Quid enim facit excepta ordinatione episcopus quod Presbyter non faciat? For what doth the Bishop except ordaining, that an Elder doth not▪ As for the other Epistle to the other Rusticus, being altogether of another argument: we find nothing tending hereunto, save only that he hath these words: unde & ad viros Ecclesiasticos, etc. Whereupon also unto the Ecclesiastical men, which are called the walls and towers of the church, the saying of the prophet speaketh: power forth your tears ye Walls of Zion. But because here he neither showeth what he meant by these ecclesiastical men, nor speaketh of any Senate of them: we can gather nothing directly either for Elders or other Ecclesiastical persons. And if he meant elders: why not such as are teachers and Ministers of the Word● and sacraments, and such as he meant of in the other Epistle, and in all other places where he mentioneth any ecclesiastical elders? Thus, as we find nothing in Jerome, that can make any thing for any ecclesiastical senate of elders governing and not teaching: ●o, because Danaeus citeth not Hierom simply, but endorseth him with a con●●rmation of the degrees in the Canon Law, as though it were a perpetual Canon, that there should still be such an ecclesiastical senate: albeit the same being fetched out of this sentence of Jerome, as we have seen, maketh more against it than any thing for it: so that this decree being grounded thereon, the one falls to the ground with the other: nevertheless, for the more full satisfaction of the reader, in this eldership so much urged: let us also repair to the decrees, and peruse what is there likewise for this senate of Governing and not teaching elders. Danaeus allegation of the Canon Law for this Senate of Elders. Canon. Eccl. 16 quest 1. And here indeed is express mention made, that the church hath a Senate of elders, ecclesia habet senatum catum presbyterorum, etc. The Church hath a senate, the company of the Elders, without whose consent it is not lawful for the Monks to do any thing. Roboam the son of Solomon did therefore lose his kingdom, because he would not hear his elders. The Romans also had a senate by whose counsel they did all things, and we have our senate, the company or assembly of the elders. These words are plain, that the church hath a senate, and this senate is the company of the elders, and that also the Monks could do nothing without their counsel. Howbeit this Canon apply not this restraint to the B. but to the Monks. And if we should understand it of Bishops also, which this Canon doth not, yet were it but of counsel, not of necessary consent, and much less of joint authority with him. But the Question is now, what manner of elders these were? The Canan Law. Whether they were such as these examples of the Roman Senate, or as the Elders whose counsel Roboam did refuse: or they were Ministers of the word and Sacraments? For our better understanding hereof, we have to resort to the cause handled immediately before, which was the 15. cause. Quest. 7. Absque Synodali. Without a synodal audience, Canon Absque Synodali causa 15. quest. 7. for a Priest to be condemned, it was in the Council of Hispalis, wherein Isodorus was present, forbidden, on this wise: Sexta actione, etc. In the sixth action we find, that Flagitanus an Elder of the Church of Corduba, was in times past deposed by his Bishop, and being innocent was condemned to exile (or banishment:) whom we find again to be restored to his own order: the same thing have we again decreed against your presumption, that according to the synodal sentence of the holy fathers, none of you think that any Elder or Deacon ought to be deposed, without the examination of a Council. For there are many that by tyrannical power▪ not by authority Canonical, do condemn those that have not been examined. And as they exalt some for favour sake, so they debase some for for hatred and envy, and condemn them upon a * Le ui aura. light blast of opinion whose fault they mislike. For a bishop can alone give honour unto priests and ministers: but he can not alone take it from them. For if those which in this world have of their Lords attained to the honour of their liberty, are not tumbled down again into the bond of servitude, except they shall have been publicly accused, before the Praetors or chief justices and governors in the judgement Court: These elder● were ministers of the sacraments. how much more, they that being consecrated to the Altars of God are adorned with Ecclesiastical honour: which verily neither by one condemning them, nor one judging them, can be deposed from the privilege of their honour, but by a present synodal judgement. That thing must wholly be determined of them, that the Canon hath commanded. And it followeth Si quid. etc. If any thing shall come to thine ears of any Clerk, that may justly offend thee, believe it not easily, least the matter being not known do inflamed thee by revengement. But the truth of the matter is to be searched out diligently in the presence of Seniors of the Church, and then, (if the quality of the matter shall require it) let the Canonical correction strike the fault of the offender. Here are Seniors also of the Church named. And again, Episcopus. Let the Bishop hear the cause of none without the presence of his clerk, The B. & his Clerks otherwise the bishops sentence shall be void, except it be established by the presence of the clerk. Hear the Bishop is restrained that albeit he may do some thing alone, unto his clerk, Ministers, Seniors, and Elders: yet that he may not alone and without the presence of their assembly, depose any of them from his living, etc. But who are these clerk, Ministers, Seniors, and Elders, in whose presence he must do these things? Doth he admit any other than Bishops themselves, or at least the Sacerdotal priests? the gloss (disputing this matter, who should be this Counsel, or Chapter, or sitters by with the Bishops,) to prove that they must be all clerk, referreth us to the sixth cause, Quest. 3. Scitote. Know ye, that to be a certain province, which hath ten or eleven Cities, and one King, and as many inferior potestates under him, one Metropolitan, and other suffragans, 10 or 11. Bishops, being judges, unto whose judgement all the causes of the Bishops, Who these Elders and▪ Clarks were that these Canons have relation unto. and of other priests and Cities, may be referred. That matters may be discerned by all these, justly and with consonant voice, except they that are to be judged do appeal to a higher authority. It must not be that every province should be debased or dishonoured, but should have in itself judges, every of the priests and Bishops. That is to wit, according to their orders. Whereby it appeareth that these Ecclesiastical Senates of such as sat in the Councils and judgements of priests were either Bishops or at least Sacerdotal priests only, and not persons of inferior orders, but every one was judged according to their estate, by them that were (at the least) of their own orders, and not Teachers by such as were no Teachers. Now after this fifteenth cause wherein he treateth of clerk, Elders, Seniors, Ministers and Priests indifferently: This next cause, to wit, the sixteenth▪ Which Danaeus citeth, is altogether of Monks, and especially that first Question which he allegeth. Whether they may do that thing (in respect simply they be Monks, that secular clerk and priests or Elders) may do. This first Question is this, Vtrum Monachis liceat officia populis celebrare, poenitentiam dare, & baptizare. Whether Monks may celebrate the Divine service to the people, enjoin penitence and baptise? To the which, the answer is this, They cannot. And anon amongst other reasons, he allegeth this out of Jerome also, Ad Riparium & desiderium: Monachus non docentis sed plangentis habet officium. A Monk hath not the office of a Teacher, but of a mourner. And even immediately before that which Danaeus citeth, are these words: Alia causa. The cause of a Monk is another, and another the cause of a Clerk: The Clerk, feed the Sheep, (saith the Monk) I am fed: they live of the Altar, the Axe is put to me, The difference of the Clerk & of the Monk. as at the root of an unfruitful tree: If I bring not my gift unto the Altar, It is not lawful for me to sit before an Elder: if I shall sin, it is lawful for him to deliver me to Satan, for the destruction of the Flesh, that the spirit in day of the Lord might be safe. Idem ad Rusticum. The same (is in Hieroms▪ Epistle) unto Rusticus. And here cometh in that which Danaeus citeth: Ecclesia: The church hath a Senate, the assembly of Elders, without whose council it is lawful for the Monks to do nothing. All this now duly considered: it is manifest, that by this the Church's Senate or assembly of Elders, is meant only a Senate of such Elders, as did feed both the people and the Monks also, with the word and Sacraments. For so the gloss expoundeth the Monks words, Ego pascor, I am fed, A sacramentis ipsorum, of their Sacraments. And that these Elders lived of the Altar, The Monks paid tithes & offerings to the elders The Elders might excommunicate the Monkey and that the very Monks in those days, were not exempted from paying tithes or offerings unto them. And that these Elders might excommunicate these Monks so well as they might other men. By all which it appeareth, that this Ecclesiastical Senate was none other, but an assembly, Colleague or Consistory of priests or Pastoral Elders. And as for any other Ecclesiastical Presbyters or Elders, in all or any of the Canons either of the councils General or Provincial, or of the Bishops, or of the whole body of the Canon Laws, Decrees or Decretals, than such Elders as were Ministers of the word and Sacraments: Our Brethren shall find but sorry comfort. No nor in any of the Doctors of the Church. And therefore it is their best (as I take it) to leave all further search that ways, for any proof or practice at all of such Ecclesiastical Governing and not teaching Elders in the Church, even from the very Apostles times. And this withal is to be observed, that where our Bret. would now bear the world in hand, there were such Senates and Segniories of these governing and not teaching Elders, in the Primitive & in the ancient Church: and for proof hereof, dare adventure to cite all these testimonies: (and if I could find that they cited any more,) I would crave pardon to search them likewise) which when they are all viewed & examined: there is not one Father, not one Historiographer, not one Canon, that maketh any whit, for any such kind of Elder, as our Brethren pretend to us, is worn out of use, and they now endeavour to have again eviued. I know that these our reverend Brethren (being both godly and learned men) do not cite these authors of any set purpose to deceive us, The cause of our Bret. & these reverend men's mistaking the●e allegations of these Elder● in Fathering that on them which they never spoke, nor thought, nor knew: but as the proverb saith mistaking makes misse-reckoning: so they (having conceived this with themselves, that such a kind of Governing and not teaching Ecclesiastical Elders there was in the Apostles times, and in the Primitive Church:) so often as they read in the Fathers the name of Presbyters of Elders, especially, if there be any mention of Senate, College or company of them, and that these in any matters joined with the Bishop (to whom they apply only the name and office of Pastoral Elder:) straightway they conceived that which they fancied, that these Elders were those Ecclesiastical Elders governing only and not meddling with teaching▪ Mistaking the fathers Which too quick conceiving, upon their forestalled opinion, (especially in the heat of zeal to have things amended,) may fall out now and then, for lack of more mature deliberation and examining, even to the best learned and most holy men. And that (I think) hath been the cause of our brethren's misliking and misseporting the Father's meanings in the Eldership. Which when their selves shall apperceive, I doubt not (for the reverent opinion I have of them, and of all our Brethren) but that they will relent in this behalf, at leastwise, for these fathers thus cited amiss, and either let them all go, or seek further in them, or in other, for other and better Testimonies, than these alleged. Which if they shall find, and can clearly evict thereby, that there were any such: for my part, I shall be most ready to acknowledge it. Howbeit, when they shall have proved, that such at any time in the Church of Christ there were: yet would not that example infer a necessity, that there ought to be such always and every where, because there was such sometimes, perhaps, and in some places. But sense as yet, we neither hear of rule, nor example of them: we may (I hope) with safe conscience dissent from them. Sith therefore, it can not hitherto be proved by any of these Fathers: Let us now see these excellent learned men's allegations and examples for these Elders, out of the holy Scriptures, if yet in them, we may find better and invincible proof, that at least in the Apostles times, there were such Elders, for then there is no remedy, but we must needs yield that such there were, Sith we also (as is our bounden duty) do admit and reverence the holy Scriptures, with the same honour that our Brethren do. Albeit, neither we nor they can make any perpetual rule, of every particular example in the scripture. But let the rule thereof fall out as it shall, let us yet see, what examples in the scripture our Brethren avouch. In the seventh Chapter aforesaid, 2. part Christ. Isag. Danaeus after his citations of Basil and Dionysius, Danaeus in 2. part Christ. Isag. Cap. 7. allegeth saint Paul (as ye have heard) saying: Therefore they may thus better be distinguished, that of the perpetual orders in the Church, other should be occupied in the treaty of the word of God, which Paul generally calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Prophecy, Rom. 12. verse. 6. Or else in the procuring of other things, the which seemeth by a General name to be of other called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. governance, but of Paul it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Rom. 12. This Testimony is also alleged of Beza in his Christian Confession, Chapter 5. Artic 32. with the 1 Corinth. 12. verse 28. prefixed thereunto. The same Testimony likewise citeth calvin, in his Institutions Cap. 8. Sec. 42. saying. Caluines' allegation of the same in Instit. cap 8. sect. 42 But as for that that I called bishops, & elders, and pastors, & Ministers indifferently, those that govern the Church: The Scripture of the Elders. I did it out of the use of the scripture, which confundeth these terms. For whosoever enjoy the ministry of the word, it giveth to them the title of Bishops. So with Paul, where Titus was commanded town by town to ordain Elders, straightways is set under it, for a Bishop must be blameless, etc. So in an other place he saluteth more Bishops in one City. And in the Acts is rehearsed, that he called the Ephesine Elders together, whom he his-selfe in his oration nameth Bishops. Hear now we must observe that hitherto we have reckoned none, but those offices that consist in the ministry of the word, neither of other doth Paul make remembrance in that fourth Chapter to the Ephesians, which we have cited. Howbeit, in the Epistle to the Romans, and in the former to the Corinthians, he reckoneth up other, as powers, the gifts of healing, interpretation, Government, tendance on the poor, of the which I omit those that were temporary, because it is no importance to stand long about them. But there are two which abide perpetually: government, and the car● of the poor. Governors (I think) were seniors, chosen from among the common people, which should together with the bishops, rule the Censure or controlment of manners, and the discipline that should be exercised. Whom Cal. thin●eth ●o be the governors. Bom 12 & 1. Cor. 12. For ye cannot otherwise interpret that which he saith: he that rule●h let him do it in carefulness. Therefore every Church from the beginning had her senate enroled, of Godly, grave and holy men. Moreover that that kind of order was not of that only age, the experience itself doth declare. Therefore this gift also of Government is necessary for all ages. Thus do calvin, Beza and Danaeus (for in these three as principal I comprehend any other of our Brethren that follow them) gather this Senate of Governing and not teaching Elders, on these two testimonies Romans 12. and 1 Corinthians 12. As for that which calvin here speaketh of the scriptures indifferent use of the names of bishops and Elders: We have already seen sufficiently, how it was used, and how it was altered, even in the Apostles times. And have seen withal, sufficient proof of the superiority of one among the Elders, yea, among the Apostles themselves, which was more peculiarly called bishop, and that by Caluines and Bezaes' own confessions. But for these two places in the Scripture here cited, Romans 12. & 1. Corinthians 12. that all the gifts or offices there mentioned, are either temporary or perpetual, the Apostle expresseth not, the event only showeth that point Not but that Government should be always in the Church, and care of the poor also. As our Saviour saith, john, 12. The poor ye shall have always with you: and then charity inferreth a good consequence, that we should always have a care of the poor, and the Scripture is plentiful in that behalf. Rom. 12. For governors. And so likewise for Governors and care of Government. But whether the like form of Government, and of care for the poor, and the like, or rother the same kind of officers for these things, should be always in the Church and perdetually abiding: that is not here declared. Neither yet that the gifts or offices of Government mentioned in these places, were of any such officers and Elders Governing and not teaching, as our Brethren do pretend they were. Only calvin saith Existimo. etc. I suppose (or think) that the Governors were Seniors chosen out of the common people, which together with the Bishop should rule the censure (or controlment) of manners, and the Discipline that should be exercised. Caluines' interpretation not necessary. This is but Caluines thinking. Who though he were a most excellent man, yet his supposing and thinking, though it may move many to think as he did, yet it bindeth none, but that another man may think otherwise, as Beza also in many things, thinketh otherwise than calvin doth. But when calvin addeth on his thinking, that these words, He that ruleth, let him do it in carefulness, cannot be interpreted otherwise: This is somewhat further than needeth. Can none that ruleth be careful in his ruling, but he must be a ruler chosen from among the common people? & that he must be a controller of manners, and of the Discipline that should be exercised? and that in this Government he must join together with the Bishop? and that he must not meddle with teaching? what necessity is there in these Testimonies, to interpret these Governors to be such Governors? and that it cannot be interpreted otherwise? is there any other here alleged than Caluines bare thinking? and we have herad already how excellent men have thought and interpreted these words otherwise, and alleged their reasons for the same. And I see no reason to the contrary, why they may not be interpreted, both for civil Magistrares in the church and also for Bishops and Pastors that are Teachers: or for whosoever hath any rule and Government committed to him, to dee it heedfully and with carefulness. Now upon these his bare supposal or thinking, and on his only avouching that it can be interpreted no otherwise, which must easily and without any absurdity, may be understood for divers other: calvin concludeth, that therefore every Church from the beginning, had her senate enroled of Godly grave and holy men, that had the jurisdiction of correcting vices. Every Church had not a Sanate Whereas Saint Paul mentioneth no such thing, neither in these places, nor in any other. Neither is there any likelihood, that it was in every Church, if it were in some, or in any, nor Danaeus himself dare go so far, as to every Church, but to some Churches. Danaeus confesseth, that from the beginning there were indeed pastoral Elders in every Church. And he allegeth a reason, saying: Governors. Cap. 10. For the former and cheefer care was in the Churches, that the word of God should be preached. And therefore as pastors, Preachers should be chosen. The 2. kind of Elders (he meaneth these Elders, now in Question) was wont to be appointed in every greater City only, wherein there was a large and populous Church, and a great number of the faithful▪ which is clean contrary both to calvin, and to our Brethren in this Learned discourse, that would have these Elders in every church and Congregation. And much l●sse doth this appear, that it was in every Church even from the very beginning thereof. The Apostles themselves had not the office of Deacons, no not in Jerusalem the Mother Church of all▪ from the beginning. But in continuance the same was added (as the number increasing) there grew need of them. But calvin proceeding on this conclusion, saith: that now it was not an order of one age, meaning it was of more than one. And Seculum an age, is commonly understood for an hundredth years. As though it left not of in so short a space, and hereupon he puts himself for proof, to the declaration of the experience. But what time, or whether any mofull ages, or how many: he himself declareth not, but leaneth us to search. But (for that we have already searched,) we cannot hear so much as of any one age. Age? nay, nor one year, nor one month, nor one week, nor one day, nor one hour, nor one moment, either of any one such Senate or, but of one such man, for any certainty that we have hitherto found. But in all the experience that our Brethren hitherto have declared: we have found either plain proof, or far more probalilitie, that all those whom they have alleged were such Elders, as withal were Ministers of the word. And yet, if all this, that calvin upon his bare thinking runneth on withal, could be avouched: it were not able to bear out his final conclusion, for these his supposed Elders, saying: Therefore this office also of Government is necessary for all ages. Where indeed he might have concluded much better, that it is not necessary for all ages. Yea, although there had been experience of some ages, Churches, This consistory of these elders not necessary. or persons: yet, wanting a rule and commandment for them: what necessity can or aught to be perpetually imposed on all Churches for them, without a manifest oppression of our Christian liberty? And therefore, away with this word necessary (except it be construed in some gentle sense) especially, when as yet we have not certainly found, in the experience of the Doctors and of the Fathers, and of the historiographers, any one age of the Church of Christ, since, nor in the Apostles age, that had any such Ecclesiastical Senate of Governing and not teaching Elders, as they imagine and would obtrude unto us. And sith calvin here referreth that testimony of S Paul, Ephesians 4. verse, 11. to no other, Rom. 12. but to such as were teachers of the word: and S. Paul showeth the reason why those gifts and offices were given, to wit, For the renewing ●f the Saints into the work of the administration of the body of Christ, until we all come into the unity of faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, into a perfect man, and into the measure of a full ripe age, that we should not now be Children any longer, which are carried away with every blast of Doctrine: but following the truth in love, we should wax strong by all things in him that is the head, to wit Christ, in whom the whole body being coupled and compacted through out every joint of the Ministration, according to the act in the measure of every part: maketh the increase of the body, to the edification of itself, by love: Ephes. 4. If all this can be done by the offices there cited, of the which none have perpetuity hereunto, but these twain (as our Brethren divide them, which may be also well contracted unto one) Pastor's and Doctors: either our Governing Elders that our Brethren plead for, must be included within these, and then can they not be such as they plead for (for they would have them neither Pastors and Doctors, but a distinguished office from them both, and not meddling with teaching, which is the chiefest thing in Pastors and Doctors) or else there is no necessity of their perpetuity, nor of necessary helping to the accomplishment of these so necessary ends. If they reply, that the Deacons neither be there mentioned, and yet they be perpetual, and helping hereunto: albeit we shall God willing hereafter see, Of the perpetuity and necessity of Deacons. in their more proper treatise, how they are perpetual and necessary, and how not: yet what letteth, but that, (as at the very first erection of them,) they were not excluded from teaching and preaching? (example, Steven and Philip. Neither can this shift serve, to say, that Philip (besides) was Evangelist, except they show the like also for Steven. And why then may not Deecons be comprehended in S. Paul's partition, Eph. 4. well enough, and so Governors, Interpreters, Healers, Helpers, speakers with diverse languages, which might be all teachers, save only these, not teaching but governing Ecclesiastical Elders. Whose office (as implying a contradiction of teaching and not teaching) is not compatible with the other offices. And if (as Danaeus here saith) the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. governance, that the Apostle useth, Rom. 12. be there general how is it then restrained to such a proper kind of Ecclesiastical Government, of Elders not teachers, more than of teaching elders, or, more than of Deacons? And if Paul (as Danaeus saith) use the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, for these governors: which is either proper to Deacons, or taken generally, for the Ministry: why may it not better comprehend the pastors and teachers, which ordinarily are called Ministers, than these governing elders that are nor teachers? The next proof out of the scripture that Danaeus citeth, (after his former allegation of Jerome ad Rusticum, for the imitation of the jews Synedrion, we shall come to it (God willing) after ward, our Brethren leading us to that argument. But because that standeth rather on a presupposal of an imitation, or continuance of the order in the old law among the jews, than any proof of institution in the new, among the Christians: let us now first, go to those arguments, whereby Danaeus will evict, both manifest example and institution of these Elders, in the new Testament. ca 10. part, Christ. 2. Isagog. (or introduction (he saith: Horum igitur Presbyterorum qui, etc. The offices therefore of these Elders, Danaeus in Christ. Isag. 2. para. ca 10. that rule the manners, is to attend upon the flock, and to watch as well over the doctrine, as over the manners of the Church, and of the faithful that be in the same. Act. 20. ver. 28. 1. Pet. 5. ver. 2. and especially in his parish, that is, in that part of the Church or region, which is committed peculiarly to him. And verily concerning doctrine, lest any Heresy should be brought in, and lest any error should be sowed, and generally lest the substance of the faith should be corrupted. Act. 20. ver. 29.21. ver. 18. which thing may be done▪ and thereupon arise offences, and those grievous. Here are three testimonies of scripture alleged, of which the two former; Act. 20. and 1. Pet. 5. we have seen sufficiently before; The Elders mentioned Act. 20. & 1. Pet 5. were Pastoral Elders by our brethren's own confession. concerning those Elders, especially those that are mentioned, Act. 20. whether they were all Bishops of Ephesus, in the proper sense of the name of Bishop: but there the question was all of such Elders, as, whether they were all equal, or no, yet were they all Pastoral Elders, Teachers, and Ministers of the word and Sacraments. And our Brethren in this Learned Discourse, in their treatise of the Pastor's office have cited already for such Elders only, these testimonies Act. 20. 1. Pet. 5. saying: pag. 19 Besides Doctors, there must be Pastors ordained in every congregation, which have diverse appellations in the scripture, as Ephes. 4. they are called by the name of Pastors, because they ought to feed the several flocks of God's sheep committed to their charge. As appeareth, Danaeus contradiction to our Br. for the Elders in these places. Act. 20.28. 1. Pet. 5.2. they are also called Elders etc. Again page, 21.22. and 23. where at large they urge this, that all the functions of the Elders mentioned, 1. Pet. 5. and Act. 20. is to be employed in such government only, as is feeding, even as a Pastor doth his sheep. And that therefore they are called Bishops, Superintendentes, or Overseers. And yet see how boldly Danaeus citeth teese testimonies, for these governing and not teaching Elders. Wherein, although our Brethren hold the truer opinion, and the text is plain enough, that the elders there mentioned, were only such as meddled with the word: yet the rather to move Danaeus with the judgement of calvin also thereupon: calvin likewise in his Institutions ca 8 sec. 4. treating of the Pastor's office, Caluinu● in Instit. ca 8. sect. 4. saith: Of these and other places which here & every where come to hand, The Elders Act. 20. & P. 5 we may gather also that in the function of the Pastors, these are the principal parts, to declare the Gospel, calvin contrary to Danaeus for the Elders. Act. 20. and to minister the Sacraments But the manner of teaching consisteth not only in public sermons, but pertaineth also to private admonitions. So doth Paul cite the Ephesians to be witnesses, that he shunned none of those things, that were for their profit, but declared & taught them publicly, and by every house, etc. And in the 42. Section he saith: Calv. in Inst. ca 8. sect. 42. And in the Acts is rehearsed, that he called together the Ephesian Elders, whom he himself in his oration nameth Bishops. Hear now is to be observed. Calvine confesseth that the place Act. 20. is only of ministers of the word. calvinus in Act. 20. ver. 17. that hethertoh we have reckoned up none, but those offices, that consist in the ministery of the word. In his Commentary indeed upon the same ver. 17. he saith: Moreover it shall more clearly appear out of the context, that the Seniors are called, not they which were of old age, but they which ruled the Church. But it is usual almost in all tongues, that they should be called Ancients, and Fathers, which were the Governors to rule others, although their Age did not alway: answer thereunto. The Elders Governors Hear he speaketh of governing Elders or Governors; which is the term, whereby our Brethr. signify their signory. But now, what manner of Governors or governing Elders, maketh he them to be? On these words, Vos scitis, etc. ver. 18. Ver. 18. These Elders that were governors and and correctors of manners were also teachers. In this sermon (saith he) Paul chiefly with hereunto, that those whom he had created the Pastors of Ephesus, he might by his example, exhort them to perform their office faithfully. For so is the censure (or correction) of manners made aright, and authority gotten to the doctrine, when the teacher prescribeth nothing with words, the which he hath not before in the deed itself performed. And so he goeth on, applying S. Paul's words in every verse, to Ministers and Pastors. And on the 26. verse, he saith; Moreover this place containeth a brief sum of teaching orderly and well; and he exhorteth the Doctors themselves with a vehement and severe statute, that they should diligently apply their office. And to this duty of the Pastors, in the next verse he apply the sayings of Ezech. 3.18.20. till he come to the 28. verse, Those whom Danaeus calleth governing & not teaching Elders Calvin calleth Pastors, Bishops & feeders with the word. which Danaeus citeth, where he concludeth thus; Since the time they were created Pastors, they are not their own men, but publicly bound to the whole flock. And on these words; The holy Ghost hath made you Bishops. Furthermore (saith he) although from the beginning the L. would have the Ministers of the word chosen by voices: nevertheless he always challengeth to himself the government of the Church, etc. And as he saith; We must briefly note this, of the name of Bishop, that all the Ephesine Elders were of Paul so called: so withal, we must note, that he said before in his Institutions: Whosoever enjoyeth the ministery of the word, he giveth them the title of Bishops. And on these words; To rule the Church: The Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to feed: Elders. 1. Pet. 5. but by an apt similitude it is translated to any regiment. And on the 29. verse; This is verily as it were the perpetual destiny of the Church, that it should be vexed of wolves: wherefore there is never any time of sleeping. Howbeitt, he more, & the more hurtful do break in; the more attentive watches must be made of the Pastors, etc. And on the 30. ver. Then doth the sincerity of the word of God flourish, when the Pastors with a common study do gather disciples unto Christ, etc. And in the 31. That he saith, he warned every one, may be as well referred to the common people, as to the Elders. For sith he had purposed to make his sermon common to the whole Church: he speaketh as though the whole body were present. Notwithstanding, if any had rather restrain it to the order of the Pastors, etc. So that in all this assembly of these Elders, he mentioneth still none other, but such as were Pastors and Ministers of the word and sacraments. This place therefore, Act. 20. (be it spoken by Danaeus leave) is merely abused, for the proof of any Senate of not teaching Elders And the same answer serveth to the other testimony, 1. Pet. 5.2. Our Breath. sestimonie against Danaeus for the Elders 1. Pet. 5. which likewise our Breath. join in this learned discourse, to their former testim●●●e for Pastors only: pag. 19.22.25. & 32. And the like doth calvin (with all other interpreters new and old) saying both in his Instit. ca 13. Sect. 7. calvinus in Instit. ca 13. sect. 7. Peter therefore while he warneth the Pastors of their office, exhorteth them so to feed the flock, that they exercise not a dominion over the Clergy. By which name he signifieth the inheritance of God, that is, the people of the faithful. And in his Comm. While he would exhort the Pastors to their duty, he noteth chiefly three things, For the Elders 1. Pe. 5. that are wont much to hinder them, that is to wit, slothfulness, desire of getting gain & licentiousness of governing. True it is, that he afterward saith upon the name Elders: By this name he designeth Pastors, and whosoever were appointed to the government of the Church: but they called them Elders or Seniors for honours sake, not that all were old in age, but because they were chief chosen out of old men. For age hath for the most part, Even the general name of ecl. Elders for governors exemplified by teachers. more wisdom, gravity & experience. Howbeit because now & then (as is said in the Greek proverb) The hoar hear is not wisdom: and there are young men found that are more fit, such as Timothy was: it is received in use, that they also are called Elders, after they are chosen into the order. When as Peter likewise nameth himself an Elder, it appeareth that this name was common, the which also is manifest more clearly in very many places. Furthermore by this title he getteth authority to himself: as though he said, that of his own right he warned the Pastors because he himself was one of them. For this mutual liberty ought to between them that are Colleagues. Here he saith that the name of Elder is a common name, not only for old age, but of dignity. And he saith, that the Apostle designeth in this name, Pastors and whosoever are appointed to the regiment of the Church: but doth he not still restrain the understanding of it in this place, to such Governors only, as either are Pastoral elders or to such teachers as himself (although he were also an Apostle) was one in the same office of this Eldership, The office of their Eldership consisting in feeding. a Colleague among them? And what was their office of this Eldership that he requireth of them? But even that which followeth in the second verse by Danaeus cited: feed so much as li●th in ●ou the flock of God. And what was the food wherewith these Elders should feed them so much as lay in them? Any other than the doctrine of God's word? Hereupon (saith calvin) we gather what the name of Elder doth import, to wit, that it containeth in it the office of feeding. The Pope createth his Elders far to an other end, that is to wit, that they should daily offer up Christ. In their ordaining there i● no mention of feeding. Let us therefore remember to discern the order of Christ, from the confusion of the Pope, even as it were the light from darkness. The definition also of the word ought to be holden. Because the flock of Christ cannot be fed, but with pure doctrine which alone is the spiritual fodder. Wherefore Pastors are not either dumb gho●●●s, or such as sprinkle their forged tales, as it were deadly poison to kill the souls. And upon this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; I doubt not (saith he) but that Peter would express the office and name of a bishopric: it may also cut off other places of scripture be gathered, The words of Peter spoken to feeders, haled to such as are not feeders. that these 2. Bishop and Elder, are names betokening one thing. He chargeth them therefore, how they should rightly exercise the Pastoral office. Who seeth not hereby, that calvin in this place restraineth the name of Elder to such only as were feeders of the people with the word, nor that Peter in that place, speaketh to any other officers? And to what purpose should he charge those, to feed the people with the doctrine of the word, that were no feeders, and meddled not at all with teaching? So that this testimony of Peter, 1. Pet. 5. maketh nothing for any such eccl. Elders governing the Church and not teaching, if rather it make not clean against them, being such ecclesiastical Elders as be only dominium exercentes in Clerum; exercising government over the Clergy, and do not pascere nor meddle at all with feeding or teaching the people. As for that which Danaeus gathereth on these two testimonies, Act. 20. and 1. Pet. 5. that the office of these Elders was to attend and watch both over the doctrine and over the manners of the Church and of the faithful that are therein, and especially in his parish, that is, in that part of the Church that is peculiarly committed unto him: in what thing the attendance and watching of the Elders consisted, in these foresaid places, we have fully seen; Not only (as Danaeus saith) over the doctrine and over the manners: but as themselves expressing the example of the manners: so also feeding with the doctrine so much as in them did lie. If they say, that is nothing at all, because they were but Controllers and Overseers of others, and themselves meddled not with teaching: then were they not such Elders as S. Paul and S. Peter do prescribe, but what meaneth Danaeus by these words, his parish? The several parishes of the Elders. Which he expoundeth to be that part of the Church that peculiarly was committed to him? Was there diverse parishes in those great Cities that he speaketh of, where he supposeth a Senate of these Elders were, and that every one of them had a part of the City assigned to his oversight, which was called a Parish? And that all these Elders of several parishes, had some one great and mother Church, wherein all these Elders held their Senate, signory, or Consistory? And can this also be proved out of these two places, or out of the scripture, that the Apostles ordained any such Senate of governing and not teaching Elders, of several parishes? If it could, how would this agree with these our Brethren, that would have a Senate, signory, or Consistory of these Elders in every parish Church and Congregation, except they would bring the whole City (as London) but to one Congregation? But whereupon gathereth Danaeus this? Upon these testimonies, Act. 20. or 1▪ Pet. 5? No, he citeth them after in the conclusion of his former assertion. For when he had said: As Daneus reporteth Sozomenus, there was but one Elder in every parish. the second kind of Elders was wont to be ordained in every great City only, wherein there was a large and populous Church, and a great number of the faithful: he proveth it thus; for every part of the City, and of the Church, as it were a parish, had his own Elder. As it may be gathered. ex Herm. Sozome. lib. 1. cap. 8. and the history of the ancient Church. These last words, the history of the ancient Church, are too general. When the places are particularly quoted, they may be better examined. And we have examined a good many already. But we could find no such second kind of Elders. And I am half a frayed before hand, that we shall find none even in this place. And for trial, let us start aside, and see it. The title of the Chapter showeth the argument: An enumeration of the noble acts of Constantine, Eccl. hist. Hermiae Sozomeni li. 1. cap. 2. both in purchasing the liberty of the Christians, and in building of temples, and other things beneficial to the commonweal. In which chapter among other matters, he saith: he builded also in the Palace a Church, and he made a tent expressing the figure of a Church, the which he used to carry about with him when he marched in battle against his enemies: to this end, that a Church should not be wanting to him nor to the army, while he abode in the wilderness. In which Church they should praise God, they should call upon him with their prayers, Sozomenus for these Elders. and receive the holy mysteries. Nam * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Sacerdotes & Diaconi, etc. For the Priests & Deacons which according to the institution of the Church should perform these functions, did continually follow the Tabernacle. Ex eo tempore militaeres Romanorum ordines qui iam vocantur Numeri, singuli sibi Tabernaculum separatum construxerunt, hahuerúntque secum * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. & Sacerdotes & Diaconos, ad rem divinam faciendam designatos. From that time forth the military orders of the Romans, which are now called the Numbers, every one of them builded a several Tabernacle, and had both Priests and Deacons with them, appointed to execute the divine service. This is all that Sozomenus hath of this matter, and is not here a fair proof, that in every greater City, wherein there was a fair & populous Church, & magnus fidelium numerus, and a great number of the faithful, every part of the City and Church had his Elder, whose office was to attend upon the flock, and to watch both over the doctrine and over the manners of the Church, and of the faithful that are therein, and especially in his Parish, that is, in that part of the Church that is committed unto him. Indeed there is mention made of some like words, that Danaeus gathereth. Danaeus miscollection of Sozomenus words. Sozomenus telleth, how Constantine made a Tabernacle or Tent expressing the figure of a Church: thereupon Danaeus belike gathereth these words; An ample and a populous Church: except he gather that of the words before; As for that that pertaineth to the holy Temples, they that were large enough, were repaired: other were raised higher & made brother, not without increase of stateliness. Sozomenus telleth, how this Tabernacle was carried about in the wilderness, while Constantine marched against his enemies: and Danaeus gathereth belike of this Wilderness, a great City. Except also he gather that of the words before: Moreover, out of the land which was tributary in every City, he took the rated tribute, that was wont to be paid to the Exchequer (or Treasury) and distributed it to the Churches & to the Clergy: which gift he enacted by Law to be ratified for ever. Sozomenus telleth of the military orders of the Romans: and Danaeus belike gathereth thereupon, the flock of the faithful. Sozomenus telleth, that these military orders of the Romans were those which were then called; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Numeri, Numbers: and Danaeus belike gathereth thereupon, that there was Magnus fidelium numerus, A great number of the faithful. Sozomenus telleth, that From that time forth every one of these military Orders builded a several Tabernacle to themselves: and Danaeus belike gathereth thereupon these words, Every part or parish of the City and of the Church. Sozomenus telleth, how they had these 2. eccl. orders, Sozomenus mistaken, Sacerdotes & Diaconos, sacred Priests & Deacons with them: & Danaeus belike gathereth here upon, Secundum genus Presbyterorum, the second kind of Elders, Priests, or Presbyters. Sozomenus telleth, how these did follow the Tabernacles, and were designed according to the Institution of the Church, to execute the divine service and perform these functions; to wit, to praise God, to call upon him with prayers, and to minister the Sacraments: and Danaeus hereupon belike doth gather, that their office was to attend the flock, & to watch both over the doctrine and over the manners os the Church, and of the faithful that are therein, each one in the parish, part, or region committed to him. Verily, except Danaeus gather these his collections, on these words of Sozomenus (for they be the words that me thinks come nearest unto his) I know not on what words else, he can make this collection. But to construe Danaeus to the best: (as he is our Reverend Brother, & excellent learned Father in the Lord: so, Bonus aliquando dormitat Homerus,) he overtrusted and followed too much some others ill collection, and considered not the place himself, and so might easily be abused. Which lest we also in so weighty a matter might be, The lack of through searching, the cause of our Br. mistaking. especially on the trust of so notable a man (as, I am afraid, too many of our Brethren be, running too much on the credit of such a credible party): it standeth us upon (craving evermore pardon of him and all our betters) to search better the places, ourselves, that are alleged; and to see, whether they be rightly alleged, yea, or no. If yea: then humbly, (so far forth as is requisite) to yield unto them, be the party never so mean, that doth allege them. If no: then modestly to dissent from them, and not allow them, be the parties otherwise never so learned. Christ biddeth us, to Search, yea, the very Scriptures: and so shall we find whether they be well or ill alleged. And the Baeroeans are even therefore commended, for that daily they searched the Scriptures, to see, whether those things were so, Act. 17.11. that S. Paul had preached. And then must our Br. be content to give us leave, if we examine these testimonies by the originals, which in this place also when we have done, (besides a number of other gross escapes,) what is here for the proof of these Consistory governing & not teaching Elders? The Elders that Sozomenus mentioneth were teaching elders. Is this Elder now become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Sacerdos, a sacred Priest, the executer of the divine service, & a minister of the holy mysteries? Well then, since we find not as yet these Elders here; let us return again to Danaeus search for them in the scripture. The third testimony of Scripture that here he cited, was Act. 21.18. Danaeus testimony for for these elders. Act. 21.18. And when we were come to jerusalem (saith S. Luke, verse 17.) the brethren did receive us gladly. But the next day Paul entered in with us unto james; and all the Elders were assembled. Act. 21.18. Hear are again Elders named, and an assembly of them all at jerusalem. But whether these Elders were only governors and not meddlers with teaching of the word, that is not mentioned. Neither is there any circumstance, that should incline to such opinion of them, but rather to the clean contrary. The probabilities that the Elders mentioned Act. 21.18. were teachers. calvin saith: out of this place we may gather, that which we had in the 15. chapter, that so often as any weighty business was to be treated upon, the Seniors were wont to come together, that the consultation might be the more orderly composed without the multitude. We shall afterward see in their order that the people were admitted. Howbeit, after that the Seniors had had their Innermore Counsel. Sith therefore these Seniors consultation with the Apostles, was not only about manners and discipline, but about principal points of the substance of doctrine: and withal, that calvin referreth us to these Seniors (or Elders) in the counsel holden at jerusalem, Act. 15. where calvin said before, as he saith here, that all the Church was not gathered: sed eos qui doctrina & judicio pollebant, & qui ex ratione officij, huius causae legitimi erant judices: but those that excelled in doctrine and judgement, and they that by reason of their office, were the lawful judges of this cause: what likelihood is there, that these Elders meddled not with teaching the doctrine, which excelled in the doctrine, and in judgement, and by their offices were the lawful judges, in the decision of the controversies of doctrine? But since the oration that is made unto Paul, Act. 21. is by S. Luke set down in the name of them all: albeit some one among them spoke it in their names: These Elders were exhorters of Paul. and they were such as of whom calvin saith, upon these their words to Paul: Thou seest (brother) how many thousands, etc. Moreover, they exhort him, that taking upon him a solemn vow, he should purge himself, etc. There is no doubt, but that zeal of the Law was faulty: and verily the Elders do sufficiently declare, that they liked it not. For although they do not openly condemn it, neither yet complain thereon more sharply: nevertheless, because they separate themselves from their affection, secretly they confess that they do err. If it had been a zeal according to knowledge, They were such as from whom knowledge should begin. it ought to have begun from them. But they strive not for the Law itself, nor they pretend just reverence thereof, nor they subscribe unto them that were zealous of the same, as they call them: therefore they insinuate that they think otherwise, & that they like not the people's superstition. But this overthwarteth it, They were such as were not of the people, but distinct from them. that they say Paul was burdened with a false infamy. Furthermore, when they exact of him a satisfaction, they seem to nourish that zeal, etc. And again: Neither verily was the liberty of Paul unknown to the Elders, when as therefore they knew the matter well, only this they will, Act. 21. & 15. that it should be witnessed to the unskilful and rude, that Paul purposed nothing less, than that he should bring the jews to the contempt of the law. Wherefore they look not upon the bare matter, but knowing what was the people's judgement of Paul, by reason of the malicious backbitings: they desire to remedy it. Although I know not whether they required this of Paul more importunately than was meet. But hereupon it appeareth, how preposterous is the credulity (or light belief) of men, in taking hold of slanders: and how stiffly an ill opinion once rashly conceived, cleaveth fast. There is no doubt but that james and his colleagues did their endeavour to defend the fame of Paul. And again; in the mean season we see how modestly the Seniors behaved themselves in nourishing concord: while in good time they prevent the people's offence, except in that they bear peradventure too much with their weakness, in exacting a vow of Paul. But this moderation is to be kept in the Church, that the Pastors should indeed excel in authority: but they should not rule proudly, nor despise the residue of the body. For the distinction of their orders, which is the bond of peace, ought not to be the cause of discord. What can be more clear than this, that these Elders which spoke these things, and took this authority in these matters upon them, were Pastors? As calvin in plain words applieth all their doings unto Pastors. And yet this more appeareth in his observation of that which followeth on the 23. verse: Do this therefore that we say unto thee, we have four men which have made a vow, etc. Although it may be, These elders Act. 21. are here plainly called Doctors. that these (he meaneth the four men) were as yet novices & that therefore their faith as yet were tender, and scarce well framed, whereupon the Doctors (or teachers) suffered them to perform the vow, that by ignorance they had rashly vowed. In these words, the Elders that before he called james and his colleagues, and of their doings gathered the rule and authority of the Pastors: he plainly here calleth Doctors and teachers. And therefore what kind of Elders these were under james and the Apostles at Jerusalem, we need seek no further, it is manifest they were not governors that meddled not with teaching, but with oversight of doctrine, and with correction of manners and discipline only: for as they were teachers, and here taught, though not so well: so, their chiefest meddling was with teaching. And that their selves testify in the conclusion of their Oration, saying: For as touching those of the Gentiles that have believed, ●e have written, decreeing that they should keep no such thing, etc. If our Brethren reply, that that decree went in the name not only of the Apostles and Elders, but also of the brethren, which in the verse before, Act. 15.22. he calleth the whole Church: and yet, we cannot conclude hereon, that therefore the whole Church were teachers: calvin (referring us to that, which he noted on that decree) saith, on the 22. ver, Act. 15. Not without the singular grace of God was that tempest ceased, that the cause being well discussed, all should descend into the consent of the true doctrine. The modesty also of the common people is gathered hereupon, that after they had permitted the judgement unto the Apostles, & to the residue of the Doctors (or teachers): then also the people subscribed unto their decree. The Apostles also on the other side, gave a show of their equity, because they established nothing concerning the common cause of all the godly, but the people being admitted thereunto. For, verily, of the pride of the Pastors this tyranny hath sprung, that those things which pertain to the common state of the whole Church, have been subject (the people being thrust out) unto the will, that I might not say unto the lust of a few men. But the Apostles and the Elders did prudently decree, that judas and Silas should be sent, to the end the matter might be less suspected. Concerning this complaint we have already answered: and let them give the people no more than the notice and approbation, so that the debating and determining be referred to the authority of those that succeed the Apostles and the Elders, that are Doctors and Pastors, meddling only with such matters as are these, not with the affairs and authority of Princes: and we can be content to afford the people no less, being such modest and godly people as these were. But our question is now, what were these Elders? (For here are but three sorts reckoned up, the Apostles, the Elders, and the whole Church, or the brethren. Forsooth (still saith calvin) the Doctors and the Pastors. And for other kind of Elders governing and not teaching among them, we hear as yet of none. But Danaeus citeth another testimony out of the Scripture, Danaeus testimony for those Elders. for proof of these Elders, saying: For they ought to have that admonition of Paul always before their eyes, that if there be any thing honest, right and holy before GOD, they should inculcate (or often urge) the same unto the faithful. Phi. 4. verse. 8. and it ought to take place in God's Church. Phil. 4. v. 8. This testimony is so little serving for these governing and not teaching Elders, that except they would have us think, the Epistle was only, or especially written unto such Elders: I cannot see how it is more appliable unto them, than unto any others, or how it can be proved hereupon, that there were any such Elders in that Church. First, the Epistle itself is written to none such, as appeareth by the first verse: Paul and Timothy the servants of jesus Christ, unto all the Saints in Christ jesus, which are at Philippus, with the Bishoppos and the Deacons. Phil. 4.8. Here is none of these Elders not meddling with teaching, named. For although Beza and the Geneva Bible would include them in the name of Bishops, which is very hard: notwithstanding sith we have heard, how calvin (even where he taketh all these names confusedly) doth say in his Institutions, Cap. 8. Sec. 42. calvinus in institus. cap. 8. sec. 42. But as concerning Bishops, and Elders, and Pastors, and Ministers, in that I have called them without difference: I did it by the use of the Scripture, which confoundeth these terms. For whosoever enjoy the ministery of the word, unto them it attributeth the title of Bishops. And hereto he addeth this testimony for proof, Phil. 1. a. 1. therefore, howsoever they would include Elders here in the name of Bishops, yet can they understand no such Elders, as Danaeus and our Brethren plead for, but such only as enjoy the ministery of the word. But what is there in this testimony, Phil. 4.8. that should be properly pertaining to an Elders office? Phil. 4.8. That which remaineth (Brethren) whatsoever things are true, whatsoever are weighty, whatsoever are righteous, whatsoever are pure, whatsoever are honest, if there be any virtue, if there be any praise: think of these things which ye have learned, and have received, and have heard, and have seen in me. Do these things, and the God of peace shall be with you. Can any thing be gathered out of these words, that is peculiar to an Ecclesiastical Elders office? calvin saith: General exhortations follow, which are stretched to the whole life. And yet if they were peculiar to Elders, and that they should do, all that which they learned, and received, and heard, and saw in Saint Paul: When calvin saith, By this repetition of words he signifieth, that he was continual in preaching these things, as though he should say, this was my doctrine, this was my tradition, this was my speech among you: And on these words: Ye have seen in me: but this is the first thing in a preacher, that he should not only speak with his mouth, but with his life, and with his goodness of his life get credit to his doctrine: Paul therefore worthily getteth authority to his exhortation thereupon, that he was a guide and master of virtues with his life, no less than with his mouth: And therefore if this be spoken to Ecclesiastical Elders, and if they should do the like action: how should they not be such Elders, as taught not only with their lives, but with their mouths also, exhorting and preaching the doctrine? But what need better testimony, than Danaeus against himself? When he saith: These Elders should inculcate this saying of Saint Paul unto the faithful? For, what else is this inculcation, but their often teaching of the people, the things contained in that sentence? But Danaeus (belike not perceiving how he confutes himself) proceedeth, saying: 2. Tim. 3. Danaeus other allegations for Elders all which also are clean against him. But these Elders ought to watch both privately by every house, and publicly in the assembly of the Church. Act. 20. verse. 20. Act. 20. Augustine there fore in his fifty Homilies, Homily the 5. anc 7. teacheth, Aug. in hom. 50. hom. 5. & 7. that that saying of isaiah, Cry, cease not: pertaineth not only to the Bishops, but also to the Elders. For, when many mischiefs may be done at home: and they that corrupt the faithful are wont also to enter into houses, as Paul saith, 2. Tim. 3. ve. 6. It is the office of them that watch, to look also house by house, lest either the good doctrine or the holy manners be corrupted. But of those things that may be done amiss in houses, there is example, 1. Pet. 3. verse 3. But of those that edify evil public, there is example, 1. Cor. 14 verse. 34. and 35. Not one of these places mentioneth any such Elders, as are Ecclesiastical governors and not teachers, neither can they be haled, but with violence, to them. The 20. of the Acts, we have seen and seen again to the full, how it is all of such Elders, as were teachers of the word. The place in Augustine we have likewise seen. And that of isaiah is so apparent for teachers and preachers of the word, that I a● even ashamed that so learned a man should (of all places) allege that, Esa. 58. for not teaching Elders, which speaketh of such crying out, exalting the voice like a trumpet, and telling the people of their sins. As for this, 2. Tim. 3. verse. 6. wherein Saint Paul having described the wicked hypocrites of these later days, that should trouble the Church of God, he saith: For of these there are, that craftily enter into houses, and lead women captive, laden with sins, the which are lead with diverse lusts, always learning, etc. Whereupon saith calvin, You would say, that Paul here of purpose painted out a lively portraiture of Monkery. But to omit the name of Monks: the notes themselves with the which Paul setteth out the false and counterfeit Doctors or teachers, are open enough. Their insinuation or creepings into households, their baits in taking women, their unhonest flattery, their leading them about by diverse superstitions. It behoveth us to mark diligently these notes, if we desire to discern between the unprofitable drones, and the good ministers of Christ. Here calvin would have us diligently to mark the difference, between these false and counterfeit teachers, and the good Ministers of Christ: Difference of the false teacher and true teacher not between them and these Elders, that would have Ecclesiastical government, and not meddle with teaching. For me thinks, they rather seem to resemble those Monks, than any Elders, that Saint Paul there would have, to oppose themselves against these false teachers. For who should better set himself against them, than a Bishop or an Elder that is a good Minister of Christ, and a true teacher? And therefore he willeth Timothy (being a teaching Elder,) to take notice of them, saying, verse. 1. But know thou this, that in the last days, perilous times shall approach, men shall be lovers of themselves, etc. And having described these wicked teachers: he stirreth up Timothy to oppose himself against them, vers. 10. saying: But thou hast attained my doctrine, institution, purpose, faith, tolerance, love, patience, etc. And here upon saith calvin: This argument also doth he use to stir up Timothy, that he shall not come forth into the combat, a rude and unskilful young soldier: being such an one as Paul himself had long time trained up in his discipline. Neither only is doctrine handled, for the things that he reckoneth up together, do add no small weight, insomuch that in this sentence he doth paint out unto us the lively Image of a good Doctor (or teacher) to wit, such an one as informeth and instructeth his Disciples, not only with his speech, but openeth his breast also after a sort unto them, that they may understand, that the things which he teacheth, he teacheth them even as he thinketh. He●e then are these two lively Images, the one of the false teacher, entering into houses, and corrupting them: the other of the good teacher, opposing himself against the false teacher. But between good teacher and false teacher of these houses; where is this Elder that is no teacher? Is there any thing either in the text, or that calvin, or any other good or bad interpreter allegeth, that makeeths for him? As for the example, 1. Pet. 3. verse. 3. Danaeus testimony 1. Pet. 3. maketh nothing for Eccl. Elders that are not teachers. That things may be done amiss at home: is nothing for proof, that any of these Elders, Ecclesiastical governors and not teachers, or that any their signory, should come into men's houses, and there take view of their wives apparel, and control it. Only Saint Peter (in giving this sober and general exhortation unto women, saying: Whose attire let it not be outward in folding or breidring of their hair, in decking themselves with gold and ornature of vestiments●s) showeth how the grave and discreet Minister or Preacher, may give private or public exhortation, by the examples in the word of God, when he seeth a fault herein. But not that he hath authority to go into their houses, to oversee with what apparel they trim themselves withal. But whatsoever the Minister may do, what is this to these Elders, that would be master controllers and rulers of every body, men and women, even in their own houses, but not teachers of them? The other place, 1. Corinth. 14.34. and 35. for the women's part, Danaeus testimonies 1. Cor. 14.34. & 35. are likewise nothing for Eccl. Elders not teachers we have méetelie well perused already. As for governing Elders not teachers, to be their controllers, neither those verses, nor all the Chapter mentioneth any. And why should they not be controllers over the men's faults there mentioned, as well as over the women's? But there is none such at all, that the Apostle there speaketh of, other than the ordinary teachers to whom the public reprehension did belong. james. 5.14. for these Elders. Which in the former cited Chapter, 2. Tim. 3.16. and 4.2. he maketh to pertain unto the teacher and Minister of the word of God, and not to any governing Elder not teaching, who may better be called an unpreaching Prelate, than any of the Popish Bishops. Especially since Beza and the Geneva Bible giveth them the term of Bishops also, besides this of Presbyter, Priest, or Elder. Danaeu● testimony for the●e Elders out of ja. 5. and 14. But Danaeus hath yet one other testimony for them, saying: But the Elders ought to watch both over the hole and over the sick, and afflicted by all manner of mean. For it is the office of the Elder to comfort the sick, and to pray for them, & for other godly also afflicted. james. 5 verse. 5.14. The fifth verse hath no mention at all of any Elders, nor meddleth with any watching over▪ either hole or sick. Except these Elders would be such, as of whom he saith: Ye have lived in pleasure on the earth, and in wantonness: ye have nourished your hearts as in a day of slaughter. I hope yet better than so, of their unteaching Elders. But in the 14. ver. there indeed is mention of better Elders. Where the Apostle saith: Is any sick among you? let him call f●r the Elders of the Church, and let them pray for him, etc. Here the Elders of the Church are named. But whether these Elders were such, as meddled not with the word and Sacraments, but only with the discipline and government of the Church: there is no mention at all made by the Apostle. I know here what calvin saith, I comprehend generally all those (saith he) that were set over the Church to govern it. Caluines' opinion for these Elders D●naeus contrary to calvin. For not only the Pastors were called Elders, but those that were chosen out of the common people, as it were censors or controllers, to defend the discipline. For every Church had as it were her Senate, chosen out of grave men, and of approved integrity. But because the manner was to choose chief them that were endued with more excellent gifts, therefore he biddeth them call for the Elders, as in whom most of all, the force and grace of the holy Ghost showed forth itself. This is Caluines' opinion for these Elders. Howbeit this is but his judgement, and still consisteth all on this mere presupposalll, that every Church had a Senate of such Elders. But we need no further confutation of that presupposal, than Danaeus own testimony, that citeth this place of james for these Elders. For (as we have heard) Danaeus, on the other side of the leaf said before: The second kind of Elders was wont to be ordained in every greater City only, in the which there was an ample and populous Church, and a gr●at number of the faithful. Which if it were true but even so far forth, then is Caluines saying not true, that every Church had as it were her Senate of these Elders. Albeit, they both agree herein, james. 5. that Saint james meant such kind of governing Elders as were not teachers. But how can we make that good in Danaeus, if every Church had not such Elders. And yet in every Church some sickened: but these Elders, by Danaeus testimony were in few Churches: for there were but few such greater Cities and ample populous Churches, wherein great multitudes of the faithful were: Aretius' judgement of what Elders james speaketh. and therefore by Danaeus own witness against himself, this rule of Saint james stretcheth not unto these Elders, except in such few places, where he supposeth they were: though he have not, nor can prove it. But rules (especially those that be general touching all men) are not made for few places. And therefore this rule of Saint james was not for any such Elders. So that, much better than both these (in my simple opinion) is Aretius his judgement upon this place. Is there any sick among you? let him call for the Elders of the Church. The third place (saith he) is of the care of those that are sick in the assembly (or company) of the faithful. But he teacheth, that the manner of healing and comforting the sick, aught to be made for the health of the sick, with the fruit also of them that stand about him. Concerning the sick party, he ought to call for the Elders of the Church, that is, of his company or assembly: at this day we should call it▪ Viciniae Seniores aliqu●s, some Seniories (or Elders) of the neighbourhood (or of the street or village near adjoining) with some Minister of the Church, among whom some Physician may have a room. For neither do I here take the Seniors or Elders to be those anointed only and shaven, which are sacrificers and Monks, neither also an Ecclesiastical Senate, quem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quadam, whom of a certain ill zeal, some go about to represent. But I take the Seniors of the church to be grave and godly men in the whole assembly. The Elders that james speaketh to be of no one certain office either Ecclesiastical or lay persons. Whose godliness I know (or like of) whether they be lay men, or they be in the ministery, or also they be Physicians, yea, or else otherwise. To conclude, I call the godly and sound hearted the ancient men. For in these is greater experience of things, greater force of comforting, greater affection also, of having compassion, and more sound counsels than in young men. Thus plainly and simply, saith Aretius of these Elders, that S. james would have the sick party, to send for his elderlie neighbours & friends, men of gravity and experience, that can give the sick good counsel. As for governors of discipline, or controllers of manners, or an Ecclesiastical Senate to be sent for, and to come to every man's house when he lieth sick and in danger of death: what use is there of them? Whereas of his acquaintance and good neighbours there may be great use, especially of the Pastoral Elders. And therefore Hemingius saith well, Accerset Praesbyteros tanquam animae medicos, Let him send for the Elders, as for the Physicians of the soul, to give him some spiritual consolation out of the word of God, of the which then he shall have most need, and to strengthen and confirm his faith and hope in Christ, to move him to repentance, to patience, and to call upon God for the forgiveness of sins in his life passed, to persuade him to a readiness to forsake the world and this transitory life, and to desire (according to Gods will) to be dissolved, and to be with Christ, & to call upon him while his strength and understanding, and memory serveth him) to dispose of his worldly goods, and make his will, and with the assembly to make the public prayers to God for him: who fit to do all these things, than the Elders that are Ministers of the word? Besides, that calvin maketh this anointing of him with oil, Caluines own testimony, that these Elders were Ministers of a temporary Sacrament & so teachers. in the name of the Lord, to have been a temporary Sacrament, saying: Verily I grant, that it was used for a Sacrament of the Disciples of Christ (for I assent not unto them, that think it was a medicine) but even as the verity of this sign endured not but for a time, I say, the sign was likewise temporary. If then this were a Sacrament serving for that time: it seemeth so much the more, that those Elders than were teachers, since the action of making the prayers over him, and of the anointing of him with oil is attributed to those Elders. For, the public or solemn prayers, especially the ministration of the Sacraments in the Church of Christ, doth principally, and (as our Brethren themselves say) doth only belong to him, that is a teacher and Minister of the word. And that it can be no better than sacrilege, to separate the ministration of preaching of the word, from the Sacraments etc. and that a word or writing may be available without a seal, but never, a seal without a writing, page. 61. And that, where is no Preacher of the word, there ought to be no Minister of the Sacraments. Furthermore, it appertaineth to the duty to make prayers, etc. page. 6●. Sith therefore these things are here ascribed to the doings of these Elders of the Church, that the sick party is willed to send for: is it not yet more likely than any of all these opinions, that by these Elders are meant pastoral Elders? Otherwise, how would not our Br. own words in this learned Discourse, beat down Danaeus, saying? Therefore in this behalf, we have had a great default so long time, Our Bre. discoursers confute Danaeus. to commit the administration of the Sacraments to those men, who not only have been known to be unable, but also have been forbidden to preach the word. page. 61. And what other were these Elders (by their description of them) but such as meddled not with preaching the word, nor it pertained at all unto their office, but only government of discipline, & controlment of manners? And yet see now when they can find them no where, rather than they should not be found, they will call them to the making of the prayers over the sick, Act. 14.23. and to the ministration of that temporary Sacrament. Yea, our Bre. these Learned Discoursers their selves in plain words, page. 22. ascribe this saying of james, to the action and office of the Pastors. Since therefore, what kind of Elders these were (mentioned jam. 5.14.) the text expressly (other than by these conjectures) nameth not: nor it is agreed upon among these learned men: What firm argument can be gathered hereon, for the proof of these governing & not teaching elders? If not rather (as we have seen) far more probability every way to the clean contrary, that they were teaching Elders. And now, seeing that, as neither before in the authority, proof, or place in any of the acts or examples of the Apostles▪ we find any evident example, or plain precept, or institution in the church of Christ, set forth in the holy Scriptures, of these Ecclesiastical Elders, governing the discipline, & controlling the manners of the Church, but not meddling with teaching nor preaching of the word and doctrine, nor ministering of the Sacraments. Let us now return from them to our Br. learned discourse, if they perhaps have yet any better proof after all these, for the authorizing and setting up amongst us, the Consistories & Segnories of these governing & not teaching Elders. We have heard how our Br. have alleged the 14. of the Acts. ver. 23. upon the which we have seen Caluines judgement to the contrary, Our brethr. return for proof of these elders to the ●ormer allegation. Act. 14.23. that the Elders there mentioned were only pastoral Elders. We have heard also their allegation, 1. Tim. 5.17. and of the three ●●ings, that (they say) we may learn thereon, & that the same testimony inferreth none of all those three things And hereupon, because calvin on the same testimony citeth Ambrose (which is cited also of Beza) I have both examined the place in Ambrose, and the other allegations of Beza out of Cyprian, and a number of other Fathers and histories for the search of these Elders. Which not yet finding, I have returned to the Scripture, to search what places any other of our Bre namely Beza, calvin, and Danaeus (which chiefly write upon this matter) have alleged. And not yet finding any sufficient proof of them, till some other of our Brethren shall bring better proof, or prove these places better, I am now come again where we began, to the 14. of the Acts, verse. 23. because our Bre. here will further yet again review the same. And especially in the place before alleged for election, The learned Dis. Pag. 85. & 86. there is great reason to lead us to think, that the Elders for government, are as well understood, as the other for doctrine, because it is written in the same place, That after they had ordained them Elders in every congregation by election: as having set the Churches in perfect order▪ (which could not be, except they had established discipline so well as doctrine) they committed them to the Lord, in whom they believed. Act. 14.23. This great reason is nothing but our brethren's over great presupposal, that except there were such Elders ordained, Bridges. there were no perfect order set, Moderating these Elders. nor discipline established in the churches. Which great reason lieth all on the great and common fallation, Pe●itio principij, reasoning on that, as on a great and granted principle, which is a great and principal question. They might well have set the churches in perfect order, & have established discipline in them, without ordaining any Consistory or signory, of such Elders or governors as meddle not with teaching. For what would it have hurt the perfection of order, & establishment of discipline in the churches, if all the Elders that they ordained, had been teachers to (as calvin saith they were)? Albeit Saint Luke in that place mentioneth not of any perfection of orders, or of discipline established at all. But only saith the text in this 23. verse here mentioned: The text mentioneth not that the Apostles set the Churches in perfect order & established discipline. And ordaining with the hands, Elders unto them (Church) by Church, making prayers with fastings, they commended them unto the Lord, on whom they believed. Did Saint Paul in all the Churches where he went preaching (yea, though some of them were famous Churches, and in some of them he lay long, as at Corinth) set the churches in perfect order, and established discipline in them as well as doctrine? How then doth he write unto the Corinthians of so many things, that (as it plainly appeareth by his reproving, teaching and ordering of them) were not before set in such order, nor established? No nor yet all things (as concerning the perfection of order, and establishment of discipline) were contained in his Epistles afterwards written unto them, but that he saith: he would ●et an order of other things at his coming to them. 1. Cor. 11.34. which we expound not (with the adversaries of the Gospel) for matter of doctrine, but for order and discipline And therefore it is not so great a reason, as should lead our Brethren to think that Paul and Barnabas tarrying so small a while in every place, that then they went unto, did set such perfect orders and establish discipline in those meaner churches. But since our Br. here do urge this place no further, than that there is great reason to lead us so to think: and we see also some reason, to lead us to think the contrary: whether theers or ours be greater, yea, whether theirs be any great or small, and whether calvin himself be not of force to overrule this so slender a reason of theirs, saying, Not of some among them, but of all of them. I interpret Elders in this place, to be those, to whom the office of teaching was enjoined: Which interpretation if it be true, then whether by any reason they could be such Elders, as were governors only, and not teachers. I refer to the readers, yea, to our brethren's own) indifferent judgement, and proceed to their second point of moderating these Elders. The second point for moderation of the Elders authority, in such sort that their sentence may be the sentence of the Church, The learned Dis. Pag. 86. is this: that when the Consistory hath travailed in examining of causes pertaining to Ecclesiastical discipline, and agreed what judgement ought to pass upon the matters, they propound it to the whole multitude, The popular state. that it may be confirmed by their consent. This second point draweth somewhat nearer to a moderation of the Elders authority, than the former did. Bridges. But how agreeth this with the former moderation of them? For before, although they should be elected and chosen by the consent of the whole congregation: yet the whole church was to repose such confidence in them, that they commit unto them their authority, not only in hearing and examining, but also in determining of all matters, pertaining to discipline and government in that congregation. If therefore these Elders shall have authority to do all this, how is it here said, that when the consistory hath travailed in examining of causes, pertaining to Ecclesiastical discipline, and agreed what judgement ought to pass upon the matters: they propound it to the whole multitude, that it may be confirmed by their consent If the whole multitude have before hand committed unto them their authority, to determine all matters: why should they be brought to the whole multitude back again, to have that confirmed, that before was determined, and that by their own authority was committed unto these Elders to determine? And what authority have they reserved and left unto themselves herein, to confirm by their consent, after these committees have determined the matter? For what if the whole multitude shall dissent? Have they all, or some, or the greater part of them, a negative voice, to dash all that these Elders have before determined? And how is not this then a plain Popular state, when in all matters, none excepted, not only pertaining to discipline, but also to government, the chief & last authority consisteth in the confirmation, no not yet of the prince, but of the whole multitude. We feared before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the dominion of a few persons in this signory. And therefore our Brethren to moderate & reduce them add 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to the government of the best men, The reducing of all to the popular state. which our brethren call men of godliness and wisdom: they have now so moderated the matter, that they have brought all ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to the popular regiment not only of the common people, but of the whole multitude. And all under pretence, that the Bishops before did some things more than they should, separated from other by themselves, in the Ecclesiastical discipline. And now they have so excluded this separate government of the Bishops, that withal, they have clean cut off the Monarchy and supreme government of the Prince and all, yea, of these Seniors determination and all, and given all matters pertaining to the discipline and government of every particular congregation, to the assembly of the common people, yea, to the final consent and confirmation of the whole multitude of the congregation. It is much, to debase the authority and government of these matters to the popular state. But I fear very much a worse estate, and more horribly confused. S. Paul's excommunication. 1 Cor. 5. For why may we not here again fear as horrible confusion in the whole multitudes dissent or confirmation of that which these Seniors have determined: as our Brethren before feared it, in hearing and determining such matters? But to put us out of this fear, and to confirm this confirmation of the whole multitude, that the people can confirm this themselves without any horrible confusion: our brethren allege us an example. The learned disc pag. 86 Whereof Saint Paul speaketh, touching the execution of excommunication (because the fact was manifest) When you are gathered together with my spirit in the name of our Lord jesus Christ, and with the power of our Lord jesus Christ, to deliver such a one unto Satan. 1. Cor. 5.4. Although this example is but of one matter, whereas the question is of all matters (for so said our Brethren before, Bridges. that there ought to be in every Church a Consistory or signory of Elders or governors, which ought to have the hearing, examination, and determining of all matters, pertaining to discipline and government of that congregation) and so this example touching the execution of excommunication reacheth not home: yet is this example so little to the present purpose, that it is rather clean contrary. Which example if it should directly pro●e, that which our Br. affirmed (for so their words would seem to infer, saying: Whereof S. Paul speaketh touching the execution of excommunication) they should prove this: that when the Consistory hath travailed in examining of causes pertaining to Ecclesiastical discipline, & agreed what judgement ought to pass upon the matters: they propound it to the whole multitude, that it may be confirmed by their consent. So that this example of some matter at the least, heard, examined, and determined by the Consistory, & by them propounded to the whole multitude, to be confirmed by their consent, might draw nearer to their purpose. But can they show us any such example, whereof Saint Paul speaketh? As for this touching the execution of excommunication: Who did execute the same, and excommunicate this incestuous person? S. Paul by his separate authority gave sentence of excommunication before the Corinthians knew of his doing. Did not S. Paul himself, by the power of our Lord jesus Christ given unto him? What▪ do they make Saint Paul an Elder not teaching? And did he it not first alone? At leastwise, without any Consistory of the church of Corinth joined with him? As he himself saith, ver. 3. For I verily, being absent in body, but present in spirit, have already judged as present, him that hath so done this thing. In which words he plainly declareth that he had passed the sentence of excommunication upon him, before he wrote to them thereof. Neither doth it appear that any of their Consistory joined with him, in pronouncing that his judgement on him. Yea, he saith, that although he was in body absent from them, yet because he was in spirit as present with them, his judgement should stand as effectual, as though he had been bodily present, at the denouncing of his sentence. And who were these that he writeth thus unto, what he had done? Was it to a Consistory among the Corinthians, to make relation unto them of his doing, and then they to take upon them the hearing, examining & determining of the matter, and then to propound it to the whole multitude? This had been yet somewhat nearer to our brethren's moderation. But here is no such order. Paul first doth the deed, and that immediately, both in his absence, and unwitting to them of his proceeding. Which done, he writeth not thereof to any Consistory or signory of Elders or Governors over them, nor in any place of either of his Epistles to them, he maketh any mention or inkling of any such among them, nor yet Saint Luke, that mentioneth (Act. 18. verse. 11.) how he tarried a year and a half, teaching the word of God (and planting a Church) among them. But he writeth of this matter (as of the residue) to them to whom he writeth the whole Epistle indefinitely, to the Church of God being at Corinthus, No such Consistory among the Corinthians sanctified in Christ jesus, called saints, with all that call upon the name of our Lord jesus Christ, in all places, both their Lord and ours. 1. Cor. 1.2. So that, he writeth to the wholde multitude. But did he write unto them thereof, to have his doing so confirmed by their consent, that if they would not have consented to this his manner of excommunicating the person before hand by himself alone, but that he should first have made them privy thereto, or ever he proceeded so far, that then upon this their dissenting, though not for the person & matter, yet for the manner of his proceeding, his judgement should have been frustrate & reversed? No, but his signification thereof unto them, was rather to command than to obey his sentence, and to put the same in execution, as our Brethren say well herein, touching the execution of excommunication, for when they were gathered together, as Saint Paul had, and that some Pastor or Minister among them, did before the whole multitude pronounce this sentence, which Saint Paul had given forth against the incestuous person: they all approved it, & so confirmed S. Paul's former sentence of excommunication. But our Breath. add this parenthesis (because the fact was manifest) wherefore they add this, they do not show. But the more manifest the fact was, the less need had the Apostle to have proceeded so far, The manifestness of th● fact. if in a manifest fact, an Ecclesiastical judge may not proceed separatlie his self to the sentence of excommunication, without the consent of a Segnory of that Congregation. But although the fact here was manifest, yet the wickedness of the fact was not manifest enough unto them. At leastwise, not this manner of the punishment for it, until Saint Paul did thus reprove them of it, and thus proceed against it. But had it been never so manifest, what doth that give him authority to deal so far therein separately by himself, without and before any authority of theirs joined with him, but only to make them afterward to put that in execution, that he had before overruled, Excommunication. 1. Cor. 5. & judicially concluded upon. Since therefore this was a good excommunication, & that all they could not reverse this sentence, as otherwise passed than it ought to have been, because they joined not in the doing of it, but only in the obedience of putting the same in execution, as he commanded them: and withal, since this was not written as an information to any Senate, Consistory, or signory of Seniors, or of governing Elders among them, but written as a charge to the whole multitude: What is this for the proof of any such Elders? Either else to infer that no excommunication in a manifest or not manifest fact, can be pronounced by a Bishop, or by a Pastor, except a Consistory of that Congregation, The order of discipline that our Br. prescribe, & thereto wrest S. Paul's excommunication. shall first travail in examining the cause, and then determine and agree, what judgement ought to pass upon the matter: & then also propound it before the whole multitude, that it may be confirmed by their consent: and last of all, the Bishop, Pastor, or Minister to denounce it. For this is the discipline that our Brethren would draw out hereon. But who may not see, that this is to draw this example clean contrary? If they would directly gather aught hereupon, they should gather, that in manifest facts and crimes the Bishop or Pastor, though in his absence, may judge, determine, & pronounce the sentence of excommunication, and by the authority of our Lord jesus Christ committed unto him, may command the whole multitude, Church, or Congregation, or any Consistory of them, if they have any, to gather the●selues together with his spirit, and charge them in the name of our Lord jesus Christ, that they fulfil, obey, and execute his sentence, in delivering such an excommunicated person ●0 Satan, that is, exclude him from the fellowship and communion of the faithful, by separating themselves from his company, & him from theirs: but this would clean dash all the imagined authority of their governing signory, if they should become such executioners only unto the sentence of the Bishop or Pastor, and that in his absence also, he being the judge and determiner of the matter. But what is this any more than all the residue, for the proof of any such Ecclesiastical Elders in the Church of Corinth, as were Governors only, and not Teachers? Of the which point (so much urged and sought for) we have hitherto seen, not one testimony nor example. But our Br. will now, and God before, go to higher & more important proves hereof. The argument of the 12 Book. THE 12. Book proceedeth further to our learned Brethr. proves of their third tetrarchs whom they call Governors. Whether their institution be grounded on Christ, whereunto they allege as their Capital place the words of Christ, Matth. 18. ver. 17. Tell the Church. Whether Christ in the name of Church, meant simply a Congregation of the faithful people, or a Senate of governing Elders. And namely: whether he alluded to the jews Sanedrim or Synaedrion. How the ancient Fathers have expounded those words. The expositions of the Protestant writers, especially Caluins: with the examination of Caluines reasons, labouring to prove that Christ in those words did renew and translate to his church the jews Sanedrim. Whereupon is laid forth a full view of the jews estate, out of Bertram, Sigonius, and Chytraeus for all their sorts of governing Elders & Senates, especially their Sanedrim. After which follow these our Learned brethren's proves of this translation, and of the Elders mentioned in the new Testament. Moreover, for the authority of these Elders our brethren's proceeding, Matth. 18. to the 18. verse, for the power of the spiritual keys. Whether they appertain to these governing Elders that are not Ministers of the word. Brentius interpretation of those words, how far they reach, and how far the Ecclesiastical Excommunication is requisite, and of the civil excommunication, & of Caluines' exposition of those words. Aretitius concerning the parties that may excommunicate. Wigandus and Matheus Index for the use of the keys in the jews Church. The practice of excommunication in the Apostles times. The practice in the primitive church showed forth by Tertullian, Eusebius, etc. The testimonies of the ancient Father's Cyprian, Jerome, Augustine, chrysostom, etc. The judgements of the Protestants, namely, Kemnitius, Melancthon, Aretius, Beza, Snecanus, chiefly Danaeus, examining his proves & reasons for the Presbytery that may excommunicate. Our Bre. conclusion concerning discipline. The weighing again (at our brethren's request) of Saint Paul's excommunicating the incestuous person. 1. Cor. 5. Of the Popish excommunication. Of Excommunication for weighty, or light offences. Of the offences excommunicable. Of our brethren's answer to our objection, that this Presbytery is not mentioned in Saint Paul's excommunicating Hymenaeus, Alexander, Philetus, and the Corinthian. How far the Congregation may deal in this power. Whether the Minister have any singular power herein. And lastly of our brethren's glimpses (as they call them) inveighing against the excommunications and jurisdiction in our Church. NOw therefore to prove that there ought to be a Consistory of Elders in every Church, The learned disc. Pag. 87. for governing of the same: it is manifest by the commandment of our Saviour Christ touching him that despiseth private admonition: If he hear not them, tell the Congregation: if he hear not the Congregation, let him be unto thee as an Heathen and Publican. Verily I say unto you, Math. 18.17 whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound in heaven. In which saying of our Saviour Christ, this word Congregation, is not so largely taken, as in other places for the whole multitude, but for the chosen assembly of Elders. OUR Brethren here would prove their Consistory of ruling Seniors, Bridges out of Christ's words, Matth. 18. v. 17. which if they shall be able to prove, God forbidden, but we should be as ready to yield. And if they cannot prove it, I would wish our Brethren to take good heed, how they wax so bold, not to fear to writhe Christ's own words. Which lest we also might mistake; let us set them down more fully than our Bre. do, Math. 18.15 But if thy brother shall sin against thee, Mat. 18. for these Elders. go and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt win thy brother. But if he shall not hear thee, take yet with thee one or two, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses, every word may stand. But if he shall neglect them, tell the Church: but if so be also he shall neglect the Church, let him be to thee as an Ethnic or a Publican. Verily I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall bind upon earth, shallbe bound in heaven, and whatsoever ye shall lose upon earth, shallbe loosed in heaven. Again I say unto you, if two of you shall consent upon earth, of all things whatsoever they shall ask, it shall be done unto them of my Father which is in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. Here first the ground of the matter (upon which Christ spoke these words, that our brethren cite) is private offence. And therefore, first he willeth, (as our brethren say well therein) private admonition to be made. Which if it shall be neglected, then that the party offended reprove the offender, before the witness of one or two besides themselves. Our Breath. supposal of Christe● words. And then it followeth, if he shall not hear them, (inferring that they should also admonish him) that then he should tell the Church or Congregation. Here (say our Brethren) This word Congregation is not so largely taken, as in other places, for the whole multitude, but for the chosen assembly of Elders. This is but our brethren's collection & supposal, which they can never be able to prove. Nor that Christ ever used the word Church in that sense, for a chosen assembly of Elders out of the Church: and as eas●e had it been for Christ, & much more plain for us, if he had said, Tell the Elders of the Church. But his meaning is manifest, that the party injured should reveal the offence before the assembly of the whole multitude. For why might not the whole multitude hear it? And either severally from among them, or all of them by the Minister, or by some other appointed thereunto, give the party offending a public admonition, The admonition may be done without a Consistory. & likewise ●xco●m. but that it must needs be done by a Consistory of governing Elders? Neither doth he say here, that if the admonition be neglected, that then the Church, or in the Church's name, a Consistory of Seniors, or the public Minister should excommunicate him: but only, let him be as an Ethnic or Publican unto thee. Wherein he rather seemeth to give the party offended leave, to account or shun him as an excommunicated person, than to give any commandment, that the Church should so proceed against him. And yet if it be gathered thereon, (as it may also well be, and is collected,) because he hath despised the Church's authority, and seemeth remediless unto the Church: what necessity is there, that this censure of excommunication must be prenounced against him by a Consistory of certain chosen Seniors, and not by the Bishop, nor yet by the Pastoral Elder of that Congregation? Mat. 28. But see here the flexible interpretations of our Brethren to serve their fancy. Before, when they would prove the Pastor could do nothing without the consent of the Church, Our Brethr. varying in this place Math. 18. and gathering together of the servants of Christ's household; they alleged that which immediately followeth this text here cited: If two of you consent upon earth, upon any matter, whatsoever ye shall ask, it shall be granted to you of my Father, which is in heaven. For wheresoever two or three be gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. Here they make but three, yea but two to be the Church, and to have the Church's authority. Pag. 81. & 82. And applying this to their Consistory, Where two of you consent upon earth, The Consistory that our Br. call the Church consisting but of one of these elders. etc. It will fall out, that since the Bishop or Pastor can do nothing without the consent of the Consistory, nor the Consistory but with the consent of the Bishop or Pastor: if the Bishop or the Pastor be one, how many shall make up this Consistory, when they be but two in the whole, that (as Christ saith) have consented upon any matter? Is there any more than one? But now, where two or three are reckoned up, even in the same place: here two or three is but private admonition, and the Church is but the chosen Seniors of the Church. And thus they enlarge and restrain the words of our Saviour Christ, rather after their own humours and devices, than that any necessity or probability of the place, doth so to construe them. But to confirm this their construction of Christ's words, our Brethren proceed, and say. For our Saviour Christ, in that word alludeth unto the assembly of Elders that was among the jews, The learned disc pag. 87 & 88 which they called (but corruptly) of a Greek word Synedrion, which signifieth a Counsel or Consistories, Sanedrin, which had the hearing and determining of all difficult & weighty matters among the jews, the like whereof he willed to be established in his Church, for administration of government. For seeing it was first instituted by God for government of his Church in the old Law, as hath been showed before out of Num. 11.6. although it was shamefully abused by the wicked jews: Math. 11.6. our Saviour Christ translateth it into his Church also in the new Testament. And the name of Elders doth most aptly agree unto them, that be Governors in the Church now, even as it did to the Ancients of Israel. So that the Pastors seem to have borrowed the name of Elders, especially in respect of their government. Bridges. Still our Brethren feed themselves with their own humours, and would feed us also with mere wind and allusions, if not rather illusions of their own conceits. Bearing us in hand, that Christ alludeth to the assembly of the Elders that was among the jews called the Sanedrim. Allusion to the Sanedrin. What a strange illusion is this, to imagine these alluons out of Christ's words? They say they will prove, Allusions▪ to the Sanedrim. that there ought to be a Consistory of Elders in every Church for governing the same. But how will they prove this? It is manifest by the commandment of our Saviour Christ. Where is this manifest? Christ saith, Tell the Congregation. Our Breath. proves of these Elders ●ut of this place, Math. 18. But Christ means not there, the whole multitude, but a chosen assembly of Elders. And is this commandment come but to a meaning? And how prove they that he meant such an assembly of Elders? He alludeth to the assembly of Elders among the jews, that was called the Sanedrim. And is this meaning again come to an allusion? And how prove they that Christ alluded to that Sanedrim? The Sanedrim had the hearing and determining of all difficult and weighty matters among the jews, the like whereof he willed to be established in his Church, for the administration of government. And where willed he the like to be established in his Church? For seeing it was first established in his Church in the old Law, Christ translated it into his Church in the new Testament. And where made he this translation? The name of Elders doth most aptly agree to them that be Governors in the Church now, even as it did to the Ancients of Israel, so that the Pastors seem to have borrowed the name of Elders, especially in respect of their government. And is all this in the end come to the Pastors, The head of all this question. and to their name only of Elders, and that to the seeming whence they borrowed their name? Here were great matters promised, such as if they could be substantially proved, must needs overrule all this question. For we are now come to the very head & fountain of the matter. Our Br. here pretend not so much any longer the ancient practice of the Church, nor the testimony of the Fathers, neither yet the examples of the Apostles, but the very original & institution of Christ himself, willing & commanding this signory to be translated from the Synagogue of the jews, and to be perpetually ordained and established in his Church, & in every Congregation of the same. If this now can be proved; there is no further reasoning on it, we must needs yield; or else we should be found to resist God, and to have no part in jesus Christ. But if this be but only our Fr mere imagination. & that Christ neither made any such translation; nor willed or commanded any such matter; nor hath any such words or such meaning, as may enforce any such a thing, or any allusion of it, or of the like unto it; but that the thing itself, which they their selves would apply the words of Christ unto, were most different and clean contrary from the Seniors, which under the name thereof they would erect: nor their selves could pretend (whatsoever they intend) to have the like erected; which if they should, they could not, without the great alteration & manifest danger of all Christian Princes estates and governments, and of all their Laws, Policies and Commonweals: Christ's words directly. what shall we then thi●●e, not so much of the great overshooting of our Brethren; as of the full stay ●nd resolution of ourselves, from all these devices and casting thus about, to seek some ground and warrant for these Seniors? And first for Christ's words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Tell the Church. Here he plainly speaketh of the Church, but of no Synedrion, or Sanedrin, nor any of the ancient Fathers (that I can find) d●● so expound his words, or gather any such meaning of them. chrysostom saith, Chrysostom Tell the Church: that is to say, the Bishops and Precedents, but of Sanedrim or Consistory he maketh no mention. Neither said he (saith chrysostom) unto the Bishop bind this man with bonds, but if thou shalt bind him. Jerome upon these words, Jerome. But if he will not hear the Church, saith: He giveth power unto the Apostles, that they which are condemned of such, might know that the sentence of man is confirmed by the sentence of God. Hilary indeed maketh an allusion of this word, Hilary. the Church, unto the coming of Christ, but not to any Sanedrin or Senate, but rather contrary, in ascribing the keys to the Apostles. Theophilact expoundeth it as doth chrysostom: Theophilact. and as for the Church's excommunication he thinketh Christ speaketh not of it, but only saith: If thou, saith he, being offended, holdest him which hath done thee injury as a Publican and Heathen, he shall be so holden also in heaven: but if thou losest him, that is, if thou forgivest him, it shall be also forgiven him in heaven. For not only those things that the Priests do lose are loosed: but whatsoever we also being injured, shall either bind or lose, the same shall be also bound or loosed. So that he apply this either to the Priest's action, or to the private party injured. The old Gloss expoundeth it thus: Tell the Church: that is, the whole Church, that he may sustain the greater shame. As for the late Writers, Vatablus expoundeth these words, Vatablus. Tell the Church, that is the assembly or public Congregation or the multitude. And so saith Aretius, Aretius. The third degree hath a provocation to the whole Church, that is unto the assembly of the faithful, whereof ye are members. But the Church is the assembly of the faithful, wherein the word of Christ, and the Sacraments are rightly administered. This form afterward the Apostles followed, 1. Cor. 5.2. Cor. 2. But neither of those Epistles, neither that matter was written to any chosen Consistory, but to the whole multitude. Munsterus saith, Mansterus. Dic Ecclesiae. Let his frowardness be showed to the Church. And if he shall not hear the Church being warned of many, let him be holden of them as an Ethnic and a a Publican. And whatsoever they shall so bind, shall be holden bound in heaven, that is, whom they having so warned shall have cast out of their company, they also shall be holden cast out before the Father, and again whom they shall lose and receive being penitent into their Company, that shallbe ratified with the Father. Caluines proves on Mat. 18. Of this power of binding and losing, that is, of thrusting out of the Church, and receiving into the same, we have said somewhat before ca 16. Where also he said: But for that which followeth of the keys, it hath this sense. By the kingdom of heaven, is understood, the Church of Christ, and this is opened by the key of God's word. But the kingdom of heaven is opened to the believers, that is, forgiveness of sins, and eternal life is promised by the word of God. And this is to forgive sins, as contrariwise to them that believe not, the key of heaven is shut by the word, that is, remission of sins is denounced. So that all this excomm. is referred to the denouncing of the Minister of the word: and this execution of thrusting out, to the Church And so saith Bucer: But and if he shall contemn this, let the frowardness of this man sinning, and not willing to repent, be showed to the Church, that he may the third time be admonished of the whole company among whom he is conversant. But calvin expoundeth (these words, Tell the Church) far otherwise: Quaeritur quid per nomen Ecclesia intelligat, etc. Caluines applying Christ's words to the rues Sanedrim. It is demanded (saith he) what he meaneth by the name of the Church? For Paul commandeth it not of any chosen number, but of the whole assembly of the faithful, to excommunicate the incestuous Corinthian, 1. Cor. 5. b. 6. And therefore, it may probably seem, that the judgement here, is referred to the whole people. But because as yet, there was no Church which had given her name to Christ, nor any such manner appointed. but the L. himself speaketh, according to the usual and received custom: there is no doubt, but that he alludeth to the order of the old Church. Even as also in other places, he apply his speech, unto the known custom. When as he commandeth the gift which we will offer, to be left at the altar, until we shall be reconciled with our offended brother. Mat. 5. d. 23. There is no doubt, but that out of the present and legal form of the worship of God, he would teach us, that we can not orderly pray nor offer any thing unto God, so long as we are at discord with our brethren. So now therefore, he looked upon the accustomed discipline of the jews: because it should have been absurd, to have proposed the judgement to the Church, which as yet was no Church. Furthermore, where the power of excommunication appertained to the jews that were Seniors, which sustained the person of the whole Church: aptly doth Christ say, that those which sinned, should then at the length be publicly brought forth unto the Church, if proudly they contemn the private admonitions, or that they elude them skoffingly. We know, that from the time the jews returned from their exile in Babylon, the censure or controlment of manners and of doctrine, was committed unto a chosen Council, Caluines proves on Mat. 28. which they called sinhedrim, in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (a Counsel, Session, or Assembly of Senators or judges). This government was lawful and approved of GOD, and this was a bridle to retain in doing their duty the froward, and such as would not be taught. If any shall except that in the Age of Christ, all things were corrupted and perverted, insomuch, that nothing ought less to have been accounted the judgement of the Church, Caluins' reasons for this signory of Elders to be renewed to the Christians from the olone Sanedrim by this place Ma. 18 than that tyranny: the answer is easy, although the manner were then corrupted and perverted, notwithstanding Christ doth worthily praise the Order, such as it was in times past, delivered of the Fathers. But when as a little after he erected a Church, taking away the corruption, he restored the pure use of excommunicating. But there is no doubt, but the manner of discipline which flourished under the kingdom of Christ, succeeded in the place of the old discipline: and verily, when as the profane Gentiles also held a shadowed custom of excommunication, it appeareth, this was even of God engrafted from the beginning in the minds of men, that if there were any impure and defiled, they should be put back from the sacred things. It had been a foul thing therefore and a shameful, for the people of GOD, to have been altogether void of that discipline, whereof some step remained among the Gentiles. But that which was kept under the Law, Christ hath passed over unto us, because the reason (or manner) is common unto us with the ancient Fathers. For, neither was it the counsel of Christ to send his Disciples to the Synagogue, which when as in her bosom she gladly nourished filthy flatteries, she excommunicated the true and simple worshippers of God: (whereof we have example in that man that was blind from his nativity. john 9 f. 34.) But he warned, that the order should be holden in his Church, which long ago was holily instituted under the Law. If any either stubbornelie refuse the former admonitions, or by going on in his former vices, do show himself to contemn them, when as with witnesses brought he hath been warned the second time: Christ commandeth him to be called to the judgement of the Church, that is, unto the Sessions of the seniors, there to be more grievously admonished, as it were by public authority, that if he reverence the Church, he may submit himself and obey. Thus saith calvin for the proof of this signory, to be authorized, instituted, and commanded, in these words of ●ur Saviour Christ, Tell the Church. Whole interpretation, Beza, Stephanus, in his new Gloss alleging also these reasons of calvin, besides Danaeus, and divers other of our Brethren since, have followed, and more at large urged. calvin the principal interpreter of Christ's words for a consistory of Elders. But because calvin began this interpretation (as I take it) and all their Discourses chiefly stand on these his Reasons and Assertions: therefore I have so fully and wholly set him down. And if we shall find that this his Interpretation, and these his Reasons prove not this matter: we must crane the same pardon, that their selves yield to Beza, and to other our Reverend and and Learned Brethren, when they also in their interpretations, descent from calvin, or calvin from other godly, ancient, and approved Fathers. Otherwise, of all the excellent Interpreters of our Age, I profess the honour of calvin with the chiefest, bringing sound proof and reason of his Sentence. Let us now therefore a while consider, how he proveth this interpretation of the word Church, to be here necessarily understood, for a Consistory of these Seours. And first he confesseth that the former place, The examination of these proves of calvin. 1. Corinthians 5. concerning The excommunication of the incestuous Corinthian, (A place which our Brethren applied to this Consistory,) was spoken of Saint Paul to the whole assembly and multitude of the people, and not to any chosen number of them. So that, The incestuous person not excom. by a Consistory of the Church. that place is in this place clear acquitted from this Consistories excommunication. But if Christ had here before (as calvin sayeth) set down an order, that excommunication should be made by a Consistory or Session of such Elders, as calvin here pleadeth for: how can we think that Paul would have dealt herein with the whole multitude of the people, and not with a certain number chosen out of them, for the governance of such matters? And therefore this is one good step to prove, that here Christ set down no such order. But calvin would drive this but to a probable Argument, That because Saint Paul referreth it to the whole number, and not to any chosen number, therefore it is likely that Christ also here should so refer it. But calvin thinketh not this Argument of any force. And why? Forsooth, because then as yet there was no Church that did profess Christ, nor any such manner ordained. And less reason (as I think) to gather it on this place, that this name Church should here signify a signory or a certain number chosen out of the Church, when there was yet no such order in the Church. And yet, there was a Church of Christ, even when Christ spoke these things. Caluines' reasons for these Elders on Mat. 18. But the Corinthians and diverse other Churches afterwards, did both openly profess the name of Christ, and had Orders also among them. If therefore this order of Discipline for the Government of seniors, had been here of Christ founded and ordained: Saint Paul would never have broken it, There was a church when Christ spoke these words Mat. 18. and a Church that had orders when Paul wrote to the Cor. Bucer using Caluins' reason, applies it to no such Consistory. at least, if he had thought it necessary. Except we should excuse him by ignorance: but that hadd● been too gross an excuse in him, if this had been here ordained, and that so necessary, as our brethren and calvin ●o● pretend the same to be. Bucer writing upon these words, Tell the Church: allegeth the sam● reason that calvin here doth, that There was no such order in the Church, when Christ spoke these words. But what? Doth he gather thereupon, that Christ had an allusion to the Seniors of the jews? No such thing. Moreover that (saith he) Tell the Church: let no man understand it thus, as though it were of Christ commanded, to accuse him in the public Sermon of them that come together to hear the word of God, that shall have despised two admonitions, and then to have him there openly reprehended of the preacher: for when Christ taught these things, there was no such face of the Church. Furthermore the power of binding and losing is not given, except to them that come together in the name of Christ, No excom. without Pastors & B. and that in a certain order, and those going before whom the holy Ghost hath ordained in the Church, the Pastors and the Bishops. Whereupon Paul would namely also have those to exercise this power, that are gathered together in the name of our Lord jesus Christ, and his spirit present with them. 1. Corinthians 5. Now our meetings together are yet too impure: and truly there is a small number of them, that have wholly given themselves to Christ. Neither is it lawful, by reason of the public peace, to expel from the assemblies of the Church those that are not tried, Wherefore in the public assemblies of the church (as for the most part at this day the matter goeth) excommunication can not publicly be exercised, except where the Lord hath bestowed such grace, That the Chur. may be without excomm. that the greater part of the whole people, with the Magistrate should be converted unto Christ with a full heart. Where that is not granted, it is necessary, that they which have received Christ more fully, reduce this most holy and most healthful institution of Christ among themselves, and whosoever of their familiars or neighbours, or by other means they have joined to them, which have given their name to Christ, that diligently and freely they admonish them. And when any shall proudly contemn their admonitions, they should declare the contemners of the admonition unto the Church, which they have among themselves, either of the company of their neighbourhood, or otherwise of familiarity, or to conclude by reason of kindred or family. Which Church if they shall continue to contemn: shall declare the matter to the common Ministers of the whole Church, that they also in the name of the whole church, may warn them. And if they shall go on to contemn the word of the Lord, they shall also excommunicate them, or else the self same Church in which they are peculiarly known and familiar, shall then not admit them to the holy communion, until the Lord shall restore unto us a just policy in the Church, and a true censure. But howsoever all things are yet mixed together and perturbed, notwithstanding if the Ministers of the word will with a good fidelity employ themselves in their office, they shall easily restore the most part of the Christian Censure, without any disturbance or cutting in sunder of the Church, The Minister's office and power in the church. which a faithful Minister of Christ will by no means bring in, who knoweth that to him all power is given in the Church to edification, not to destruction: and that it is more appertaining to his office, from every place to gather them together unto the kingdom of God, yea the blind, the deaf, the weak, than to drive them out of it. Of the true moderation of the ecclesiastical censure, S. Augustine wrote many things against the Donatists. But the chiefest place of this matter is in his third book against the Epistle of Permenian. Bucer refer● us to Aug. for excommunication. Wherein this man of God most prudently gave charge, of the correction and excommunication of the evil persons that seem to be in the Church. This place chiefly at this time were of us with singular diligence to be read and thoroughly weighed. Thus writeth also Bucer on thi● matter, where he complaineth most of the lack of this Discipline, and where he somewhat agreeth with calvin, in alleging this reason, That when Christ spoke those words, there was no face of a Church that professed his name. And yet doth he so little gather hereupon, this unnecessary consequence, that Christ alluded to any Seniory among the jews, to be revived among the Christians, when they should have Discipline in the Church, that he acknowledgeth by the name of the Church nothing else, but (as the name importeth) the whole congregation. Neither yet that the whole congregation should excommunicate, otherwise than not to permit the man to receive the Communion, but the common Ministers of the church only to denounce the excommunication. And least we should understand thereby, any signory not teaching the word: he declareth withal, that they be the only Ministers of the word, and that to them, and to their office, the exercise of the power of binding and losing is committed, though the power in general by the churches. But Calvin saith, that in the name of the Church, the Lord did speak, as though it were of the usual and received manner. if he so did: then he spoke of the present state either of the true Church, among those few that professed his name: or of the jews Synagove. But Calvin saith after, that it was not the counsel of Christ to send his disciples to the Synagogue. But to allude unto the old order of the church, and not to the present order, had not been to speak according to the usual and received manner: why should we not therefore rather thinks that Christ spoke of such order as should be afterward used in the Church among the Christians▪ either for such states and times as the church was in, or to continue: then of such order, as either in the old time had been, or at that present was in the Synagogue among the jews: But now, if we should grant to calvin and to our Brethren, that Christ alluded in these words, The admission of this allusion, inferreth no perpetual rule of a like Consistory. unto the assembly of Elders that was among the jews: is this enough also to infer, that the Law or rule that Christ prescribeth, must stretch to the establishment and continuance of the same order, or to the erection and Institution of a like order, as that was, whereunto in these words, he alluded? if this be a good argument, let us see the force of it, even in the present example, whereof Calvin himself giveth an instance. There is no doubt (saith he) but that Christ alludeth unto the order of the church, even as also in other places, he fitteth his speech unto the known custom, when he biddeth that the gift which we will offer, should be left at the Altar. Math. 5. d. 23. There is no doubt but that he would teach us out of the present and legal form of the worship of God, that we can not orderly pray nor offer any thing to God, so long as we are at strife with our Brethren. These words are indeed apparent, to be an allusion of these terms, Altar, gift and offering, to the present and legal form, Calu. own example, overthrows this perpetuity. nor can be understood otherwise, as the word church may, which is more properly used among us christians, than ever it was among the jews. Whereas the words Altar, gift, and offering, were more proper to the jews than unto us. But doth it follow, that because Christ in setting down this rule of reconciliation, alludeth (for the plainer understanding of the people) to such speeches of Altar, gift, and offering, as were then more usually received and known among than, that therefore he meant withal, to establish and carry away in his rule, the same manner of God's worship at an Altar, by a gift and offering as was then used, received & known among them? If it do not in this present instance, that calvin himself bringeth in (as it is most clear it doth not): can calvin then, or any of our learned Br. or all the world infer, that if Christ did allude in the term of Church to an Eldership or consistory among the jews, in prescribing his rule of Reconciliation or excommunication, that therefore, he continued, or renewed, or constituted the same, or the like order among the Christians? Or, if he looked upon their Discipline, that therefore he ordained the like to continue for ever? did Christ establish every thing that he only speak of, or but looked upon? But saith calvin, It should have been absurd, to have propounded the judgement to the church, which as yet was no church. Although this again be not altogether so, that there was no church: yet, what if there had been none then▪ had Christ in these words, no further respect, but to the present time? if he had not: how shall any perpetual rule be grounded hereon: And if he respected a perpetual order of his church: why should we rather understand it▪ of the o●der of the church at that time among the jews, which was forthwith to be dissolved: than for the state of the church that he would erect, that should among the christians be continued? But what now was this order among the jews, that Calvin and our Brethren say, Christ alluded unto and looked upon? Moreover (saith calvin) when as the power of excommunication belonged to the jews that were seniors, which sustained the person of the whole church: aptly doth Christ say, that those which have sinned, if they shall either proudly contemn the first admonitions, or scoffingly exclude them, are then at length to be brought forth publicly unto the church. That the Seniors among the jews had the power of excommunication, is not in question, What Seniors among the jews had the power of excommunication. but what Seniors they were which had that power. Whether a chosen number out of the ancients of the people, or such as were only of the priests and Levites: I speak it, for that power of denouncing excommunication. Not, but that (I grant) they had other Elders, for other matters: But, that either, or both these Elders, represented the person of the church, being the heads and Governors of the church: I see no such aptness in the representation. The head representeth not the body, nor the body the head. And yet the subjects may more aptly represent by substitution the person of the governors, than the governors may be said, to represent the person of the Subjects. And no doubt, Christ's words were most apt and proper, The governors of the Church are not so aptly said to represent the Church. for the matter that he spoke of. For as calvin saith, of bringing forth the matter publicly to the church, if he had meant of them that were but Elders or governors, or admit also they were representers of the church: yet should he not have spoken so aptly, as if he had said (if he had so meant) tell the Elders, or governors, or representers of the church. And not, tell the church which is a great deal more improper and unapter speech. We know (saith calvin) that from the time that the jews returned out of the captivity of Babylon, the censure of the manners and of the doctrine was committed to a chosen counsel, which they called Synhedrin, in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. This was a lawful regiment & approved of God, and this was a bridle to retain in their duty, the froward, and such as would not learn. To prove that there were such a chosen council among the jews, to whom the censure or controlment of manners and of doctrine was committed. calvin here assigneth the time, after the return from the captivity of Babylon, which council was called Sinhedrim, in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, And he saith, God approved it, and that it was a lawful regiment, and a good Bridle against the wicked. I marvel that calvin fetcheth these Seniors among the jews from so late time, as after their return from Babylon. And yet he nameth no time, when after their return they were created, that we might have turned to it, and seen what persons they were, Danaeus 2. part. Chri. Isag. li. 2. c. 10. and what office was committed to them. Danaeus to make this more cleeare, in his foresaid introduction, 2. part. lib. 2. cap. 10. saith: But to determine strifes and (as out of Socrates, li. 7. cap. 37. may be gathered, which example we have before perused) to take upon them to be judges and Arbitrators, I never read that it was the office of Elders, or part of their office. For although the presbytery or Synedrion of the jews (which was the same, Act. 22. verse, 5. & 30. And Math. 5. verse 22.) seem to answer to our presbytery, and judged oftentimes of certain causes: Notwithstanding, our Presbyteries do not judge, and therefore are different from those from judaical, because those partly had political, and partly Ecclesiastical jurisdiction both at once, as appeareth Esd. 10. ver. 8. But ours have only ecclesiastical. If this which Danaeus saith be true, that that Presbeytry Act, 22. be the same Presbytery with that mentioned Esdras 10. We find it then indeed (as calvin saith) after the return out of the captivity of Babylon. But how then doeour Learned discoursing Brethren say? The like whereof he willed to be established in his Church. Will these our brethren's Seniors (contrary to that which Danaeus saith) take upon them politic and Ecclesiastical jurisdiction both at once? And so indeed these our Bret. plainly say, the Synedrion had the hearing and determining of all difficult and weighty matters among the jews. Here is nothing left out, be it in politic or Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, so it be a weighty and difficult matter. And our brethren apply it to us saying: The like whereof, he willed to be established in his Church, for administration of Government. So that, nothing here remaineth entiere to the Prince and nobles, to the judges and Magistrates: for our Governing Seniors must have all, or a stroke in all. But the authority of the Presbytery. Act. 22. was much abridged, What Presbytery that was. Act. 22. concerning the Politic jurisdiction, (as we shall God willing see anon. And yet who were those Seniors in that presbytery? Acts 22. ver. 5. Paul saith: the chief priest doth bear me witness, and all the Presbytery, of whom I received letters unto the Brethren and went▪ to Damascus, to bring them that were there bounden, to jerusalem, Calvin for the Sanedrin. that they might be punished. And in the thirteenth verse, speaking of the captain that kept paul prisoner, he saith: on the next day, because he would have known the certainty, wherefore he was accused of the jews, he loosed him from his bonds, and commanded the high priests, and all their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Council to come together. And he brought Paul and set him before them. Here are both these terms Presbytery or Eldership, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Council, These were all indeed Controllers of Doctrine, as Marlorate well noteth out of Brentius, commending the equity and prudent doing of this Tribune. Who because he was ignorant of the jewish religion he would refer the cause of religion to the Council of them that were the Prelates of religion. So that here this council seemeth to have been all of those that were teachers of Doctrine, for such are or should be the Prelates of religion. But, did God allow of this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉? If it were all one with that before mentioned, Esdras 10. The Synedrion or Sanhedrin was not in Esdras time. We may well say with calvin, It was a Lawful regiment, and approved of God. But this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Acts 22. was not a Lawful regiment, nor approved of God: and therefore it was not the same that is mentioned, Esdras 10. But a degenerate corruption of it. Neither was that indeed called either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Sanedrin, or Synhedrin, nor any such Greek name, or any corruption of that name begun among the jews in Esdras time. The Babylonians had no dealing with the Grecians. Neither the jews, till after the conquests of Alexander the great, who translated the Monarchy to the Grecians, and so withal, the state of the jews dispersed in A●syria, Media, Persia, Egypt, and after in Greece also, about the times of the Maccabees and after the Bible was translated into Greek under t●e Egyptian king Ptolomeus Philadelphus. And therefore, How our Bret. run to the corruptions of jewish traditions to seek out the grounds of this consistory of governing Elders. in all the Canon of the old Testament, there is no mention of this Sanedrin or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. But in the jews Thalmud and tradition. And yet see here, how our Brethren will run to these jewish traditions, and think that Christ approveth them, and taketh these corruptions from the jews, and translateth them into his Church, rather than they will omit to gather argument, for the Institution of these Seniors, on never so light a show, or inkling or allusion, or any thing of them. And must this also go for good proof of them? But to prevent the offence of this, calvin saith: If any man except, that in the age of Christ all things, were corrupted and perverted, that nothing ought less than that tyranny, to be accounted the judgement of the Church: The answer is easy, although the manner than were adulterated and perverted, notwithstanding Christ worthily praiseth the order, as it was in times past delivered of the Fathers. The answer is not so easy, as calvin supposed, although the order were the same, and the difference but in the corruption of the manner. For what order was this, that Calvin doth not say, was ordained of God, nor nameth when, where, what, or by whom it was delivered: but saith at large, a patribus fuerat traditus, It was delivered by tradition from the Fathers. What? shall we have the Father's traditions here approved and praised, without the manifest Word and Institution of God, for the ground of them? If the Papists hear of this, they would triumph▪ And what can be gathered here on Christ's words, that he doth praise any such order of their signory? I speak not in the dispraise of any good order taken among them, for their better & more orderly Government, in times of their afflictions after their captivity: but I deny, that this can be proved out of Christ's words, that he hath continued, borrowed translated, or erected up the same or the like order, to be established among the Christians. Christ's words import no translation of the jews Sanedrin to the Christians. These words enforce no such thing. This is but Caluines mere conjecture, and theirs that follow him. And I do yet more commend these our Brethren the Learned Discoursers, that they would fetch this order higher, from the Canon of the Scripture, rather than from the traditions of the fathers: saying: for seeing it was first instituted by god, for government of his Church in the old Law, as hath been showed before out of Numb. 11.6. Although it was shamefully abused by the wicked jews, our Saviour Christ translateth it into his Church also in the new testament. Although they speak here of a translation, which they have not yet proved, nor can ever be able to prove on this place: yet if they would prove it, here were somewhat for it, that we are sure was good, and had good warrant, if they could prove the translation of it into the new Testament. But when we shall see what that Presbytery was, which was instituted by God for Government of his Church in the old Law. Numb. 11. Although we have some what seen already, (and that out of calvin) that it was no such Presbytery as our Brethren pretend, Supra Pag. 23●. and therefore that was not translated: yet we shall further 〈◊〉 more fully see, both what that was, and how far different, and what danger consequently followeth on this point, to the state of all Christian Princes and commonweals, if this translation, continuance, or reviving of that seniory should take place. But (saith calvin) where that within a little while after, he erected a church, he restored the use of excommunication, the corruption being taken away. That Christ restored that use of excommunication, which was used before in the Law, is not here proved. Nor yet that there was any such use of the Law for excommunication, or that Christ in these words, so much as respected or looked upon, either the old use of the Law, or the present corruption of the jews, or erected either for the one or the other, when he erected his Church, or the use of Excommunication in it. And this do Caluines own words sufficiently declare. For if he had no church, when he spoke these words, nor referred them, if he had a Church, to the state thereof at that present (as calvin said before) but that (as he saith here) he erected his Church within a little while after, and that then when he so did, he restored the pure use of excommunication: then did he not restore it in this place. And yet, if here he did translate it, and willed it here to be established: how is not this the restoring of it? What discipline succeeded in the place of the old discipline. Notwithstanding (saith calvin,) there is no doubt, but that the manner of the Discipline which flourished under the kingdom of Christ, succeeded in the place of that old Discipline. To succeed in the place, we deny not. So did baptism succeed in the place of Circumcision. And the Supper of the Lord in the place of the Passover. And the Ministry that we have, in the place of the Ministry that they had. And yet are all these far different, from the translating, continuing, renewing, erecting, restoring, or establishing of those things. Calu. argument from comparison of the Gentiles. Neither do we deny this argument of calvin. That when as the very profane Gentiles held a shadowish custom of Excommunicating, it appeareth, this was instilled of GOD, even from the beginning, into the minds of men, that if there were any impure and defiled, they should be put back from their holy things. It had therefore been a foul and a shameful matter for the people of God, to have been utterly ignorant of that discipline, whereof there remained some step among the Gentiles. This is a good Argument, both from the lesser to the greater, that we being God's people, should have such Discipline as God hath appointed us to have: and a greater shame for us, if we have it not. But our Question lieth on this, whether GOD have appointed us this Discipline, and these Governors of it, which our Brethren pretend: yea, or no. The shame and danger of this new San●drin. But, if this were so shameful among the jews, yea, among the Gentiles too, for profane men to meddle with their holy things: how quickly should we incur the greatest shame of all, when s●che as could not meddle with the teaching of the Holy word of GOD, should not only meddle with the teacchers of it, and be the controllers of them, and of all their sacred actions: but meddle with excommunicating and absolving, the chiefest ●ey and force of the word itself? not shame only but peril, which if it should be in every parish, what in many Parishes both in the Country and in the Cities too, it would breed, were too shameful, yea, too dangerous for them to practise, or for us to suffer. But that (saith calvin) which was kept under the Law, Christ hath transmised or sent over to us: because the reason (or manner) is common to us with the ancient Fathers. Neither is this proved that Christ hath sent over unto us, that which was kept under the Law, any more in this matter, then in others which are abrogated, and not sent over to us nor we to them, neither is the reason (or manner) common to us with the ancient Fathers, under the law, but very greatly different. And though it had some general community: yet, that inferreth not so importaunt a specialty. Neither hath Christ sent us over to the ancient Fathers, any more herein, than to the Synagogue then present, nor admonished by any words heers expressed or included, that that order should be holden in his Church, which long ago was instituted holily under the Law. All these are but calvin's mere sayings, without any prooving, other than these aforesaid weak and bare reasons, which we have heard. But since Calvin pr●●seth so much on the Law of Moses, for these Seniors, and our Brethren likewise expressly, both now and before, urge the 11. of Numbers, and other places where any mention is made of the jews Elders, assemblies, and Counsels: and still beat upon the name, that of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, was called Sanedrim: Let us therefore, to see this point even to the full, since this is the place that must make up all the matter, Nova glossa Stephani in Math. 18 and that the New gloss also of Robertus Stephanus following calvin, concludeth thus: Tantum illos admon●bat etc. Only he warned them▪ that this order must be holden until the end of the world, that wheresoever there should be a Church, there ought perpetually to be some (he speaketh of these Seniors) that should have the care of the Church: Let us therefore crave patience here a while, since this Synedrion and the original thereof is so straightly urged, to search eu●● to the grounds thereof, and see what these Seniors, their assemblies, Senators, and Counsels were, and in what things their authority most consisted. Which no doubt (if it shall not seem tedious) will give great light to the whole matter. Bertramus de politia judaica. Cornelius Bertramus that writeth of the policy of the jews ● dedicateth the same even to Beza: maketh (in his 3. Chapter) these 70. Elders, to have appertained to the civil policy and that God did not then first ordain them, The 70. Elders not first ordained. Num. 11. Numb. 1●. 16. (as our Learned Brethren Discoursers said before, page 20.) but rather continue and confirm them. And in the sixth Chapter: Therefore, this kind of senate, as it consisted of the seniors and Prefects that were more approved, Bertram. of the jews Elders. (for they seem to be those that already exercised this office in Egypt, as we have before conjectured) and were appointed to ease the charge of Moses: seemeth to have had the understanding (or hearing) of the weighty judgements, & de Reip. summa ita statuisse, and to have so determined of the sum (or principal state of the Common weal: that the same senate had his prefects also, Immo & summum caput ipsum Mosem. Yea, and his chief (or supreme) head Moses himself. Of what number they were, & why those Elders had that number. Some do make the precise number of these to be 72. as though 6. out e●ery of the 12. tribes, were described: (of whom nevertheless, Moses left 2. in the camp,) because the Lord had commanded to bring only threescore and ten. Other make it the number of 71. Perhaps, because the number of judges should be odd. And to this number, the hebrews commonly subscribe, which call their Synedrion, by the name of Seventy-one. But these numbers may on this wise be well reconciled. For, where the Lord expressly commandeth threescore & ten to be gathered unto him: it is likely that they were first 70. only. Unto whom, Moses being added, to moderate the assembly: it made up 71. But the high priest that was to answer out of the Law made up 72. etc. And in the ninth chapter, writing again of their civil policy, after their possession of the land, from josues' time, until their exile into Babylon: The precepts & the practice of this Seniory. It is certain (saith he) that the hebrews being now sent in-to the possession of the land of Chanaan: kept not only those things, the use whereof they had of Moses received, together with the precepts: but they revoked those also into practice, whereof they had the precepts only, but no use, by reason of the hindrance of the wilderness. The precepts that seem to pertain to that policy, are contained Deut 16. ver. 18.19. & 20. And in the whole 17.18. & 19 chapped. and in certain places of Exod. and of Numb. Yea▪ and of Leviticus itself also. Therefore, they so drove their policy to those chapters: that every city should have her Seniors, (or her Senate) consisting of Chiliarkes, or chief of thousands, Centurions, (or chief of hundrethes) Quinquagenariens, (or chief of fifties) and Decurions or chief of tens. josephus in his fourth book of the jews antiquities, chapter 6. prescribeth the number of these judges to be seven, because, perhaps he regarded his own time. Certain Thalmudistes as they divide the inferior judgements into matters pecuniary, The Levites with their offices. (or pertaining to pryses) and capital (or matters of life and death): over the pecuniary, they place three judges, over capital, three and twenty. josephus in the same place, ascribeth to that sevenfold number of judges duos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, two Ministers, being levites, that is to say, such prefects as we have described. And verily, out of those things that were done of David and josaphat, in restoring the judgements, it is likely, that the Levites sat with the judges. But of their number it is not certain, except out of those traditions of the Thalmudistes, we shall say that it seemeth, there were 3. Levites, The matters wherein the Elders & governors dealt. which so did first of all take notice of the pecuniary causes: or certainly, 2. Levites, with some one of the seniors or Elders of that place or city, which so excelled among the other, that he was called, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sen Praetor, the captain or Mayor. And these afterward being joined to 20. seniors determined of capital causes. Certainly, out of the 4. chap. of the book of Ruth, ver. 2. There seem more Elders than 7. When as Boas is said, to have taken 10. of the Elders of the City of Bethlehem, that should take notice of the cause of redeeming, and of the state * Levirationis. of the husbands brother. It is clear out of controversy, that of every city the judges municipal (or men capable of offices, as the freemen or Burgesses) as they are called the Elders, they were the Chiliarkes, the Centurions, the Quinquagenariens (or Fiftinaries) and the Decurions (or Deciniers) so many as there could be in every city, insomuch, that also out of them, certain levites were taken, to be their prefects. If not, they were called for out of the next city assigned to the Levites. It is evident enough that every tribe had their own chief and principal captain which in his own city was also of the Chiliarkes. The universal assembly of the Tribes and families. Moreover, in the whole, and out of the whole people, there was a chief Senate that consisted of 70. Elders, being so elected, as the reason of the time could bear it. For before th● carrying away of the 10. Tribes it is likely that they were chosen of the families of those 70. that came down out of Cananie into Egypt, and of those families that were substituted in their steeds, as in his place we have said. Besides these, (as the matter required) the fathers of the houses of all the Tribes came together at solemn meetings. Thus first we see, how Bertram here doth summarily describe, all the sorts of Seniors and Elders that were in Israel, and all their senates and assemblies. Not only those that were inferior in every of the Cities & principal Families, and in all the several Tribes among them: but also in general of all the whole Realm and state, especially that of the Threescore and ten Elders, that were chosen out of every Tribe as a chief standing senate over all the other, and in what matters, not only, nor so much Ecclesiastical, as civil and political, they had to deal with all, even from the first Institution of them, and while these senates and seniors were in their perfectest estate. Which estate of theirs, Calvin & our Learned Brethren here affirm, was restored, translated, renewed, and ordained by Christ, to be continued in his church to the worlds end, as it was, before it was afterward corrupted by the jews. All which senates and seniors, or any of them, but chiefly of all the other (which our Br. urge chief, & indeed it was the chief) if they or it were restored, or translated, or renewed among us: how should not forthwith all the state, not only of the church, but of the whole common weal be clean altered? & so (of like consequence) all other parts of Christendom. Now to prove that these Senates had this authority. Bertram proceedeth to the practice of it. To return therefore to the times of joshua. joshua seemeth (out of those things, that are written, jos. 23.2. & 24.1.) to have very well appointed the judgements, according to the prescription of Moses Law. For, there it is treated on the solemn meetings. First, all the Tribes of the Israelites, or all the Israelites, that is to say, josues orders for all these Elders the Fathers of the households of all the tribes, that were enfranchised with the right of the City, or also were Citizens: are set down. Then, the Elders, that is, the 70. afterwards, the heads of Israel, that is, of the thirteen Tribes, 13. chief captains. Last of all the judges and Prefects, that is, the ordinary judges of every city. Which consisted of the Chiliarkes, the centurions, the fiftiniers, and Prefects of each city. After the death of josua, this civil policy seemeth to have continued, especially during the time that those seniors or Elders did survive, which had seen the works of God in the wilderness, of whose number Phinees seemeth to have been one, in whose age the battle was waged against the Beniamites. In his time therefore, all the Tribes of Israel are said to have come together unto Mitspa, that the chief citizens being before warned and assembled to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Caal, that is, to the army or universal assembly of the citizens, concluded to give battle to the Beniamites, and had determined the same, and had promised by a solemn oath, that they would not give in marriage their Daughters to the Beniamites. All the self same citizens deal about the restoring of the Tribe of Benjamin. But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gnedah, that is, all the Chiliarches, centurions, Fiftinaries, Decurions, and Prefects, decree the War against the jabesites, and to that * Expeditionem. voyage, (or exploit) they send 12000 soldiers. But the seniors or Elders, that is, the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gnedah. To wit, the seventy, at the beginning in the battle, give the council of catching the Virgins of the Siloites. But, that the seventy Elders are signified by that assembly: It appeareth thereby, in that they took upon them to pacify the Siloites, if at any time the Siloites should before them appeach the Beniamites for that rapt (or catching of their Virgins). This therefore seemeth to be the process of that story▪ The process of the story jud. 19.20. so far as serveth to our purpose. The Levite sent the twelve pieces of his secondary wife (or wife then permitted of the second sort, otherwise, then called a concubine) into all the coasts and regions or cities of the twelve tribes. The seniors or judges, that is, the Chiliarkes, centurions, Fiftinariens, and decurions of every tribe, and so of every city, call a council about this matter, among their citizens and kindreds. By whose agreement an universal (or general council is indicted) at Mitspa, to the which all the tribes of Israel, which are there called the Angles or corners of the people, that is to say the provinces or tribes, etc. (Except the jabesites) make appearance. The Provinces therefore of the Israelites, which otherwise are called Tribes, are present at the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Caal, that is, the army (congregation) or universal Contion of God's people, to the number of 400000. In that universal contion (or calling together) the Levite declareth the matter. The matter being heard, the people decree a message to be sent to all the families and villages of the Beniamites, to deliver up the authors of that wicked fact. The Beniamites do rather prepare themselves to battle. The Israelites take an oath of not giving their daughters in marriage to the Beniamites, and do thus order the battle towards, that by lot out of ten thousand, they chose one Chiliarke (or band of a thousands) and out of a thousand, a hundred: and o●t of a hundred, ten. To take the care of vittayling the camp. They ask counsel of God at Silo, what tribe should fight first. The Lord answereth, the tribe of judah shall do this. The battle being ended: the people come together again before the Lord. They repent them of their oath. The army being mustered, it is found that none of the jabesites was among them in the Beniamites War. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gnedah, that is, the assembly, to wit, the Chiliarks, centurions, etc. decreeth War against the jasebites, and against them they send 12000. men: They return conquerors, and bring 400. Virgins of the jasebites. But when they sufficed not the Beniamites: The people do more repent them of the Tribe destroyed. At the self same time, the seventy (Elders) do decree, the catching of the Siloites Virgins. For, there is no likelihood, that the Chiliarkes, centurions, etc. of the Siloites, if they had been present would have suffered this decree. At the end of that history is annexed under it, that therefore these things happened thus, because there was no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, no king whom the Israelites should reverence, The necessity of a king, or one chief Governor. and to whom (being either privately or publicly offered injury) they should flee. But by the name of a King, he understandeth every such Governor and Duke (or guide) as Moses was, such an one also as was joshua: to conclude, such as were the judges, that were afterwards raised up. And it is taken in that sense, Deut. 33. 5. The scripture therefore would show, that there was at those times no guide, that should govern all the hebrews, and restrain them into order, and admonish them of their duty, as Moses and joshua had done, and whom all the hebrews would hear and obey: Finally, that should so hold all the tribes in their dutifulness, that he should execute revenge on violence publicly committed, and punish both whoredoms and Idolatries. Whereupon it came to pass that rather every tribe, yea and every of the Cities also, and besides that, every private person committed every where many things that were horrible to be spoken of, which were not publicly revenged. For that most beautiful face of the holy common weal, which shined in the times of Moses and joshua, was for the most part so decayed: that notwithstanding, The beginning of these elders corruption. it was not utterly extinguished. For there remained in every City their own judges and Elders, to wit, the Chiliarkes, the Centurions, etc. As appeareth, judg. 9 6. Where mention is made. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Col Baale shichm ve col Beth millo. Of all the Lords (in French 〈◊〉 gnieurs) & as our Br. call these Elders or seniors, governors (or as it were Lordings) of Sichem & of the family or kindred of milo, that is, of the Princes of the cities that governed the same, and of the whole assembly of the Citizens of the Sichemites: (for so I interpret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beth milo) and out of the tenth chap. ver. 18. where it is said, the whole people, that is, all the citizens & heads of the families of Gilead itself, together also with the princes of Gilead, said every one to his neighbour, etc. And in the 11. ch. v. 8. The self same princes are called the Seniors or Elders of Gilead. As also ch. 8.14. The same to be called the princes of the Succothites. And these things are also better apparent out of Rut. 4. These kind of princes or Eld. did so flatter the people, The Elders flattery of the people. that they pretermitted many things pertaining to their office, which sufficiently appeareth by the whole history of the judges. Whereupon is manifest, that the Lord was so offended with the people's Idolatries, that he often admonished the people by the prophets, & at length corrected them also by the Chananites. Thus writeth Bertram even of the first state of all these governing seniors, and of all their senates and assemblies, immediately after Moses and josues time, and in the time of Phinees that was living, even when that was done, which our Bret. these Learned Discoursers cite out of Num. 11 16. for the Institution of the seniors & Sanedrin, that they would bring in to rule now over us, and say: That our saviour Christ in that word (Congregation, Dic ecclesia) alludeth, unto the assembly of Elders that was among the jews which they called (but corruptly) of a Greek word Synedrion, which signifieth a counsel or consistory, sanhedrin, which had the hearing and determining of all weighty and difficult matters among the jews, the like whereof, he willed to be established in his church for administration of government, For, seeing it was first instituted by God, The Contion of the elders. for government of his church in the old Law, as hath been showed before out of Num. 11.16. Although it was shamefully abused by the wicked jews, our Saviour Christ translateth it into his Church in the new Testament. Here was indeed some corruption in some of those officers that flattered the people: but, the orders and the offices, remaining as yet entire, This than is the state of government, that in plain & express terms, our Brethren would so fain have us, and all the Church of Christ reduced unto. So that under a name and colour, (otherwhere) of Eccl. Seniors we may here most evidently see, what Deciniers, what Fiftinaries, what Centurions, what Chiliarkes, these Tetrarkes' would be: yea, which is far above all this, (if they would be like the Seniory of the 70, what principality they aspire unto, and in what matters of weight and government, those governors would govern like Princes, having little commonweals of their own in every town, Our Brethr. defacing the state of a king. city or province. And might not this full quickly breed as horrible facts, and foul a stir, as was here between the Beniamites and the Israelites? If they reply, it would not so, having a general Governor, which the Israelites did then want. And what? would they have judges also (as they had) tohelp this inconvenience▪ because calvin and Danaeus would not have the jurisdictions of Magistrates go by inheritance: but by election? And this Bertrame (that likeneth these ancient judges to Dictator's) after he hath showed how those judges also did degenerate, and that when the people called for a King: he saith, that Samuel taking it grievously referred it to the Lord: who comforted, his prophet, and bids him dissuade the people from this purpose, Proposito Regis iure plane tyrannico, Laying forth the right or Law of a King plain tyrannical. Thus doth Bertram also esteem, not of the abuse, but of the Law or right of a King: & all, to recommend unto us, that first policy and Government of the jews. Now, whereas Bertram here mentioneth that the Provinces & tribes came together, ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, to the assembly, which he calleth again Seu Concionem universalem populi Dei, The Congregation or Contion universal of God's people, which was of 400000: in which general Contion the Levite made his complaint to the people of his injury: of this Contion let us see also, what Carolus Sigonius writeth. Who although he be otherwise an adversary, (& therefore not of credit or authority in our controversies) yet in this matter not litigious between them & us: and he both commended, and his promise of this argument expected by this Bertram: let us at least wise see him so far forth, as he truly & clearly gathereth his collections out of the holy scriptures, Carolus Sigonius de rep. Haebrae orum lib. 6. Cap. 2. or out of the testimonies of other ancient & unsuspected authors, wherein we cannot justly except against him. In his book De rep. Hebraebrum. li. 6. c. 2. de consiliis: he saith: Counsels then I call those assemblies, that chief decreed those things, which contained the state of the whole commonweal, as the war, the peace, the victuals, the bounds, the institution of laws, the creation of magistrates, & such things as are of that sort. The which is nothing else but to dispute of a singular profit, that could not be comprehended in the law. But these Counsels, as in other common weals, so also in that of the jews, were two. For either they were entered into of all in common: or separately of a few, and those of such as were the ancienter in years. If they were of all, The jews Counsels. they called it Concionem a Congregation, or calling together of the people. If they were of part, they called it a Senate. And this also seemeth David to have understood in the Psalms. For treating of the Praises of God, that aught to be celebrated in all and of all assemblies: poetically he maketh mention, both of the contion, and of the Senate. As when he saith- I will praise thee O Lord with my whole heart, in the Council of the righteous, and in the Congregation. And in another place, Let them extol him in the Church (or Congregation) of the people, and praise him in the chair of the Elders. Again, I have hated the Church of the Malignant, with the wicked I will not sit. For the contion, he said, the congregation, in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, synagogue, and church: for the senate, council, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Senate or consistory, and chair of seniors. He would also have adjoined a third, if the use of his common weal which he looked upon had permitted. By which it manifestly appeareth, that these two being thus distinguished, and so different the one from the other: and the name of Ecclesia church or congregation, being taken for the one, that is to say, for the contion or gathering together of the multitude, clean different from the other, that is to say, from the senate or consistory of the Elders: It is most evident, that if in these words of Christ, Dic Ecclesiae, tell the church he alluded either to the ancient or to the present state of the jews order▪ that he meant not any senate, consistory, or council of seniors, but a contion, a congregation, or calling together of the whole multitude of the people. Now although, this so clear a reason, (the distinction being als● confirmed by Bertram) might seem sufficient to cut off all Caluines interpretation▪ and those that follow him, applying these words clean contrary, not to the congregation, but to the jews Seniory: yet, let us proceed further with sigonius for our further understanding of both these counsels. Moreover (saith he) c. 3. Three ●●ate● of the jews & then 3. kinds of Conciou●. The contion of the people in the holy scriptures is commonly expounded by 2. terms, Synagoga & ecclesia, synagogue & church, as in the places right now alleged, it is known. For as yet, there was not that difference between the synagogue & the church, which hath come between them, since the gospel delivered by Christ, But as there were 3. (as it were) common weals of the jews (even as I have declared from the beginning,) of the whole people, of every one of the Tribes, and of every one of the cities in every tribe: Sigonius of the jews Senates. so were there 3. Contions of the people. One, wherein all the tribes of Israel, another, whereunto all the families of one tribe, the third, whereunto all the men of every city came together. And of this last (except we shall yet restrain it narrower, to all the multitude of every synagogue in every city) is this Ecclesia, Church, Contion or Congregation whereof Christ speaketh to be understood, if it should be referred to the jews state and orders. Now after Sigonius hath produed this by manifold testimonies out of the scriptures, he cometh to the fourth Chapter, concerning the Senate saying: Having expounded the Contion, we have to speak of the Senate. But this also the Hebrews had, Three kinds of the jews Senates. and that, (as the people) three-folde. One whereunto the Senators of all the people came together: another, unto the which, they that were of every one of the tribes: the third, they that were of every one of the Cities. The Senate of the whole people was ordained by God, of threescore and ten men, which in age excelled others in all Israel. For so he said, Num. 11. Gather together to me threescore and ten of the seniors of Israel, whom thou knowest that they be the elders of the people, and the scribes, and thou shalt bring them unto the door of the Tabernacle of the covenant, and thou shalt make them stand there with thee, etc. to bear the burden of the people and that thou only be not burdened. The Grecians therefore called the men that were of this order, a Senate, ancients, Seniors, and Senators: the Council they called Bulen, the Council place Eulenterium, the men Buletas, as ye would say, a Counsel, a council house, and counsellors. Hear (Lo) is the place that our Bret. in thi● their Learned Discourse have now the second time avonched for their Seniors: that our Saviour Christ hath translated the Senate of this seniory into his church, in the new Testament, although it was shamefully abused by the wicked jews. This Seniory indeed of these 70. was instituted of God, for the Government of his Church in the old Law. Sith therefore this is the place chief pretended for the order and authority of the Governors in the new Testament, the abuses of the jews being only abolished: let us not only look to the jews corruptions and abuses, but to the institution of God, and to the good use thereof in the old Law, that our brethren say, is here passed over in the new Testament and translated unto us to be perpetually used in every congregation. Our Br. will be Seniors of the highest sort. And here I like better of our Bret. wit, (that they would choose to be Seniors of the best and highest Senate, not of the mean or lowest) than of their wisdom: not foreseeing how this can not agree to every Parish, except every parish should be made a kingdom. But why not? as that he said: Si ius violandum est, regni causa est violandum. They must needs be like the 70. Elders assistant to Moses, the other inferior Elders will not serve them. But these (saith Sigonius chap. 3.) sat by the chief Prince of the Commonweal in the Metropolitan City, and being of him admitted, together with the Princes of the people, they entered into the Counsels, of the sum (or chief state) of the affairs. Whereupon josephus reporteth that, out of the Law: Let the King do nothing without the sentence of the Bishop, and of the Senators. Of these councils, there ar● these testimonies: in the 5. of Deut. Moses faith: All ye, the Princes of the Tribes and the Seniors came to me. And in the 27. Moses and the Seniors commanded the people, saying: Keep all the commandments that I command you. Also joshua, 23. joshua called all Israel their Seniors, their Princes, their judges, and their Scribes. From thence, under the judges, chap. 21. the Seniors or Elders decreed, that the Beniamites should catch the virgins of the siloites to be their wives. Then under Solomon in the 7. chap. of the 3. book of the Kings: The Elders in the time of the kings. All the Elders of Israel were gathered to the King Solomon in jerusalem. And in the 1. ch. of 2. Chr. Ezekias the King entered into counsel with the Elders, concerning the stopping the heads of the fountains. And albeit, the kingdom being divided, the Senate of the jews was chosen out of the only Tribe of juda and of Benjamin: nevertheless the number of the 70. Elders was preserved. For Ezechiel in the 8. chap. said: And the threescore and ten men of the Elders of Israel, when notwithstanding in the Age of Ezechiel the 10. Tribes of Israel were in Assyria. And jeremy in the 19 named the Elders of the people, Take an earthen bottle of the Elders of the people and of the Priests. Neither only did this Senate flourish while the kingdom stood: but also the kingdom being overthrown, after the jews return out of the captivity of Babylon, the same was restored. The Elders since the captivi tie. For in the 1. of Esay it is written: I will restore thy judges and thy counsellors as in the ancient time. And in the 10. of Esdras (which place we have heard cited by Danaeus,) Every one that shall not come within three days, according to the counsel of the Princes and of the Elders: all his substance shall be forfaised. And the 12. of the first of the Maccabees: jonathas the high Priest of the Nation, and the Elders, and the residue of the people of the jews. And in the first of the 2. book: The people that is at jerusalem, and the Senate, and judas to Aristobulus the Master of King Prolomeus, sendeth greeting. And in the 11. King Antiochus to the Senate of the jews, and to the other jews. And in the 14. To Simon the Bishop, and to the Seniors, and to the whole people. And Saint Luke 22. The seniors of the people: being called in Greek, the Presbytery (or Eldership) of the people. josephus also showeth, that in last times of the City, Florus the Procurator of jury calling unto him the Princes of the Senators, Sigonius. and the Senators, and the Senate, he said that he would departed out of the City. And he addeth, that with the Temple the Court also was set on fire, which Court he calleth, Buleuterion, the Counsel-house. But although this Senate for consultation sake remained always: The kings authority besides the Senate. notwithstanding we have to understand, that the Kings which have had the Commonweal in their power, were not thrall unto the Laws, although they made Decrees without the authority of the Senate, as those that were in chiefest authority, not such as God had prescribed, but such as their selves wished. Moreover, that the Tribes had every one their Senators, different from those that were the Senators of the Common-people, it is more probable by conjecture, than certain by authority: For although it be written in the 20. chap. of the 4. book of the Kings. All the Seniors of juda and jerusalem were gathered together to the King josias: and in the 30. of the first book, David sent gifts of the Pray●, to the Seniors of juda his neighbours: and 19 of Hieremie, God said, I will destroy the Counsel of juda: notwithstanding it may be, that they that were the Seniors of juda were all one with the Seniors of the people. But without doubt, every one of the Cities had gotten their Senators, separate from those whom we have spoken of. Whereupon are these speeches, All the Seniors of juda and Jerusalem, were gathered together to the King josias. And josephus lib. 2. The Seniors of jerusalem took it grievously, that the brother of jaddi the Bishop, married a stranger. And judges 11. the Seniors of Galaad proceeded to take jephthe for their aid, & said unto him; Come and be our Prince. And in the 8. He took a child of the men of Sucoth, and asked of him the names of the Princes and Seniors of Sucoth. And Ruth 4. Booz taking ten men of the Seniors of the City of Bethleem said unto them, etc. Thus doth Sigonius divide the Seniors into three sorts, The Senniors of all the people, the Seniors of every Tribe, and the Seniors of every City. And if Christ had meant any of these Seniors, it is far more likely, that he should have meant this last sort, if not some yet of lower degree than these, of every Synagogue of the City, than the highest of all, that sat with the Prince in Counsel, and had the consultation of all the sum and principal points of all the Churches & Commonweals affairs: which were the manifest endangering of her majesties estate, Cap. 5. and the clean altering of all the Commonweal. In the next Chapter Sigonius proceedeth to their judgements, saying cap. 5. We have spoken of the Counsels, in which chiefly the City's profit is disputed upon. After which we have to speak of the judgements, wherein the singular (or particular) equity is defined, that could not either be provided for, or prescribed by the Law. But these judgements, the Greek Interpreters of the Bible, have now and then translated them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, now and then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to wit, respecting the double force itself of judgements: in which condemning and acquitting is contained, which by these two words judgement and justice or justification they expressed, as we have showed before. Furthermore, among the hebrews there were two Tribunal seats, of the judgements, the one in every of the Cities called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The Synedrion at jerusalem. the other chiefly at Jerusalem named 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which the Latin Interpreter translated judgement and Counsel. Whereupon in S. Matthew, Christ saith; Every one that is angry with his brother, shall be guilty of judgement. But he that shall say Racha, shallbe guilty of a Counsel. But that the judgement was an other thing from the Counsel: David in the first Psalm showeth, when he said: Therefore the wicked shall not arise again in judgement, neither the sinners in the counsel of the righteous. And here cometh in our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 corruptly called Sanedrin, that calvin and our Brethren apply Christ's words unto. Which Synedrion was the judicial Consistory of the seventy Elders, that with the Prince as Counsellors, had the government of all the policy of the jews. But because the other called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, was the judgement of every City: if Christ had meant to have alluded to the jews orders, and to have translated and established the same or the like in every Congregation among the Christians: is it not more likely of the twain, he would have taken that which was the judgement of every City: than the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which was only in jerusalem the head City, a chief judgement to over rule all the other. But yet for our further resolution, let it not be tedious to hear also Sigonius testimonies at large, Cap. 6. for both these judgements of these Seniors. Let us first (saith he, chap. 6. treat of the judgements of the Cities, and then of the Counsel of jerusalem, when they were instituted and confirmed, who they were that entered into them, who were Governors of them, where they came together, and to conclude, in what order they took notice of the causes. I say therefore, that the judges of the Cities with their Princes, which in Greek were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, introducers, informers, What elders the judges of the cities were. or teachers of the writings, or of the Law written, (or as we might call them Masters of the Rolls, which were after called Scribes) were instituted of Moses in the Wilderness, first by the authority of jethro his Father in law, and afterward by commandment of God. For when Moses the first year in the Wilderness sat to hear causes, he was warned by jethro his Father in law that he should spare that labour, and appoint wise men, skilful and prudent, to judge in his steed, and reserve to himself only the understanding of matters that were of more importance. He therefore appointed them the Princes (of whom after shall be spoken) Tribunes, Centurions, Governors of fifty, Governors of ten, or as the Greek sets them out, Chiliarks, Hecatontarks, Pentecontarks, Decadarks, to be introducers of the causes to the judges, or preferred them to be Grammatoisagogeos, the Chauncelors, or the Primitories, or the enterers in writing of the actions. Exod. 18. And choosing valiant men out of all. Israel, he appointed them Princes of the people, Tribunes and Centurions, and Captains over fifty, and Captains over ten, which should judge the people at all times. Wherefore, after the 40. year, rehearsing to the people the acts that he had done, he allegeth in the first of Deuteronomie, I said unto you, I am not able alone to sustain your businesses, What princes the Elders were, inferior to the Synedrion Elders. and burden, and brawlings, give ye out of yourselves, wise men and skilful, and whose conversation is approved in your Tribes, that I might place them to be Princes. Then ye answered me; It is a good thing that thou wilt do. And I took wise men, and noble out of your Tribes, and appointed them to be Princes, Tribunes and Centurions, and Rulers over fifty, and Rulers of ten, which should teach you all things. And I commanded them saying: Hear ye them, and judge ye that which is righteous, whether he be a citizen, or be be a stranger, let there be no difference of persons. Ye shall as well hear the small as the great, neither shall ye accept the person of any whosoever, because it is the judgement of God. But if any thing shall seem difficult unto you, refer that to me, and I will hear it. But the Grecians have it more plain and more apt to unfold the manner of these judgements: And I appointed them to rule over you Chiliarkes, (or Rulers of thousands): Hecatontarks, (or Rulers of hundreds): Pentecontarks, (Quinquegenariens or Rulers of fifty): Deacharks, or Rulers of ten): and Grammatoisagogists, (or the enterers in writing, or inrollers of the pleas,) unto your judges. For in steed of that which the latin interpreter translateth, which should teach you all things: the greek rehearseth it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to the informers in writing unto your judges (the text itself is, and Governors to your tribes. Afterward the law of God came hereunto, wherein concerning these judges it was enacted chap. 16, in these words, Thou shalt ordain unto thee, judges and Masters in all thy Cities, which the Lord God shall give to thee, according to the Tribes. And they shall judge the people with righteous judgement, neither shall they wrest the judgement, neither shall they acknowledge the person of any, neither shall they take gifts. And in this place for Masters, the Greek setteth out, Grammatoisagogeos, the informers in writing (or of the Law written. This Law josephus so rehearseth, that he showeth, the judges were also chosen by lot: Let those also which by lot have come forth to judge, be in chiefest honour in the cities, & let no reproaches be spoken in their presence. Let the judges have the right of pronouncing that which they think, except that any shall show that they have received rewards to judge, or shall allege any other cause of wrong judgement. But as Moses ordained them, The Elders in the time of josaphat so afterward king josophat confirmed them in the kingdom of juda, as is declared in the 19 Chap. of the second book of Chronicles, He ordained judges of the land, in all the dedefenced Cities throughout all places. And commanding the judges, he said: Take heed what ye do, for ye exercise not the judgement of man, but of the Lord. And whatsoever you shall judge, shall redound upon yourselves. Let the fear of the Lord be with you, and do all things with diligence. With our Lord GOD there is no iniquity, nor accepting of persons, not desire of rewards. After this, These Elderships restored after the captivity. the judgements being disturbed in the land of Babylon, the jews when they returned into their Country, as they did other matters, so they restored these. Which thing that it should come to pass, isaiah Chap. had forewarned, when as he uttered these speeches of God: And I will restore thy judges as they were before. And after that, the king Artaxerxes commanded that it should be so done. For so he wrote in the sixth of Esdras: Ordain thou judges and Scribes, that they might judge all the people. For he called them Scribes, whom we have named Grammatoisagogeos, the informers of the writings or written Law. Whereupon (that they were restored) the Psalmist rejoiced (as saith Saint Athanasius) which when the city of jerusalem was re-edified, and the judgements restored, even as it was foretold of the Lord, breaking forth for joy, he song in the Psalm. 121. I was glad in those things that were spoken to me, we will go into the house of the Lord, our feet standing in thy Courts O Jerusalem. jerusalem which is built as a City, whose participation is in itself. For thither the Tribes ascended. The Tribes of the Lord the testimony of Israel, to confess the name of the Lord, because they set the seats there in judgement, or, into judgement, as the Greek hath it, the seats upon the house of David. And so afterward even until the last times of the jews. But these judges seem to have been chosen out of the body of the Senators of every city. From whence the Synedrian Elders were chosen. Even as from the first times also among the Romans, the judgements were executed of the Senators. The Law itself in many places teacheth it. Deut. 19 If the smiter shall fly into one of the foresaid Cities, the Senate of that City shall send and take him out of the place of refuge. And in 21. When a corpse is found, and the slayer shall not be known, the Senate of the City shall go out and measure from that place, etc. whereupon Ruth 4. coz taking ten men of the Seniors of the City of Bethleem, said unto them: Sat ye here and be witnesses. The people that was in the gate, and the Seniors answered, we are witnesses, and before them he took the possession of Elimelech. Moreover Philo in lib. de judice. gathereth out of the Law four conditions of good judges, etc. Furthermore, that the judgements were exercised in the gate of the Cities, that was called the gate of judgement: the Law, Deuteronomi. 21. declareth, etc. and 25. and also joshua 8. etc. and Ruth 4. etc. proverbs 22. and 31. and Psalm. 126. etc. These judgements were made in this manner. He that desired to commence an action against another, resorted to one of the Princes of of the judges, which were called Grammato-isagogei, the Scribes, or informers of the writs or writings, and showed forth his cause, and requested of him that he would bring it in unto the judges. But if he received the controversy (for he might also reject it) he brought in the same at a day appointed before the judges. Whereupon he received the name (Introductoris) of an introducer, etc. But the Thalmudistes have showed that the matter was handled on this wife; They that demanded the Law, came to the judges of their City: who, if they heard them not, they went to them of the next City. But and if so be, that neither yet they hearkened unto them: then they went unto the judges of Jerusalem, which sat in two gates. After whom, from them, if that yet they obtained not their purpose, they fled to the Council, the which they called Sanhedrin. Their words (such as are rehearsed by Petrus Galatinus, Petrus Galatinus of the process in the courts of judgement. a man in time past an Hebrew) are these. In the beginning there was no controversy in Israel, but the house of the judgement of the threescore and ten judges, sat in divers places. For one of the houses sat in the gate of the Mount, that is, of the Temple: but another in the gate of the Porch. As for the other houses of the three and twenty judges, fate in every of the Cities of of Israel. But when any thing was to be demanded, it was demanded of the house of judgement, which was in the self same City. If they heard it, Dicebant, they declared it (or gave sentence thereon): but if not, they came to that order that was in the next City. Who if they heard it: they declared it unto them (or gave sentence). If not, they went to that order which was in the gate of the porch of the lords house, and said, Sic exposui, & sit socij mei exposuerunt: sic docui, & sic socij mei docuerunt, Thus have I showed it, and thus have my fellows showed it: thus have I taught, and thus have my fellows taught it. Who if they heard it: they declared it unto them. If not, then both these and those went to the Consistory Gazith, wherein the Sanedrin sat from the morning till the evening. But in the sabbaths and first days they sat in the wall. Thus far the Thalmudistes. And thus far also Sigonius, for the judgements of the Seniors in every City. Whereby again we perceive the authority that these Seniors had. The next and seventh chapter is all of this Senate, that calvin and our Brethren say, Christ alluded unto, and hath translated unto us. But the Consistory Gazith (saith Sigonius) which the Grecians have named 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and Chair, the Latins Council, the Thalmudists Sanhedrin, was the ample (or honourable) Tribunal (or judgement seat) of all the judges, both in number and in dignity, in that City which the Lord hath chosen and decreed, to be the head both of holiness and of the Empire, that is, first in Silo, and afterward at jerusalem, or else, first in the Tribe of Ephraim, and afterward in the Tribe of juda. In that Council it was established, that those things which could not be defined of the judges of every of their Cities, varying in their sentences concerning the Law, or concerning the fact, Petrus Gala●tnus collection of the Thalmudists concerning the Sanedrin. should in conclusion be referred hereunto. But now being about to treat of this Tribunal, I will first show forth all those things, that are declared of the Thalmudists. And then I will add, what I myself have found by reading in the holy Writers. Thus therefore have they in divers places. In the time of Moses by the commandment of God, seventy Elders of ancient years and tried in knowledge were chosen out, which should be Coadjutors of Moses himself, in the government of the people, unto whom it pertained both to declare all the difficulties of the Law, and to define them, and also in weighty matters and hard causes to give judgement. Of whom is written, that in the Deuteronomie: If thou shalt perceive that a difficult and doubtful judgement is before thee: arise and go up to the place, which the Lord thy God shall have chosen, and there shalt thou call upon his name. As for these they were called by the term Sanhedrin, and they sat in the Consistory Gazith, to judge the judgements of the lives, and they were called Meokekim, that is, Scribes, or Lawe-makers, because that whatsoever they delivered, and wrote, was holden of others as a Law. The College of whom represented the Sceptre, given of the holy Ghost to the house of jacob. And the sceptre itself depended on them. Whereupon not only they that were resiant under the kings and Captains (or Dukes) exercised the power of judging, but also while there was no king nor Duke extant among the jews, nevertheless the authority of them endured. But there were 4. manners of putting to death delivered to them. To stone them, to burn them, to * occidere. wound them to death, and to strangle them. Whereupon their use was, that when they had destroyed any body's life, The authority of the Synedrian Elders. that is, when they had judged any to be slain: all that day they tasted nothing. Moreover, the judgements concerning money or goods movable, were made by three judges, the judgements of the lives by three and twenty. But none judged the Sceptre, or a false Prophet, or the high Priest, but the house of the 70. judges. Neither did they go forth to war, except according to the mouth (or sentence) of the house of the judgement of the 70. judges. Nec addebant Ciuita●●, neither increased they the city (or indenized any) nor the salaries (or stipends) of the Temple, except by them. Neither made they the Sanhedri●th, that is, the meetings (or Sessions) of the judges for the Tribes, but by them. The great College was of 71. judges, the less of 23. But the 70. seniors were those, of whom (it is said Num. 11. Gather to me threescore and ten Elders, and Moses one. Their lesser Sanedrion, assembly, (or meeting) of them, could not be ordained, but of the assembly (or meeting) of the 70. that were the greater. For those 70. judges ordained the assemblies of the other judges, which in other Cities & places round about governed the people, howbeit on this condition, that every Assembly of whatsoever Region it were, should be under the Assembly in jerusalem, and in the place called Gazith. But the judges were chosen with the imposition of hands, The Elders chosen with imposition of hands. insomuch that five were necessary for the doing of that office. But these Sanhedrins, Herode the King took away. Other after that were substituted, but without the power of blood, (or of life and death) whereupon they answered Pilate, It is not lawful for us to kill any man. The power of the Sanedrin diminished in Christ's time. From thence forth, for their false judging of Christ, they were expulsed out of the Consistory Gazith, forty years before the Temple was burned by the Romans, and they sat in Hamih. But it was not lawful, De Capite agere, to deal with matters of life and death, except in Gazith. As it is Deut. 17. And thou shalt do● according to the word of the mouth, They lost their place & dignity after their falls judging of Christ. that they shall show unto thee out of that place. And again, Thou shalt arise and go up to that place. At the last, all these judges also were again killed of the Romans. And these things verily have the Thalmudists, who challenge to themselves an assured knowledge of these things, whereof Petrus Galatinus is the Author. But unto those things which they have written, The Romans destruction of these Elders having found them out as it were with their eyes, we adjoin these things, out of the holy Treasuries of the new and old Testament, and beside out of the Monuments of josephus, by the which we shall lay forth the institution, confirmation, right and power of this Council, First of all therefore it appeareth, that this tribunal (or judgement seat) was ordained of God, that from the judgement of the judges, they should come to the council of the seniors and of the priests, as it is written. 17. Deut. For Moses speaketh there by the prescription of God unto the people: But if so be thou shalt perceive a difficult and doubtful judgement to be before thee, between blood and blood, cause and cause, God's ordinance, Deut. 17. of these Elders power in judgement. Lepry and not Lepry: and thou shalt see the judgements of the judges within thy gates. To v●ry, arise and go up unto the place which the Lord thy God shall choose, that thou mightest there call upon his name. And thou shalt come to the priests of the levitical stock, and to him that shallbe judge for that time, and thou shalt ask it of them. Who shall show unto thee the truth of the judgement. And thou shalt do whats●euer they shall say, that rule the place, which the Lord shall choose. and they shall teach thee his Law, and thou shalt follow their sentence. Neither shalt thou serve from it, to the right hand nor to the left. And whatsoever shallbe proud, refusing to obey the priests commandment, which at that time ministereth unto the Lord his God: that man by the decree of the judge shall die. Out of these it appeareth, that this judgement was committed to the king, to the priests, and to the Elders of the people. For they were the chief that ruled the place that the Lord had chosen. josephus. josephus therefore doth so rehearse this law, that he maketh chief mention of the senate. For than he wrote: But if the judges want knowledge to pronounce of the matters brought before them: let them send the whole cause into the holy City, and the Bishop, and the Prophet, and the Senate, shall pronounce that, that seemeth unto them. But afterward Moses nameth the judges themselves, whom we have spoken of, priests, saying in the 19 chapter. If a lying witness shall stand against a man, accusing him of trespass: they shall both of them stand before the Lord, and before the priests, and before the judges that shall be in those days. But josephus citeth it of the priests themselves, in his second book to Appion, when as he wrote: josephus li. 2. ad Appionem. The priests were ordained of Moses the viewers of all things, the judges of the controversies, the punishers of the condemned. Moreover Moses himself, in the counsel took knowledge (or hearing) of his cause, that gathered sticks on the sabbath. levit. 15. For so saith Philo. 3. De vita Mosu. They took the man & brought him to the Prince, about whom in the Counsel sat the priests, Philo. li. 3. de vita Mosis. but all the multitude was present on the Sabbath day to hear them. But Moses not knowing what punishment the man deserved, asked counsel of God, who answered, that he should be stoned to death. By this it appeareth that all the parties that sat in this Sanedrin, except the Kings and the Prince's persons were Teachers of the Law and and word of God. Yea, in all the other inferior Seniories they were noble men that only were joined to the Teachers. But as Moses ordained this tribunal, so afterward josaphat King of juda ordained, as he also confirmed the judgements in the cities. For thus it is written in the second of Paral. He appointed also in jerusalem, levites, and priests, and patriarchs, out of Israel that they should judge the cause of the Lord to the inhabiters thereof, and commanded them saying: thus shall ye do in the fear of the Lord faithfully and with a perfect heart. Every cause that shall come unto you of your Brethren which dwell in their cities, between kindred & kindred, wheresoever the Question of the Law, of the ceremonies, of the justification (in the Greek translation it is, of the precept, commandment justifications and judgements) He declared unto them, that they should not offend against the L. And least wrath should come upon you and upon your Brethren. Doing thus therefore ye shall not sin. But Anainas your B. shall govern in those things which pertain to God, Zabadias' the son of Israel, which is Captain in the tribe of juda, shall be over those works which pertain to the offices of the king. The Masters, (in Greek the Scribes) The Levites shall be before them. Into this counsel therefore, as it appeareth, there entered the king, with the Princes of the people, What manner of persons the Elders were in the Sanedrin. and the 70. seniors of the people, and the Bishop with the princes of the priests, & the scribes, that is the doctors of the Law, as is easy to see out of the Gospels, where the judgement made on Christ is treated upon. Wherefore joseph of Arimathia a senator or noble decurion, the same man being a partaker of the council, for it is written, that he gave not his assent with the other to the condemnation of Christ. But I call them the Princes of the priests, which in 24. forms of the priests, every one of them ruled in every one of their turns, but the Scribes I call them, that were the doctors of the Law, whom josephus called Prophet's. Afterward the Council in the transmigration of Babylon being destroyed: when the jews being returned into their country, the residue of their institutions were restored, the power of judging in the Council was also given unto the priests. The power of the priests in the Sanedrin. Which thing Ezechiel. cap. 44. did forewarn, by the commandment of Go●, saying: The priests shall teach my people, what difference there is between holy and profane, and they shall judge unto them between impure, and pure, and they shall endeavour themselves that they may judge about the judgement of blood, and they shall justify my justifications, and judge my judgements, and they shall keep my laws, and my precepts in all my feast days, that is, they shall take notice of causes of religion and of capital matters (that is, of life and death) and they shall justify men, that is, absolve them: and judge men, that is, condemn them, even as I have prescribed in the Law to be done, where I have declared who are worthy of pardon, and who of punishment. But some there are that think this counsel to have been chosen out of the family of David, and that they were afterward taken away of Herod the King Which if it be so, whether the words of the Psalm sung (as S. Athanasius witnesseth) in the restoring of the City of jerusalem, may be referred thereunto: because there, that is, in jerusalem, sat the seats unto judgement, the seats upon the house of David, that is, the seat out of the house of David. But either the King or the Bishop called this counsel, according as the crime brought before them either touched the City or Religion. But the order of executing the matter was almost in this manner. He that desired to put up the name of another, for the most part came either to the king, or to the Bishop, or to the Princes, and declared the guilty party. Which done they sent Ministers to take the man. The order and process in the Sanedrin. And if the matter required, they added a band also, received from the governor of the Temple. And having brought him, they kept him for the most part either in prison, or in soldiers custody, until judgement passed on him. The whole Council being afterward called together, they gave themselves to the understanding of the matter. As for the crime and the punishment, was of the accusant called upon, in these words: The judgement of death is due to this man, because he hath done this or that. But the Defendant repelled it, with these words. The appealants accusation. The judgement of death is not due to this man, because he hath not done it, or because he hath done it righteously. But when the cause hath been thoroughly pleaded upon, then were the suffrages (or voices) given of the judges, and either he was condemned or absolved, according to the number of the sentences. But when the matter was brought to the Romans: the only condemnation was left to the Council, but the the punishment was taken away, but, permitted unto the Roman procurator. Which happened in the judgement of Christ. For the Council condemned Christ, and adjudged him to death. But the people being stirred up of the Council, demanded of Pilate the Procurator, that he might be crucified, & he gave judgement that it should so be done. The form of laying the accusation or of repelling the crime, as in the 26 of Hieremie: the priests and the prophets spoke unto the princes of juda, saying: the judgement of death is unto this man, The fo●me of the accusation in jeremy and of his acquittal. because he hath prophesied against this City. And the princes said unto the priests: the judgement of death is not unto this man, because he hath spoken unto us in the name of the Lord our God. A form of the condemnation is in S. Math. 26. Behold now ye have heard blasphemy what seemeth it to you? and they answering, said: he is guilty of death: the which thing Mark saith: The form● of the Synedrion in condemning Christ. Who all of them condemned him to be guilty of death: but these things which we have spoken shall all be more clear known, if every one of the iudementes made after this order, whereof record is left in writing shall be showed forth. And here he proceedeth to the manifold testimonies and examples hereof in the Scripture, and in josephus, but especially in the new testament. By all which it appeareth for this Senate or council of the 70, Seniors, (which after the jews mixture with the Grecians, of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was corruptly called Sanedrin) what persons they were, except the King and the Princes, all of them either priests or teachers of the Laws of God, And how they sat but in one and the head City, assistant with the King and the princes, in all matters of plea and controversy, of Lands & goods, of war and peace, of life and death, etc. Nor the King could rule these matters without them, and that their authority herein grew not so much by the late corruptions: as it was rather thereby abridged in the age of Christ, by the Romans and by Herod. If now our Learned discoursing Brethren shall reject all these so industrious collections of Sigonius (as an adversary) what proofs, Bertrams● confirmation of these things. reasons, and authorities soever he avouch: let us then see, how far forth Bertram also doth confirm it. For, besides that which we have alleged out of him, for the original and the first practice thereof, before the government of the Kings: after the negligence of Saul speaking of David, chap. 10. Page 56. he saith: Moreover David restored the municipal judgements altogether into their ancient order. ●ert. de politia judaica, ca 10. pag. 56 Howbeit, but about the last times of his reign: because, that being hindered with wars and divers businesses, he was content with those judgements, which for a great part being decayed, persevered (but little constantly) in every of the Cities and tribes, even from the times of joshua, until then. But yet so, that the more weighty causes (especially the appeals) were referred to him, as it appeareth out of 2. Sam. 15.2. But at the length, he also restored this part of the common weal, so that unto the Levites reckoned up, he established to be firm, their changeable and uncertain offices, The Levites were the governors in the jews Senates. both in the holy (or Ecclesiastical) policy, and also in the civil. In the civil policy, he is said to have appointed out of the Levites, 6000. judges and praefectes (or Governors). Out of the Levites, the judges and praefectes were assumed, for this reason: That first there should be certain out of the Levites which should be assistors or sitters together with the ordinary and municipal judges, that were called seniors. Who sometimes also De plane (ut Vulgo loquuntur) judicarent de rebus levioribus, should judge after a plain sort (as is the common saying) of the lighter matters, The matters that the Levites judged. such as were the pecuniary, either they alone, or taking some one unto them of the Seniors of the place or City. And moreover, that there should also be some other, which should execute the matters adjudged. Bertram. Or else, 1. Chro. 26.29. (that which is indeed the more likely) they that were the Assisors of the ordinary judges, who also their selves took notice of the pecuniary matters, & judged them, and executed the matter itself that they had judged. He ordained therefore that Chanenias and his sons, or his posterity should be designed for judges and Prefects for the outward work, that is to say, for the outward holy offices that we necessary for the making of sacrifices, in the house of the Lord, or Tabernacle, in Israel, that is, among the Israelites, that dwelled on this side jordan, except the Tribes of juda, Benjamin, and Simeon. The number of these is nor prescribed. He also ordained out of the Hebronites, Hasabias', and his brethren, that they should govern the Western coasts, sidelong (or on the side) of jordan, that is, on the hether-hand jordan, as well in the business of the Lord, as in the service or ministery, or obeisance of the king. In French, Pour le service du Roy, that is, in the businesses (or affairs appertaining to the Royal administration or civil policy, as shall afterward appear, This Western coast contained the Tribe of juda, Benjamin, and Simeon. Which Tribes of those that are on this hand jordan, do lie Westward. The other which are attributed to Israel, are Northern. Hasabias' & his brethren are accounted 1700 He ordained also, How David distributed the governments and bounds of the Levites Seniories. that out of the Hebronites, the brethren, or the next a kin of jerias, the Prince of all his family, to the number of 1700. should govern the Rubenites, the Gadites, and the half Tribe of Manasses. For every matter of God, that is, Ecclesiastical: and for the matter of the ning, that is, the civil. Of the same family therefore were adhibited to govern the Church, and to govern the civil policy, neverthesse's, in such sort, that there was no confusion and permixture: as it appeareth out of those things that were restored of josaphat. It seemeth therefore, that then, and from thence upward, even to the times of joshua; there were certain Ecclesiastical assemblies of the Levites, at every one of the Synagogues of every one of the Cities, or verily at tho, e cities, which were proper to the Levites, as in the 15. chap. we shall more at large declare. Thus was the state again rightly restored to the original (as Bertran saith) in David's time, and that by his industry and supreme authority. Wherein we see what those Seniors only were, that here meddled not only with Ecclesiastical, but civil government, to wit, all of them levites. And such as might teach the law. For the other, (which were the Elders of other Tribes) dealt only in civill-matters, except the Prince alone, that had the principal charge over both the Tables, though not to execute, yet to see executed (by the persons competent in both founctions) as well the Ecclesiastical as the civil policy. And thus as David did dispose the regiment of these Seniors, a little before his death, so no doubt, but that his son Solomon did all his life observe it. Solomon maintained herein David's orders. After whom (saith Bertram) concluding that Chapter: In the time of jeroboam the judgements began to degenerate, especially after the Empire was divided. But entering again into a fresh restoring thereof in the 11. Chapter, he proceedeth, josaphats' restoring ●he Iewes Seniories. saying: josaphat having taken possession of the kingdom, proceeded both in restoring the Ecclesiastical and civil policy. To this purpose therefore he thought it very expedient. if first of all he removed the high places and the groves (as a little after we shall throughly handle it.) And then, that he should send five of his Princes, Beuchail, Abdias, Zacharias, Nathaniel, and Micheas, unto whom he adjoined two of the Priests, and nine Levites. And he sent them throughout all the Cities of the kingdom of juda, etc. beginning at Beer-sheba, and ending at the mount of the Tribe of Ephraim, to reclaim his people to the worship of God. To confirm this, he is said to have ordained judges, in all the defenced Cities, City by City, that is, in every of the Cities, or, for City and City & City. He placed the judgement in the chiefeft Cities, to the which judgements the causes of the lesser Cities, 2. Chro. 19 Pages, and Islands should be referred. These judges are to be taken in that manner as they were instituted at Jerusalem, to wit, Ecclesiastical & civil. So that they appointed civil judgements out of the Seniors of every City, and the Levites are said to be adhibited, to be the governors unto either of the judgements, to wit, after the same manner, whereby David had assigned them to that office, as appeareth out of the end of the Chapter. He also ordained judges at jerusalem out of the Levites and the Priests and heads of the Fathers of Israel, partly for the judgements of the Lord, that is the Ecclesiastical, partly also * Ad Li●●m. for plea, that is, for the civil judgement. In these words, the two judgements, to wit, the Ecclesiastical and the civil, are distinguished. The civil (as it seemeth to consist on the heads of the Fathers of the people) seemeth to be the Synedrion of the three score and ten Elders. The Synedrion. In those heads of the Fathers, we may place the Priests and the Levites: for the institution of the seventy themselves had their governors, which were the Levites. But those seventy were not now taken out of those seventy families, of whom we spoke before. But of those only that were under the dominion of josaphat. Whereupon also at the length, they were chosen out of the only house and family of David. As concerning those judges being chosen, are said to return unto jerusalem: This may be so understood, that leaving the allottment of their Tribe those judges came to abide at jerusalem, or that they used to meet at jerusalem, where the judgement was to be entered. It is likely that the Ecclesiastical judgement did then consist of the Priests and Levites only. These two judgements were the chief and principal, whereunto the more difficult causes were referred, as the Lord had commanded in the Law. For the King in his exhortation set forth unto the same judges, confirmeth this sufficiently, while he saith: And ye shall judge every strife which shall come from your Brethren that dwell in their Cities, etc. The matter of either judgement may seem to be all one, but in a diverse respect, that is to wit, Ecclesiastical and civil, The diuer● respect of Eccl. & civil in one and the same cause. according as in the same cause somewhat was Ecclesiastical, & somewhat civil, as in a pawn divided, etc. Moreover, the high Priest was sometimes demanded concerning the Law, that it might at length be determined concerning the fact. To conclude (as these judgements were the highest) they had at jerusalem their municipal judgement, which seemeth to appertain to the king and to his officers, or rather to the Chiliarks, Centurions, etc. of that territory. Notwithstanding so, that the whole jurisdiction should be subject to either of those judgements. By these things therefore, this King seemeth rather than any other judge or King, to have come near to the natural institution of the Law prescribed, concerning this matter. Hear again do we see a clear example, of that Seniory which calvin and our Brethr. do so much urge, drawing nearest to that very institution of the old law, without the corruption that they except against. And they (saith Bertram) that were the governors of the supreme civil judgement, do seem for the same cause to be those, which with the later kings are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Sarim, that is, princes, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chorim, that is, Patricians (or noble Fathers.) That these Princes were out of the heads of the Fathers, and out of the ordinary judges, it appeareth out of the things aforesaid, and especially, out of these things that are declared in this restitution of josaphat, yea rather, The great principality of these Elders. out of the Prophets often reprehensions, being so converted and composed to these Princes, that they altogether respect their judgements. Verily of this so great Empire (or principality) there seem to be extant in jeremy most clear examples. So that, except these Elders which our Brethren plead for, (to be renewed after the example and pattern of the ancient laws of the jews) would take this Princely Empire and authority upon them: their appealing to these ancient laws & orders, make nothing for them. But yet to see their authority better: let Bertram proceed with his examples, though some of them we have heard before in Sigonius. The first (example) is extant, jere. 26. Chap. where after that jeremy was condemned of the Priests & Prophets (that is) of the ecclesiastical Confession, or Consistory, jerem. 2. & of them that professed the knowledge & interpretation of the divine letters (or of divinity as we term it) as though the knowledge of doctrine pertained unto them: whereupon they also which of jeremy are called Prophets, of jonathas the Paraphrast are expounded, Scribes) and also was condemned of the whole people, that is, of the ordinary advocates of the people, the judges, or Seniors, to wit, the Chiliarkes, Centurions, etc. Which represented the whole people, insomuch that, verse. 9 the whole people is gathered to the congregation or contion. And in the 17. verse mentioned is made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Caal. That is, of the gathering together, or of the universal contion itself: or certainly, the very people their selves (that heard jeremy) being called together to bear witness against him, & to subscribe to the sentence pronounced against him, and to command it to be executed, as it appeareth in the end of the Chapter: & that the same was declared to the Princes of juda that were assembled at the king's palace, to wit, to the civil Consistory of three score and ten Elders: jeremy acquitted by those Elders these kind of Princes came to the Temple, where they are said to have sitten, at the tribunal or judgement seat, at the new gate of the Temple, and the people being admitted thereto (according to the manner, to wit, that we have now declared) they heard the Prophet & absolved him also, even as though in that their judgement they had condemned & corrected johakim the king himself, which had most cruelly murdered Urias the Prophet. Here again is a lively pattern of the great authority in cases of life and death for matter of religion, that the Consistory of the Elders had. Which here notably and sincerely (by reason of some good men among them) acquitted jeremy according to the ancient manner of God's law. This then is the authority that calvin and our Brethren pretend, Christ translated to his Church, stretching so far, as not only to the acquitting of the Prophets: but to the condemning and correcting even of kings and Princes. The second (example) is Chap. the 36. where Baruch having recited before the people, bertram's 2. example of those Elders power. jerem. 36. the writing that he had writ●en out after jeremies' mediting thereof: he is called to for the kings palace, unto these kind of Princes, before whom he readeth a fresh that same writing. When it was read, they lay it up in the chamber of the Scribe (or Chancellor, as the Geneva Bible translates it): they enquiring how it was written, do admonish Baruch to hide himself together with the Prophet. The Princes go to the king, they report to him the sum of the writing. The King himself commands the writing to be brought to him. And when he had heard three leaves thereof, he cut out the writing with a Scribes penknife. And when he was besought of three of them only, that he would not burn the book: he ceased not to burn it, as a matter that did not displease the residue of the Princes, who also even for that point are noted of the Prophet, that they trembled not, nor yet, rend their garments, at the reading of that writing. Hear again, we see their great authority in this matter of doctrine, and how the king (at their silence or consent of the writing) presumed to cut out the leaves, and burn them in spite, as a thing that no whit displeased the greatest part of these Consistory Princes, although that some few among them entreated him to the contrary. The third example is extant, jerem. 37. and 38. where it is said, bertram's 3. example. jer. 37. & 38. that jerusalem having been besieged of the Chaldees: jeremy was apprehended of jerias a certain watchman, at the gate of Benjamin, as though he were a runne-awaie, and being brought to these kind of Princes, who ●ere very much chafed against the Prophet, & having beaten him, they cast him into a most filthy prison. Sedechias (which was the next King ●●ccéeding) secretly called for jeremy out of that filthy prison (he so feared those Princes) and removeth him into a more gentle custody, where he continued dutifully. Whereupon it cometh to pass, that those Princes go about to wring from the king the sentence of deaeh against the Prophet, to wit, that the king should consent unto his death. Pretending, that he discouraged the people's minds, and that he studied not for their benefit. The King answered that jeremy was in their hands, neither that the king might prevail against them in any thing, as though he confessed that he was far their inferior. Which he showeth enough, when afterwards he saith, that he is afraid, The Elders superior to the king. lest those Princes should inquire, what speeches he had with the Prophet too and fro, whereupon also he feigneth a lie, as though he had been to give an account to them, of the things that he had done. By these means it is brought to pass, that the order of the judgements thus restored: endured until the times of the babylonical captivity. This was the state of that Consistory of the jews, which of all other our Brethren have picked out, and urge so earnestly to have it set up amongst us, pretending that Christ restored it, and translated it from them to his Church, and all by the virtue of these words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Tell the Church, as forcible words in their imagination, to make this Metamorphosis of the state of all Christian Kings and kingdoms, as ever the Papists pleaded for those words of Christ, Hoc est Corpus meum: they for their Transubstantiation in the Sacrament, and these for this translation in the Regiment. Pretending (as Bertram showeth hereupon) that the state was not only Monarchical, but chief Aristocratical, the government of the best men, to the which purpose he allegeth these examples. Although (God wots) these three last examples (in this state that he calleth restored) were of men for the most part of them, whom he might have less praised (if it had pleased him) these enemies of jeremy, and too much over-rulers of the Prince. And also it was in part democratical, or the government of the people. Whereto he allegeth 1. Samuel. 14.38. etc. How the people delivered jonathas from his Father's judgement. And 1. Chron. 13. verse. 1.2 & 4. How 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chol Caal Israel, all the congregation of Israel, and all the whole people gathered themselves together, and that David demanded their sentence for the reducing of the Ark. Yea, rather than the Prince's state should not be thus translated: it must be conformed to that example also, of the Israelites state of the ten Tribes. For they (as Bertram saith cap. 12.) had their Sanhedrin too. The policy (saith he) of the ten Tribes, The state of the ten tribes. came very near to the civil policy of the kingdom of juda. For it had the king their head, and then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chorim, that is, the men which were the Patriciens or noble Fathers, which otherwise we said were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sarim, that is, Princes, which made also the Synedrion, and chief Consistory of judges of that kingdom. Here the Consistory sat most commonly at the King's palace, such as was jesrael in the time of Achab. It had also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Zechonium, Seniors (or Elders) to wit, Chiliarks, Centurions, etc. Either of these magistrates is so called in Nehemias'. That also argueth the people's power, that the witnesses suborned against Naboth, are said to have given their witness before all the people. But that policy seemeth to be so mixed of the Regal, Aristocratical, and democratical power, that was altogether Tyrannical, as appeareth by the gests of the Kings of the ten Tribes. True indeed, those Kings for the most part of them did degenerate into a kind of Tyrants. But this argument is but weak, that the state was mixed with the people's government, because the witness of the Elders was given before the people: for what witness in so weighty a judgement, should not rather be given before the people, than in secret, or in private? But, may we not better find fault with those wicked Elders, which gave that judgement. And yet, what difference between these among the Israelites, and those among the jews, that by all means sought the murdering of the prophet jeremy? And if such good Elders came in the time, while (they say) whatsoever the persons were, their state was entire, and according to the first and ancient institution, whereunto our Breath. would have our state translated: might not we fear also, that when these Seniors should become such Princes, that might peradventure break out into such parts? Which lest they should do: how they might be repressed (or rather prevented) would be better thought on, before they were put in possession, especially of the estate, which is here so expressly by calvin and our Brethren challenged, that they should be admitted unto. The state of the jews regiment after the captivity. As for the state of the regiment following, in the time of the jews captivity, & afterward until Christ's coming, was more disturbed. And yet, Bertram telleth cap. 13. that first Darius Artaxer●es Longimanus permitted to the jews some part of their former power, whereby Esdras did so again let in order the civil policy, that in the place of a king, it had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pechah, that is, a precedent provincial, that governed jury under the direction of the Persian Monarch, and of him he was sent thither. As appeareth out of the story & occasion of sending Zerubbabel Ezr. 3. & 4. & out of Nehe. 5.14. In the second place they had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Sarim, that is, Princes, which are often 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chorim, that is, patricians. And sometimes also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ari aveth, that is, the Princes of the Fathers, or of the families: and these made the Synedrion of the 70. Thirdly, it had their ordinary judges, the Chiliarks, Centurions, etc. which were not only called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 jekonim, that is, Seniors (or Elders) etc. In the 4. place it had the assembly and judgement of all the Citizens, this kind of assembly is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Kaalah Gedolah, that is, the great company or great gathering together. Thus were all these orders retained so well as that troubled and tributary state would permit it. Over whom, in all their assemblies & judgements still were (& much more than before) the Levites, the prefects & governors of them. Of which State (saith Bertram in the same Chap, pag 69.) To conclude, if ever that Policy of Magistrates and judges, The special time of the Elders government. which our Thalmudistes do record, had place: verily, it is to be referred to the process of this time. For they tell, that the chief Senate of the hebrews, to wit, of the 70. the power which they had of the sword or putting to death, which they had in the greater causes (such as were of the Tribe, of the high Priest, of a false Prophet, and of Treason:) they communicated the same to three & twenty headmen, etc. Whereby it appeareth what great authority, they still retained, or had then most of all, having no King among them. And in the next page, he saith: The Precedents provincial excelled in greatest authority, insomuch, that they had the chief government, as it appeareth by those things which Nehemias' did. To prove Nehemias' had chief auth. that last fact of his doth argue, The auth. of Nehemias'. wherein he rejoiceth, that he had banished a certain man of the posterity of joiada, the son of Eliazib the chief Priest, because he had married the daughter of Sanballat the Horonite: & to prove also that he had the chiefest government, in that he had rebuked, he had commanded to be excommunicated, to be beaten with rods, and to be made bald, (in token of greatest reproach) the residue of the jews that had married women strangers. josephus chap. 11. in the 7. book of the jews antiquities, josephus antiq. jud. li. 7 cap. doth so touch the foresaid story: that he saith the elders of jerusalem, that is the chief Magistrates and the synedrion itself, decreed & commanded Manasses the brother of the high Priest jaddi, to send away and put from him his wife an alien borne, that is, a Samaritan the daughter of Samballat etc. Such auth. had this synedrion (albeitnot so called among them) under Nehemias' & jaddi, the high Priest, but Bart. saith in the page following, of the state declining after Nehemias'. Nevertheless it might be that jaddus and the other Guides of the jews, The high Bishop's authority. did choose one of the Tribe of juda, that should bear the principality in the chief Synedrion; howbeit, rather for namesake than indeed, when as all things depended on the high Bishops. And on this sort continued the State, till the time of the Macchabees: in whose time saith Bertram, pa. 79. Yea jonathas (that he might the better retain safe and sound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the use of their own laws, and state of their own power): he sent Ambassadors to Rome and to Lacaedemonia, which should renew the league with the Romans and the Lacaedemonians. But, that their ancient policy was restored, appeareth in this, that the Ambassadors expressly signified to the Romans, that they were sent of jonathas the high Priest, and of the Nation of the jews: & also by the very superscription of the letters, which by the same Ambassadors he sent unto Lacaedemonia, which was indited in these words. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 1. Mach. 12.6. jonathas the high Priest, and the Senate (or Eldership) of the Nation, and the other people of the jews, send greeting to the Spartans their brethren. The mixed estate of the jews common weal. And in josephus Ant. itq. jud. 13. c. 9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. jonathas the high Priest of the Nation of the jews, and the Eldership and the Commonalty of the jews, etc. These things do manifestly argue, what was then the form of the jews Commonweal, & how they were returned to that former mix Policy. For first, jonathas is set down, as the Prince: then the Senate, which term comprehendeth the superior and inferior judges: last of all, the people itself. And that (in these terms) it is apparent, they did it not to the Romans and Lacaedemonians, to make a show: it is said 1. Macchab. 12.35. that jonathas called together to an assembly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, the Elders of the people, to treat of building the Fortresses in jurier, etc. But those whom the author of the book book of the Maccabees, calleth the Elders of the people: josephus calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the whole people. So that either in their names, come all the Citizens, which is properly called the people; or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, the Senate, to wit, that superior Senate, which (when it representeth the people) is called the people itself. This sense of the Senate, especially of the superior Seniors, is here very violently by Bertram wrested (as I under correction take it) for the People. Being the Governors of the people, and so clearly distinguished from them, between the Prince and the People But his conclusion is this: Hear certainly it seemeth, that this former time of the Maccabees, had somewhat more of the popular state, and of the best men's government, than of a kingdom. For when all is done, both Bertram, calvin, Beza, Danaeus, and these our Learned Discoursing Brethren, incline most to this estate that most declineth from a kingdom, And so we should quickly come to a good estate of Regiment: the Prince being overruled by the Senate, and the Senate representing but the people: and so, all comes to the state popular, Gabinius erecting of more Synedrins. as it was among the Grecians and the Romans. Which in short time, would bring England and all Christendom, into a proper state. And of this estate he allegeth further many more instances, 1. Mat. 13.36.14.20.27 41 42. etc. Besides still his confirmations out of josephus. And so, less or more, the authority of the Synedrion continued: for, by this time, (after the Grecian Monarchy, it had gotten that corrupt Sanhedrin of Synedrion) till Gabinius subdued the jews under the Romans. Who (restoring Hyrcanus to the high preesthood) distinguished (saith Bertram. pag. 84. The nation of the jews, into five Courts (or session places of these Elders) and to every court assigned his Synedrion And here (lo) began the corruption of the state by making many Synedrions, as our Br. now would do. The Synedrions of jerusalem ministered the Law in the territory of jerusalem, Gadarens in Gaderene territory, etc. So that (saith Bertram) now their affairs might be lawfully administered, not by the government of one: but by the decree of the chief persons. But now, when in this goodly estate, julius Caesar had made Antipater the Father of Herode, to be Hyrcanus' procurator, and that these Elders and chief persons complained to Hyrcanus, of Antipater's & his son's affectation of tyranny: especially (saith Bert. pag 85) taking occasion hereupon, that Herod had committed many things in Galilee, against the country laws of the hebrews, and right of the Synedrion, and that for the same, he was a little afterwards cited unto the chief Synedrion at jerusalem: moreover (saith he) josephus treating of these matters, teacheth▪ that in those times the right of that chee●e Synedrion endured, which sat at jerusalem, and that the dignity thereof, together with the principality of the nation, was plainly restored under Hyrcanus: etc. When it was thus in the chiefest estate, The Synedrion Elders slain by Herod. Antony setting up Herod to be a Tetrarch, & Augustus afterward making him a King: all this state and chief power of the Synedrion was overthrown. For (saith Bertram, pag. 86.) Herod provided, that all the judges of the chief Synedrion except one or two, were slain, and all other that excelled in any authority or obtained the degree of any dignity, so that, he placed in their steeds, whom he pleased. After which Herod's death, when Augustus divided all that state into four governments: there followed of necessity this distracting (saith Bertram, pag. 87) of the jews kingdom into Tetrarchies, a new distinction of Synedrions, every Tetrarch (no doubt) upholding separately his own jurisdiction. Which occasion, we see, that Pilate greedily snatched, when he sent Christ as a Galilean (in which doing, he verily pleased the jews nothing at all) unto Herod the Tetrarch of Galilaea, whom notwithstanding, Luke calleth King. Thus have we seen, all the state of the jews, Our Br. assertion of the jews Synedrion altars all the states in Christendom, and binds us to the jundiciall Law. Seniors in the Sanhedrin, so much pretended and urged by our Brethren) from the time that their selves fetch it, Numb. 11. And before, descending down even until Christ's time, who gave this precept Math. 18. Dic Ecclesia, Tell the Church. In which words (they say) Christ translated the jews Synedrion (as it was ordained of God, but not, as it was then in Christ's times altered) to be restored, renewed, and continued in his Church. If this be true: how must not all the state of the Realm, and all realms Christian be quite altered? Yea, if this be true: how did not Christ translate withal, restore, renew, and continue the judicial civil and politic Law of Moses? Our Brethren pretend at the superficial view nothing but the restoring of the Eccl. regiment and Discipline but when we come thus to the sounding of th● matter: we find it is indeed, the alteration of all the whole state. Yea, it is little or least of all, Ecclesiastical Regiment, Discipline or policy. I grant the jews had also their Ecclesiastical Regiment, Discipline, and policy, whereof Bertram treateth at large afterward. But what was that to the Sanedrin or Synedrion of the jews, either corrupted, or in the best estate? Our Br. pretence under the name of eccl. regiment drive at the civil regiment. Ecclesiastical persons also did deal therein, but was not their authority most in the chiefest matters of estate? if our Brethren mean, but the state Ecclesiastical: why do they urge so peremptorily that Synedrion and those Elders (before it had that name) of the 70 ordained of God, Numb. 11. All these therefore, duly and thus at large considered: to say now, that Christ alluded to this order of the jews senate, to this Sanedrin or Synedrion among them, to this consistory and council of seniors, not so much corrupted by their vices, as instituted & approved of God, & that Christ translated this into the Church in the new Testament, and that to continue while the world endure, to be established now in every Church or congregation, either the same, or the like to this for the administration of government, and to have the hearing of all difficult & weighty matters among us, as the Sanedrin had among the jews if this be (as our Brethren in the title of this their Learned Discourse do say) a brief, & plain declaration of the desires of all those faithful Ministers, that have, & do seek for the discipline & reformation of the Church of England: If our Br. ask to marry this Abisag: her Majesty then in-déed● may quickly say, as Solomon did, Let them ask the kingdom too. For what is here left in temporal, politic and worldly matters, or in the government and state of the kingdom, wherein these Seniors will not, have a stroke, yea, and a negative voice? and that in every parish, Chytreus of the Synedrion which is clean different from the Sanhedrin. For both their less kind of Sanedrin, either greater (as they afterward divided it) was only in one place for all the realm. As first at Sylo, and then at jerusalem the head city, until these last alterations came. Where as our Br. would have the like (if not the same) to be erected in every congregation, which is the plain overthrow of a kingdom, & to make every congregation a kingdom in itself. For if it be not such a Senate as was their Sanedrin, then is it not the same, nor like the same that Christ (they say) did here allude unto. And if it be not, then do they plainly delude us, and wrest Christ's words, in gathering such allusions, and building on them, and enforcing on us, this their Seniory by force hereof. When all is done, our Br. Elders that are governors and notteachers are here also excluded except they will be Princes. And say that here Christ also translated the same into his church in the new Testament And yet when all is done, they must needs confess, that it is clean different. For in both these consistories of the Sanedrin, the greater of the 70. and the less of the 23. They were all either priests or Doctors of the Law and teachers, the King and the Princes, or noble peers, only excepted. So that, except they will be King's Princes or noble Peers, all these Seniors must not be governors not teaching, but Interpreters, Doctors, & teachers of the Law of God, or else they be neither the same nor the like, nor fi●te at all, to be any Seniors in this Senate. And whereas Beza saith in his Christian Confession, cap. 5. artic. 32. but we must know, Beza in confess. Christ. cap. 5. Art. 32. that this jurisdiction (he speaketh of these Seniors) doth not appertain to earthly and transistory matters, and is altogether different from the civil, as witnesseth Christ, and after Christ Paul: although either of them particularly comprehendeth all the faithful without exception: for all are also thrall to ●he civil Magistrate whose power also in respect is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an edifying or building power, so far forth as it ought to procure peace, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, good order or discipline, especially inthose things that respect the first table. And on the other side there is none which should not be subject to the word of God, & so of consequence unto the eccl. discipline. Howbeit (I confess) the apostle willeth, that for the cause of avoiding offence, Christians should judge their controversies privately, without the civil magistrate. But it appeareth sufficiently, that Paul which followed the steps of Christ, and of all the saints, would not therefore withdraw any thing from the civil jurisdiction, nor confound those things that the Lord hath distinguished, but only have consideration of the time, in the which it could not be that the faithful should contend before infidel judges, but that they should be thrall to diverse slanders. For the which cause he admonisheth the Corinehians, that all such kind of controversies should rather be either once taken away, or taken up, by domestical debating of them. This admonition therefore of Paul, doth nothing favour the furious and giddi-brayned anabaptists, which leave no place to the Civil Magistrate in a Christian Church. To return therefore to the matter, there is a certain ecclesiastical jurisdiction, but utterly distinguished from the civil. Thus writeth Beza of the jurisdiction of these Seniors to be mere Ecclesiastical and clean different from the civil jurisdiction, Danaetus in I●ag Christ. 3. part. cap. 10 Yea Danaeus also concludeth as is foresaid in the 10. chapter, saying: For although the Presbytery or Synedrion of the jews (which was the same, Act. 22. verse 5. & 30. & in Math. 5. ver. 22.) seemeth to answer to our presbytery, judged often of certain causes: notwithstanding our Presbyteries do not judge, and thereupon are different from those of the jews. Because they had partly political, partly Ecclesiastical jurisdiction both together, Danaeus Confession for the difference of the jews Synedrion & our Presbyteries for government of civil causes. as appeareth, Esd. 10 verse. v. But our presbyteries have only Ecclesiastical: it pertaineth indeed to their office and function to reclaim, if they can, to peace and concord the faithf●●●●leading or about to plead. Verily they ought to exhort them to mutual charity, Cor. 6. verse 1. Mat. 5.25, But to sit judges in their pleas, they ought not, for this is the office of the civil magistrate. Yea neither the whole presbytery, neither any part of the presbytery, ought so much as to be chosen arbitrators, but only as private men, if any of the presbytery be taken to be arbitrators. If this be true, than is all this devise of translating the Sanedrin of the jews into the new testament and Church of Christ, or of willing the like thereof to be established in his Church, for administration of government, quite overthrown. For what the jews eldership was, we have seen at large already. And yet there were then also Civil Magistrates aswell as now. And therefore if Christ had translated their Sanedrin unto us, ours might have like authority, as theirs had, notwithstanding our civil Magistrates. But besides this in general that Danaeus here confesseth, that the presbyteries of the jews judged often in some causes, and mixed together the temporal and Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, which our brethren mislike in the Bishops and ministers: Chytraeus also upon the 17. of Deut. Tit. de judiciis, Chytraeus in Deut. 17. titulo de judicijs. doth confirm the most of that, which we have showed at large out of Bertram & Sigonius, for the jews judgements and Sanhedrin: saying. Three kinds of judgements are written to have been distinguished among the jews, Three kinds of judgements among the jews. unto whom it is agreeable that Christ alludeth, Math▪ 5, in the declaration of the ten commandments, setting down the degrees and differences of sins, repugnant to the Law, thou shalt not kill. And that he would declare the same out of the form of the civil judgements accustomed to the people. Heers he 〈…〉 of Christ's more proper alluding to the jews orders, in th●se things. But doth he gather thereupon, that the same civil judgements, were either translated, or the like to them established amongst us? The first was Triumuirall, The i●dgement Triumuiral of th● 3. Elders. over the which were Governors in every City, three men. In the which, money matters, and the lighter trespasses, of bearings, of private iniu●ies, of the●●, etc. were decided. They suppose that Christ signified that Mat. ●. in the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of judgement. Another was called, the Little Synedrium, consisting of 23. The little Synedrion of 23. judges. Wherein the greater and the capital causes were heard. It is thought that Christ Mat. 5. named that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, H● t●at ●aith to his brother, Racha, s●albe guilty of a Counsel, or of the Synodrion. The third was the great Synedrium, or S●nate of 70. The great Synedrion of 70. Seniors, ordained of Moses, Num. 11. over which sat the high B. and the Elders excelling in wisdom, virtue, learning and authority, chosen out of the Priests and Levites▪ and of every Tribe, were the assistants, (or sitters with him.) Unto whom afterward by the ordinance of David, the chief of the Royal ●ooke, which we●e called 〈◊〉, ●●at is, the King's brethren, & ●arr●●ttiu●, that is, endowed with the right of succession, were adjoined, as the highest Counsel of the ●●ole Commonweal, & chief Senate of the Kingdom. To whom belonged the power of judging the most weighty causes, pertaining to the sum of the Commonweal a●d of Religion, of the King and the Kingdom, of war and peace, of answering and pronouncing of the most difficult controversies of opinions, & of other businesses. To conclude, of what manner the form ●nd jurisdiction of this most high Senate was, to the which they appealed from the other inferior judgements, & in whose sentence and decree they must hold themselves contented without any gainsaying, may for the most part clearly be gathered, out of the reformation of the judgements made by King josaphat. For these are the words of the story, 2. Paral. 19 In jerusalem also josophat appointed Priests, etc. But as in highest Senate of the jewish people, the Priests and Princes of the Families, governed together the Counsels of the Commonweal, & the two chief Precedents were the B. which governed the causes of religion, and the ecclesiastical businesses, and the kings Cousin which governed the businesses Political: even so almost is the like form in the chief Senate of the Kingdom of Germany, consisting of 7. Electors. whereof three are Priests or Archbishops, which ought to instruct, Chytreus' resemblance of the chief Senate in Germany to the Saned●in. and with their counsels and labours ought to help the Emperor, and conserve the Commonweal, concerning the laws of God for religion and the worship of God, or the first Table of the x. Commandments: & 4. politic Princes, which ought to instruct, and with their counsels and labours to help the Emperor, The elders of the new Testament. and to conserve the Commonweal, concerning the Politic Law, & office of the Emperor, in ordaining judgements, in war and peace, in taxes, etc. Thus more gravely (in my simple judgement) doth Chytreus allude, not on these words, How moderately Chytreus alludeth on Christ's words Mat. 5. to our Senates. Dic Ecclesia, to the Sanedrin of the jews, to have the same or the like, translated, and established in every or in any Congregation, of the Church of Christ: for that were clean to overthrow all the States in Christendom: But that in those places which he mentioneth, Mat. 5. he alluded to the order of their lowest Senate, of 3. Elders, which was in every City, and of their lesser Sanedrin, that was of 23. in jerusalem. not of the 70. which was the highest, & instituted by God, Num. 11. But not, that Christ translated any of all these Senates into him Church, or established any law thereon, for administration of government in his Church. Although he say, almost the like form is in the highest Senate of the Kingdom of Germany. But not simply that it is the like, and much less the same, and least of all, that it was grounded on the jews form, otherwise than that all Estates and Kingdoms take their general grounds from God's law: but we are not tie● to this or that form, of Senate and judicials of the jews. And, so have we also our chiefest Senate of Parliament, and o●her Senates, Session's, or Assemblies▪ both of the Clergy, and of the Temporalty: and Coun●els and judgements, (in some respects) not much unlike to the jews Assemblies, Senates, Counsels, and judgements. And they draw nearer a great deal to the uncorrupted orders of the jews, and are more fit, requisite and 〈◊〉 for the State and condition of our Realms, than these Consistories or Senates would be of these Seniors, that our Brethren call for, and thus hale the words of Christ to press them upon us, to be established in every Congregation, for the administration of government, in the hearing and determining of all difficult and weighty matters amongst us, 〈◊〉 so to continue for ever, Our Breath. peremptory wresting of Christ's words. as long as the Church continueth in this world, 〈◊〉 the great bondage of our Christian liberty, by reducing us to these judicials of the jews, and to the quite overthrow of ours and of all Kingdoms, by reducing this Senate of the 70. Elders into all Congregations throughout Christendom. Having now thus far considered (as I take it) the very ground wherean calvin, and all our Brethren following him, would say the foundation of this Consistory, & Senate of Elders in every Congregation, to wit, upon this construction of these words of Christ, Dis Ecclesia, Tell the Church, that is to say, Tell the signory, Se●ate or Consistory: ●et us now return to the process, The learned disc pag. 88 of our Br. learned discourse 〈◊〉. And the name of Elders doth most aptly agree unto them that be Governors in the Church now, even as it did to the Ancients of Israel▪ so that the Pastors seem to have borrowed the name of Elders, especially in respect of their government. The name of this Consistory also in the new Testament, we find to be agreeable with that of the jews, whereof our Saviour Christ speaketh when he saith, Tell the Congregation or assembly, S. Paul 1. Tim. 4.14. Despise no● the gift which was given thee, through Prophec●●, wish imposition of hands of the Eldership. Where the Greek word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the assembly or Consistory of the Elders. Which word was used also by S. Luke in his Gospel, speaking of the Consistory of the jewish Elders, Luke 22.66. As soon as it wa● day the whole Eldership or Assembly of Elders came together both chief Priests and Scribes, and brought him into their Council. In which saying, their Council 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Also S. Paul Act. 20.5. ●hat he had been a persec. of christians taketh witness, of the high Priest and of the whole Consistory of Elders, using the same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. By which it is evident that our Saviour Christ by this word Ecclesia in that place meaneth a Consistory or assembly of Elders, whose authority, etc. This is but descant on the name, and we would rather hear of the 〈◊〉. The name of Elders served to more, Bridges. than to those of the signory which were of the Sanedrin or Synedrion. And we grant it most aptly agreeth to them that be Governors in the Church new, and those Ecclesiastical Governors to, The use of the name Elder. and was but borrowed as well in respect of the government, as of the Pastorship and the Ecclesiastical are as properly and aptly called Elders, as were the civil Governors. But this communicating of the name, doth not pr●●ue the same or the like office; any more th●● the name of God's Minister, doth prove that the civil Princes and the ecclesiastical Pastor's offices, are the same or like, because they are both of them called God's Ministers, Rom. 13.4. and 1. Cor. 4.1. But here to prove that in this place Mat. 18. Christ meaneth by the word Church, a Consistory, Senate or Presbytery, our Brethren allege these testimonies, 1. Tim. 4.14. Luc. 22.66. and Act. 20.5. wherein the name of Presbytery is mentioned. But do they find the name of this Consistory also in the new Testament, to be agreeable with that of the jews, whereof our Saviour Christ speaketh when he saith, Tell the Congregation, Christ alluded not to the jews Sanedrin or Presbytery, mentioned in the new Testament. or Assembly? For if (as they say) Christ alluded there to the Sanedrin or Synedrion, will they find this Consistory: that they would have to be erected in the new Testament, to be agreeable unto that Consistory? I think our ●r. will not find it. If they say, they mean not that this Consistory is called in the new Testament, by that name Sanedrin or Synedrion, but by the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that that name is also agreeable to this Consistory: they told us before, that Christ alluded to that Consistory among the jews, that was named the Sanedrin, of the Greek word Synedrion, & would they now bring this Consistory to the name Presbytery? They say, that in the 22. of Luke, ver. 66. their Counsel Synedrion is called Presbyterion. And what of that? We grant that the Sanedrin 〈◊〉 called a Presbytery. But was every Presbytery called a Sanedrin? They should prove this, that wheresoever the name Presbytery i●, there wa● such a Senate, Presbytery or Eldership, as was agreeable to that which was named the Sanedrin. For we deny not, but that there were Assemblies of Elders, and those aptly also called Presbyteries, among the Christians in the new Testament. But that they were so aptly called Sanedrins or Synedrions, that I deny: and much more, I deny the matter & office of them among the Christians to be found any where in the new Testament. And here in saying this, our Brethren still r●●ne ●n in their wonted presupposal of this soever cited place, Math. 18. Tell the Church, (Congregation or Assembly,) that Christ speaketh of the Presbytery of the jews, called the Synedrion or the Sanedrin. But we have seen sufficiently, By the name Church is not meant Senate. that the very name of Church, Congregation or Assembly, which Christ useth, was in the use of the jews, Membrum dividens, and opposite to the name of Senate, Counsel, Consistory, Sengniorie, Presbytery, Eldership, Sanedrin or Synedrion. So that in n●●ing the Church, he so little meaneth a Consistory or Senate of Elders: that he rather seemeth to oppose himself herein against those, that would restrain his speech unto a Consistory or a Senate. The word● of S. Paul 1. Tim. 4.14. do mention indeed a Presbytery or Eldership. But they are so little to be drawn to this interpretation, which calvin maketh of Christ's words, Math. 18. that calvin himself (as we have 〈◊〉 before) in this observation on these words, 1. Tim. 4.14. calvinus in 1. Tim. 4.14. Neglect not ●he gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the imposition of hands of the Presbytery (or Eldership) saith they that think Presbytery (or Eldership) here to be named a noun collective, put for a college of the Eld. think well in my judgement: Bezaes' testimony that by those elders were meant only the Ministers of the word. howbeit all things being weighed, I grant that the sense different therefrom, that it should be a name of office, doth not il agree thereunto. He putteth the ceremony for the act of the ordination. So that the sense is, that Timothy when by the voice of the Prophets, he was called into the ministery, and then by a solemn rite or ceremony was ordained: he was withal furnished with the grace of the holy Ghost to execute his function. So that this place importeth no necessity of understanding the Presbytery, more for the assembly of the Elders; than for the function of the Eldership. Nevertheless if our B. will needs have it understood, for the assembly of the Elders: yet saith Beza also upon this word Presbyterij, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, of the order of the Elders, by the which name it is probable, that the assembly of all those that laboured in the word, in the Church of the Ephesians, is signified, as Acts 20. d. 17. and f. 28. For now and then these names are general, of Bishops, of Elders, Our Br. conclusion of these Elders. yea & that also of Deacons. See Philip. 1. a. 1. A certain fellow translateth it Senate, as other where for the Church, he said, the Commonweal. Thus doth Beza nip (and well worthily) at Castalion, for this name of Senate, in steed of Presbytery. And yet, Bezaes' nip of Castalion for the term Senate. all this drift of our brethren is, to urge a Senate on this word. But Senate or Eldership, sith he maketh here the Elders thereof, to be Labourers in the word, and to be those that S. Paul spoke unto Act. 20. This then is all for Pastors and Ministers of the word, and nothing for a Consistory, Senate, signory or Eldership of ani● such Elders, as are altogether Governors and not teachers. As for the other places cited, Luc. 22. and Act. 20. were (I grant) that Presbytery which was called the Sanedrin or Synedrion. The Presbyteries of the jews. Luc. 22. Act. 20. Who, except such Elders of the people, which were such Princes (as we have heard) in the government of all temporal matters of (life and death only by Herode and the Romans taken from them (so well as ecclesiastical matters, were all of them Teachers and Doctors of the Law of God. For that we heard was the Scribes office. So that except our Brethr. would set up Consistories of Princes and Magistrates, to govern all temporal matters so well as ecclesiastical: how can these testimonies fit their signory? Or are those Presbyteries of the jews, that sat in counsel against Christ, and gave licence to S. Paul to make havoc in Christ's Congregation, any example, or warrant, or approbation in the new Testament, of any signory or Consistory among the Christians? But what are either of these to prove the words of Christ, Math. 18. To be interpreted of a Presbytery? That our Brethren should so roundly hereupon, (or rather so loselie) make this conclusion, saying: By which it is evident, that our Saviour Christ by this word Ecclesia in that place, meaneth a Consistory or Assembly of Elders. By what thing here alleged, Our Brethr. chief evidence for their Eldership▪ how weak it is. is this evident? or rather, is it not evident to the clean contrary? If our Br. have no better evidence than this, to prove their Elders; first, all is driven to a bare name, howbeit here is neither so much named as the bare name, but a name that hath a clean contrary sense. And yet forsooth we must imagine, Christ meant it: for our Br. can not say, Christ said it. Although in a matter so much urged, and of such importance, this had been requisite, that we had heard Christ's words, & not their gathering only of Christ's meaning, for our evidence. And yet if we should admit this meaning and all, we are never the nearer, for any such Consistory, Senate, or Segniotie of Elders, as our Br. pretend. Well might we set up (if not rather, ill might we set up) a jewish Sanedrin, and Presbytery of Princes & Priests in every parish, to rule the whole estate thereof, as a little kingdom in itself, to the alteration and overthrow of the whole state of the Realm: but for these governing and not teaching Elders, The power of the keys that our Brethr. would bring in, The learned Dis. here is neither word nor meaning, that they are able to infer on Christ's sentence. But our Brethren conceiving, that they have now at least won thus much, that our Saviour Christ by this word Ecclesia, meaneth a Consistory or assembly of Elders: they cheerfully proceed to their authority, & say: Whose authority he doth ratify with such power, that whatsoever is bound or loosed by them on earth, in the fear of God, and with hearty prayer, the Lord will bring it to pass, yea he himself will be in the midst of them, as precedent of their Council, to direct their consultations to the glory of God, and to the profit of his own Church. Concerning that which our Brethren add here, out of the 19 & 20. verses of Matth. 18. the consent of two or three, Bridges. gathered together in prayer or counsel, to have their petitions granted, and Christ himself to be in the midst of them as Precedent of their counsel, so far as they do it in the fear of God, The sentences of christ Mat. 18. ver. 19 and 20. not to be restrained to a Consistory. and in the name of Christ: this is so little to be restrained to a Consistory of Elders, that it stretcheth not only to all Provincial and general Counsels so assembled, but to all Congregations gathered to public prayer, or to the hearing of God's word, yea, to any particular household or persons, though they be no greater number than there is mentioned, to encourage and confirm them in their faith to God, and in their mutual love and unity one to another. As for the authority that Christ ratifieth with such power, that whatsoever is bound or loosed by them on earth, etc. (meaning this Consistory of the church) the Lord will bring it to pass we confess, (concerning the Church, of the which before he spoke) that Christ there gave such power unto his Church: but our question now, is not whether the power be given to the Church, as to whom the exercise of this power is committed. Whether to the whole Church's assembly or Congregation, or to a signory of the Church, governing discipline, and yet not meddling with teaching the word of God, or to those to whom the ministery of the word is committed. And albeit that neither the Magistrate nor the Senate of Governors (if there be any) nor yet the whole assembly of the Congregation, are debarred from all kind of excommunicating: yet to speak of excommunication, in his proper sense, it is the act of him that is a Minister of the word. Brentius writing at large on this place, not only acknowledgeth a kind of excommunication made by the Magistrate, but also affirmeth this speech of Christ, Tell the Church, to be indeed a good rule, but not necessary for ever, and for all Churches. Haec Regula, etc. (saith he) This Rule which Christ in this place delivereth, being rightly understood and used, is healthful to the Church, and bringeth much profit: Brentius. on Math. 18. but being ill understood and naughtily used, hath brought much hurt to the Commonweal, hath divers times troubled the government of the Church, and of the Policy. Brentiu● in Math. 18. When as the Bishops of Rome with their unreasonable and naughty excommunications, How these words, Die ecclesiae, have been abused. have now and then stirred up the children against the parents, have cast out Emperors and Kings out of their Empires, and in these days also, because the Anabaptistes see not in our Churches, the like government according to the letter, as is here described: they think that the true Church is not among us. Wherefore we must do our diligence, that we may understand this rule aright, and use the same lawfully, according to the manner thereof. First, whereas Christ saith in this Rule, Tell the Church, he speaketh not of such an assembly of Christians, which consisteth of a great multitude of people, and of a civil Magistracy, and wherein the civil Magistrate is not only a member of the Church, but also the Governor and ordainer of the Ecclesiastical matters. For in such an assembly, it can not be brought to pass, that that which is said, Tell the Church, can be kept according to the letter, without confusion. For what a confusion and perturbation of things were that, if a man publicly in the Ecclesiastical assembly, wherein now and then some thousands of men do come together, should make an outcry of injury offered him of his neighbour, and desire that after his neighbour having been twice warned, would not repent him, witness may be heard, and if he will not obey the voices of the whole assembly, that he should be excommunicated? What place would there be in so diverse wills of men, in such a company of the multitude, either unto honest councils, or unto right judgements? and what either measure or end would there be of brawlings? But God (as S. Paul saith) is not the Author of confusion, but of peace. Here Brentius draweth near to our brethren also in this point, that it is not meant of every great assembly of the people. But what now, doth he conclude hereupon, that it was spoken of an Ecclesiastical Senate or Consistory in their names? It followeth: Moreover when in the Ecclesiastical assembly there is a civil Magistrate, the office of this civil Magistrate is to punish wicked deeds according to their Laws, & that by the severity of his administration, he remove offences out of the way. Such as sometimes was the administration of the Kings in the Church of Israel, of David, Solomon, josaphat, Ezechias, and of other godly Kings. That therefore Christ saith, Tell the Church, A small assembly w●ting a civil Magistrate. is not be understood of a great assembly of the Church, wherein there is a civil Magistrate, and one that for his vocation, laboureth to defend the public honesty of life; but is to be understood of a small assembly, whereof the Magistrate is not a member, & wherein the Magistrate either hath no function, or else is holden, as though he were a private person: such an assembly as was the company of Christ. For few accompanied Christ in his Ministry among the jews, and among these few, there was no public Magistrate. The occasion of Christ's sentence. Among such therefore being few, the rule may be holden, according to the letter. For it appeareth, that Christ was moved to the prescribing of this rule, on that occasion, that although they were few that followed Christ, yet now & then there arose even among them, so great brawls for matter of most small importance, that one of them odiously accused another before the civil, either jewish or Ethnic Magistrate, to the great offence of the Gospel. As also it happened afterward among the Corinthians, of whom Paul writeth, saying: Doth any of you having business with another, sustain to be judged under the unrighteous, and not rather under the Saints? Christ therefore reproveth his contentious companions, and prescribeth unto them such a rule, which may be kept only in private assemblies, and among private men. That is to wit, that thou shouldest not by & by accuse him that hath sinned against thee, before the Magistrate, especially the Magistrate being a stranger of thy religion, but thou shouldest first of all admonish him privately. Then, if being so admonished, he proceed to do thee injury: thou shouldest take unto thee 2. or 3. friends, that they may admonish him of his injury, and exhort him to repentance: last of all, if he will not yet so leave of his doing injury: thou shouldest tell it unto the whole assembly, and desire that the assembly, would interpose their authority. That this rule of Chr. serveth only among private men. It is manifest therefore, that Christ in this rule, maketh not a general law for the Church of all times, and for that assembly which also consisteth of a great multitude of men, and whereof the civil Magistrate is a part, and the Governor: but only for the little Church of his own time, and for the assembly of a few men, and those private. For otherwise also he gave some precepts, that were temporary and not perpetual, such as those are, Go ye not into the high ways of the Gentiles, & enter ye not into the City of the Samaritans. And, Possess ye not gold nor silver, etc. This sentence cannot be understood of heinous sins. Moreover when this rule is said, If thy brother shall offend against thee, etc. it is not to be understood of every kind of sin: for it can not be understood of gross and heinous mischiefs, such as are these, homicide, adultery, and other of that kind. For in these, a threefold admonition hath not place: but it is necessary that these mischievous deeds, for public example sake, according to the calling of every assembly, so soon as ever they are found out, should be punished. Neither should space of sinning be given to the wicked doer, Brentius. until a triple admonition may be made. For what discipline were that, if that any should have slain a man, that he should not be punished before with excommunication, till that after the first admonition, he had killed another? And another after the second, and another after the third. And so mought an Homicide kill 4. men, or ever he should be holden for an Ethnic or a publican. Neither did saint Paul himself admonish the Corinthian whoremonger, The Incestuous Corinthian. but commanded him straightway, so soon as ever it was known, to be cast out of the company of the faithful: This rule therefore is not to be understood of every kind of sin, but only of civil controversies, which private men have among themselves. What then doth this rule pertain nothing at all to the present assembly of the Christians, which consisteth as well of a public magistrate, as of private subjects? verily it pertaineth much unto us. But for the manner thereof, and for the condition of these times. For if thou haste against another a civil action or controversy, it is an uncourteous and hard part that thou shouldest straightways hale him into the public judgements: but charity requireth that if the cause be such, that thou mayest not pardon thy neighbour without judgement: first of all admonish him thou thyself, or else some other friend in thy name, of the injury, that he go not still on to do the same, but that after his measure he make amends for it. But if so be nothing be obtained, thou shouldest take unto thee two or three friends, whereby thou mightest seek all means, that he may leave off from doing thee injury. Last of all, if so be thou shalt not yet profit any thing: what ought to be done? The last remedy is to tell the ordinary magistrate and not to constitute an Eccl. Senate Is the cause to be brought to the whole Church of that place? Hear certes, the letter can not be observed, which is spoken in this place, Tell the Church. For what a confusion and disturbance of the orders were this? but the cause is to be deferred unto those certain judges, which out of the whole body of the Church are lawfully chosen into the Magistracy, whose sentence also is to be expected. So that there is no necessity, that we should constitute a new Eccl. Senate, but use that which before was appointed in the policy. But what, of the wicked deeds that are more heinous? In these, the order of this rule cannot be observed, whether the church be only private men, or have a Magistrate. But that so soon as ever they shall be set down, and found out: they must be punished either with Excommunication, or casting out of the city or congregation, or else with some other punishment according to their ordinary Laws. For this altogether is sought for, that offences might be taken out of the way. But with what penalty or with what punishment they should be taken away, Excommunication. that must be judged by the public Laws and ordinances. Thou wilt say therefore, sith that there is in these times a politic Magistrate in the Church, is there now no place of Excommunication? verily there is, as well of public as of private. For the public excommunication is that penalty of the Magistrate, wherewith the wicked person is openly defaced in the mouths of men, and is cast out of the City, or is cast into the prison, and for some space of time is fed with Bread and Water. And such an Excommunication also may be done in the Church, when as, if any by public and lawful judgement, is condemned of a wicked fact, and at the Magistrate's commandment is cast out of the Church, and is forbidden that he shall haunt any public banquets, neither that he be admitted to honest or worshipful offices, etc. It is private, A private & Ecclesiastical excommunication when the Minister of the Church doth privately admonish the sinner, that he receive not the lords supper, except he repent. etc. Thus gravely, and with great judgement and weighty reasons, writeth Brentius of these words. Neither making this rule to be general or perpetual, otherwise then in these senses and cases, and in the matters of worldly and civil contentions, & to be judged and punished (if no private means will serve) not by constituting any Ecclesiastical senate of Seniors in every congregation, but by the ordinary civil Magistrate. As for the Censure of Excommunication (though in such a sort, the punishments of the Prince may be called an excommunication) yet if it be an exclusion from the Sacraments, it is properly the Act of the Minister, and that good, To whom the proper & Eccl. exc. doth pertain. not only though it be public, but private also. As he saith further on these words, Verily I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall bind upon earth shall be bound in Heaven, and whatsoever ye shall lose, etc. In this sentence Christ strengtheneth first the judgements of private men, if the Church shall not have a public magistrate. For when men are wont tobee stubborn, it may come to pass, that he that faileth in his cause, before the Church of private men, and is judged an Ethnic and publican, may contemn this judgement, and think himself nevertheless to be an inheritor of the kingdom of Heaven, although he be cast out of the assembly of these (as he thinketh them) vile or base persons. But Christ strengtheneth their authority, and affirmeth that their sentence is approved also in Heaven. Furthermore he strengtheneth also in this saying, the public judgements of them, that are in lawful Magistracy, that we may manifestly know, that their judgements are not of men, but are the judgements of God. According to that of Paul: he that resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God. And verily, Christ in other places with the like sentences in Math. 16. and john. 20. chapter confirmeth the authority of the Ministry of preaching the Gospel. But in this place, he confirmeth the judgements of private men, or of Magistrates, against the contemners, that the same should be ratified before God in Heaven. Hear lo, is the ratifiing whereof our brethren speak, but hereupon he concludeth thus: But all these things are to be understood of a right and lawful judgement, and of that sentence which is given in the ministry of the church according to the word of the Gospel, and in causes forinsecal, according to the public and ordinary Laws. For if the sentences of the judges, or Ministers, strive with these, it is none before God, how greatly soever thou shalt be condemned before men. So that here he concludeth with these two excommunications, Two kinds of Exc. ciui● and Eccl. a civil and an Ecclesiastical. The civil, either in these private men's small assemblies, or in the public Magistrate. But the Ecclesiastical, to pertain only to the Minister, and to be in the Ministry of the word of God, such as was mentioned before Math. 16. And afterward again, john. 20. And verily, if we shall search the ground of this Eccl. Exc. (what abuses soever be or have been, or may be by the Ministers or by any other not Ministers, committed therein (which I take not upon me to defend, and may easily be helped without the supply of this Seniory, and good provisions there are in that behalf): yet that the act of the proper Ecclesiastical Excommunication, should be executed by such Ecclesiastical governors, as are not Ministers nor teachers of the word: I can not yet see, how it may be sufficiently warranted, or how it may stand with the nature of this spiritual and Ecclesiastical censure. For if this power of binding and losing, be the same that is called the power of opening and shutting, called also the power of the keys: than it chiefly consisteth in the Ministry of the word. For what is the key, but God's word? Yea, if it be the same that consisteth in remitting and retaining of sins towards God, what other power hath the Church thereof, than by the prenouncing of Gods word? So that, our Brethren must either make these Seniors to be Ministers of God's word: or else they must grant, that in this place Christ meaneth not such a Seniory of Governing Elders, as are not Ministers of the Word. But here saith calvin. Hic locus non omnino. etc. Cal in Mat. 18. This place is not altogether like that place which is above written, Chapter 16. c. 19 But it is to be understood in part a little different. But we make them not so divers, that they have not much affinity between themselves. This first of all on both parts is alike, that either of them is a general sentence, and the power of binding and losing is always the same, that is to wit, by the word of God, the same commandment, the same promise. But they differ herein, that the former place is peculiarly of the preaching which the Ministers of the word of God do exercise. Here it pertaineth to the Discipline of excommunication, which is permitted to the church. There, Christ would avouch the authority of the Doctrine: Here, he constituted Discipline, which is an appendent unto doctrine. There, he said that the preaching of the Gospel should not be frustrate, but that it should be a quickening or a killing savour: here he affirmeth that although the wicked do scorn the judgement of the church, notwithstanding it should not be vain. This distinction is to be holden, because, there, it is simply treated upon the word preached: & here, upon the public censures and Discipline. Although I do not altogether deny this difference in respect of the object matter, The ministry of the power of the word pertaineth to the Minister in the expounding the word. wherein the subject person hath divers times, on divers occasions, and divers ends to deal: yet since calvin here himself maketh the power of binding and losing, the promise also, and the commandment, to be all one: and the same to consist all only by the ministry of the word: although the occasion or purpose of Christ in the former place, Math. 16. be more for ratifying the Doctrine of the word, when it is taught or preached, than for ratifying the public censures and Discipline, being only the appendants to the Doctrine: Y●t this letteth not, but rather proveth so much more, that he to whom the execution of both, or either of these actions, (being both of them powers of the word, and ministerial pronouncing of the same word) doth appertain, aught to be his self a Minister of the word. And thus doth calvin himself afterward also confess, Cal. in Mat. 18. saying: For neither doth Christ avouch authority of (or unto) his church, whereby he should diminish his, or his Father's right: but rather whereby he may establish the majesty of his word. For even as before, he would not confusedly establish every Doctrine whatsoever, but that which proceeded out of his mouth, chap. 16. c. 19: So neither saith he in this place, that every judgement whatsoever shall be stable▪ The Minist. are publishers of God's word and setters forth of his judgements. and ratified, but that wherein he himself is precedent (or governeth). Neither that only by the spirit, but also by the word. Whereupon it followeth that men bring no prejudice unto (or hinder not) God, while they pronounce nothing but out of his mouth, and stood only to execute faithfully, that which he hath commanded. For although Christ be the only judge of the world: yet would he have in the mean season, ministers to be the publishers of his word. and then he would have his judgement to be of his Church set forth. So, that cometh to pass, that it derogateth nothing from him, that the ministry of men cometh between, but that he only looseth and bindeth. And h●ere Marlorate co●texteth out of Bucer: Hereupon it appeareth, how proposterously or rather how naughtily some gather out of this place, that the Church can do any thing, but chiefly can make laws of religion, which whos● despiseth shall despise God's Laws. Whereas Christ disputeth here nothing of the power of making Laws: but of brotherly admonition, of exhortation, reprehension, correction, and of taking away offences, and of the judgement of the church, which in all things thought to follow the word of God, that it be not so much an human as a divine judgement. And again Marlorate n●teth out of Calvin, saying: Whereupon we see, how the spiritual jurisdiction of the church, which punisheth sins out of the word of God, is the best help of health, and foundation of order, and bond of unity. And concluding the ratification of their sentences, he saith: For they have the word of God, wherewith they condemn the froward, How the froward are punished, & the repentant received by them that have the word of God. they have the word wherewith they receive into favour the repentant. But err they cannot, neither dissent from the judgement of God, because they judge not but out of the Law of God, which is not an uncertain nor earthly opinion, but the holy will of God, and an heavenly Oracle. ●ith therefore all this jurisdiction of the censure and discipline of the Church, consisteth in the Ministry of the word of God, and besides the sentence pronounced, comprehendeth admonition, exhortation, reprehension, and all out of the word of God: And these persons are public officers, and their doing public doings: how are not these the public ministers of the word, & meddle with the public teaching of the same. But this more plainly appeareth by Christ's own words. For when Christ had said, Tell the Church (howsoever they understand there the name of church) when he cometh afterward to set down the manner, how Excommunication should be used: he straight turneth his speech to his Apostles, saying: Verily I say unto you, whatsoever things you shall bind upon earth, they shall be bound also in Heaven▪ and whatsoever you shall lose upon earth, shall be loosed in Heaven also. So that this place directly is turned to the Apostles, both in Math. 16. And here the 18. and joh. 20 and so, the power and promise thereof continuing, continueth directly in those only, that are the successors of the Apostles. That is to say, that are such, as of whom S. Paul saith, 1 Cor. 4.1. Let a man so esteem us, as Ministers of Christ, and dispensers of the mysteries of God. And of such only is Excommunication (being taken as this spiritual Censure of the Church) to b● pronounced, and of none other kind of Elders. For proof now of the continual practice and approbation hereof: let us see, both how the Church of God used it among the jews before Christ came, and how in Christ's time, & in the primitive Ch●●ch▪ & ●●t●rward in the time of the ancient and holy Fathers, and also now lastly in this light of the Gospel, what are the judgements of the best learned of our brethren hereupon. And first (as we have showed before ●ut of Brentius) t●ere was and is a divers acceptation of this name Excommunicating. Wher●pon Aretius among other divisions of Excommunications, good and bad, greater and lesser, outward and inward, hath this division: Let us therefore divide it from the head after this manner. There is one Excommunication civil, another Ecclesiastical. The civil is that that is exercised in politic matters against offenders. Aretius' 2. part problem. Tit. de Excom. etc. And on the Hebrew names thereof, and the Greek name among the jews, in and before the time of Christ, he saith: in joh. chap. ●. 12. & 16. He that was excluded, is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is, to be made an Alien from the public assembly. Such were abominable and odious to the residue of the jews, Civil and Eccl. Exc. until they were reconciled. In the ninth chapter he saith, that it was ordained of the jews, that if any man confessed him to be Christ. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, he should be cast out of the synagogue. In the 12. chap. that many of the Princes believed, but they confessed him not, lest they should be made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And in the 16. chap. They shall make you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, out laws and unworthy of their assemblies. Hereupon excommunication may be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. In the old Testament it is (called) Masger, a shutting: for he that was of Moses shut out, was bound as it were with many Laws. Besides that, he which was bound● with any certain fault, was holden under the penalty to the which he was bounden: you have the example Num. 12. where Miriam the sister of Moses for the crime of rebellion, is excluded by the commandment of God 7. days out of the camp. Let her be shut out seven days abroad, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cherem among the Hebrews is anathema. That is, a penalty inflicted of God, as Mal. 4. Lest I come and strike the land, cherem, that is, anathemate (with a curse suspension, or separation). The same word signifieth a thing consecrated to God, and sequestered from the public use, as it is said of the spoils of jerico, that Achan received 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Minha-cherem, that is, of the spoils condemned of the Lord by a curse, of setting apart, or suspending. Syntagma Tit. de clavibus. Wigandus and Matheus judex in their treatise called Syntagma, or corpus doctrinae, on the title de clavibus in veteri testamento, of the keys in the old Testament, do say: First, that there are such keys: Although in the new Testament Christ institute the keys by a solemn manner, Matth. 16.18. and joh. 20. notwithstanding in the old Testament also, there was a power of the keys pertaining to the church, and to the Ministers thereof, as appeareth by the things following. What were the kinds▪ That there were two keys, the one binding, the other losing▪ appeareth out of Esa. 22. I will give (or lay) upon his shoulder, to wit, Eliachim, the key of the house of David, and he shall open, and there shallbe none that can shut, and he shall shut, and there shallbe none that can open. And examples to the Prophetical writings do witness. For Cain in the 3. of Gen. is excommunicated. But David is absolved of Nathan, and the types or figures of thrusting out of the camps the lepers and polluted, and receiving of the healed and purged by sacrifice, Num. 4. levit. 13. concerning the binding key, or Excommunication: what are the names thereof? The binding key in the Prophetical writings, is called Anathema. Num. 21. Deut. 7. etc. Malediction and detestation: Num. 23. Deut. 27. crying out woe: Hosee. 7. casting out of the land: Gen. 4. taking away out of the midst: Deut. 13. The definition is this. The key binding is a power ordained of God, The definition of the Eccl. binding. committed to the church and to the Priests, of denowncing the wr●th of God to notorious and polluted sinners, and of shutting them out of the society of God's people, and of forbidding other their society and company, until either by the Magistrate they be taken out of the way, or else by repentance, or by the prescribed sacrifices, they shall be purged and received etc. And afterward coming to the Ministers, he saith: the Ministers of excommunication were the Priests, and the church approving it Deut. 27. the Levites shall pronounce and say unto all the men of Israel with a high voice, accursed is the man that maketh a gra●en and ● moult●n Image, the abomination of the Lord, the work of the artificers, and setteth it in a secret place. And all the people shall answer Amen. In the second book of Esdras, chap. 13. Eliasis the priest separateth the strangers from Israel. And likewise for the other Key of losing: The key absolving is a power ordained of God and committed to the priests and Prophets, The definition of the Eccl. absolving. of pronouncing to sinners being penitent, the remission of sins, for the Woman's and Abraham's seed and the son of David, that is for the Messiah. etc. The author and the Ministers are these: Either God himself immediately hath denounced the forgiveness of sins, as Genesis 3. When he setteth forth the promise of the Woman's seed, he doth nothing else, bu● thankee mought absolve Adam and Eve from their sin. etc. Or else by the patriarchs, So Genesis 30. God saith ●o Abimelech of Abraham▪ etc. Or else, by the Prophets. The second of Kings 12. Nathan said to David, the Lord hath translated thy sin. etc. or else, by the Prees●●▪ which offering sacrifice● expiatory, for the people, for their sins, & afterward blessed them, which what was it ●●so 〈◊〉 a denunciation of the forgiveness of their sins? Levi. 4.5.6. & 9 levit. 19 And the Priest shall pray for him and for his sin, and it shall be forgiven him, and his sin remitted, and Num. 6. Speak to Aaron & to his sons: thus shall ye bless the children of Israel, & say unto them● the Lord bless thee and keep thee, the Lord show his face unto thee, and have mercy upon thee. This wa● the state of Excommunication and absolution in the old Testament, denounced by the ●outh of the Minister of the word. For to whom the Absolving belonged, the Excommunicating belonged also. The steps whereof (saith Aretius) are in the new Testament, joh. 9.12. & 16. For although that Discipline was administered then of wicked men, notwithstanding it is for an argument of the antiquity. And in the old time the Institution was honest and profitable. This corruption Christ corrected, when he drew back this Discipline to his Church. Math. 16.18. joh. 20. The Apostles also used it laudably, as it is, 1. Cor. 5.1. Tim. 5. Whereby also it appeareth, that 〈◊〉 the wicked jews used it in Christ's time, The censure of Exc. renewed by Christ. Mat. 16. john. 20. Christ reducing into his church, the old Institution of God for Excommunicating and absolving: he committed this spiritual censure to such only as were spiritual Ministers of the word, Howsoever the other that were not Ministers, did allow and approve the same. And this sentence. Math. 18. Being over ruled by the other before Math. 16. 〈◊〉 john 20. coming after, and put in practice by these examples. 1. Cor. 5. And 1, Tim. 5. ●here S. Paul being a Minister of the word, pronounceth the sentence and the judgement: If the use of the other Apostles be to be leveled by these examples, it is clear, that in the Apostles times (though the Church 〈◊〉 thereunto) the action was 〈◊〉 by such only as were Ministers of the word of God. What the practice was of Excommunication in the Primitive church succeeding the Apostles, partly appeareth by that we h●●e cited out of Tertullian, saying: There are also exhortations, chasticementes and the Divine censure. Tertul. In Apolog. cont. Gent. cap. 39 For judgement is there given with great w●ight, as among those which are certain that God beholdeth them. And it is the chief foreiudgement of the judgement to come, if any shall so offend. If any be banished from the communicating of prayer and of the meeting together, and of all the holy partaking, every of the approved Elders have the Government. Here is Excommunication mentioned, and the Government to appertain to every of the approved Elders. But in adding withal the public prayers and Exhortations, that he ●nne●eth to the government of these Elders, it is apparent, that he meant none other, but such as were Ministers of the word. Which we have also showed yet more play●●, in his book De Coronae militis, Ext. in the Eccl. history. where after he hath spoken of Baptism received Sub antistitis, under the Bishops and Prelates: speaking of the lords supper, he saith: Nec de aliorum manu quam Praesidentium sumimus, Neither receive we it at the hands of any other, than of the governors. So that he maketh these Seniors and Governors, to be all one with the prelate's and Minister's of the word and sacraments. Eusebius lib. 5. cap. 24. telleth, Wherein Victors exc. was reproved. how Victor Bishop of Rome Excommunicated the Churches of the East, For keeping their manner of celebrating Easter day. Wherein although he greatly abused this power of binding: yet if he had rightly with discretion used it within his bounds, Irenaeus nor any other did reprove him but only for his rash overreaching himself in the same. For, (saith Eusebius) Irenaeus also writing with the other Bishops of France over whom he had the government (for he was Archbishop of Lions, Anno Domini 169.) doth indeed confirm it, that the Mystery of the lords resurrection should be celebrated on the sunday: Notwithstanding he reproveth Victor, that he did not well, to cut off from the Unity of the body, so many and so great Churches of God, that kept the custom delivered to them of the ancient time. And to show this better, that when he used this power better, he was not misliked for the use thereof: Eusebius saith afterward in the last chap. of the fift book. What Exc. by Victor was allowed. But how can they lay a slander unto Victor concerning this, sith they knew, that Victor expelled from the communion of the Church, Theodorus the tanner, which was the prince & Father of this their impiety, which durst first at Rome avouch, that Christ was but only a man. For if Victor (as they say) did so believe: how did he cast out of the Church Theodorus the inventor of this blasphemy? So that Eusebius approveth this doing of Victor for his Excommunication of this heretic. I here pass over all the Canons and decrees mentioned in the councils, in the names of the Apostles and of divers ancient Bishops, because their credit may be called in question, though divers of them mentioning the Excommunications, (made only by Bishops and sacerdotal priests) be no doubt of great antiquity. Only I note that, which Eusebius recordeth of the Emperor Philip. Eusebius li. 6. cap. 25. Of this man (saith he) It is reported unto us, that he was a Christian. And on Easter day, to wit, even in the Vigilles, when he would have been present amongst them, The Exc. of Philip the Emperor. and communicated in the mysteries, he was of the Bishop of the place not suffered, before he had confessed his sins, and stood among the penitent persons. Neither by any means could he have leave to receive the mysteries, except that before he had by repentance purged himself of those manifold faults, that were reported of him. It is said therefore that he gladly received that which was appointed to them by the Proestos (or Bishop), Theodosius of Excom. approving that he had a godly fear, and a Faith of Religion, most full of works. The like we read of the most Noble Emperor Theodosius, in the Ecclesiastical History of Theodoretus Lib. 5. Cap. 17 Where having declared in the former Chapter, how Theodosius had in his fury caused his Soldiers to make a Massacre of 7000. people in the City of Thessalonica, for the revenge of an insurrection there made, wherein some of the emperors justices were stoned to death: he showeth, how the Emperor afterward being come to Milan, when he would have entered into the Church after his wont manner, Ambrose forbade him, laying the heighnousnesse of his fault before him, and willing him to departed, and submit himself to this bond of Excommunication that he inflicted on him. With these words (saith Theodoretus) the Emperor being moved, Theodore●us li. 5. cap. 17. (who being brought up in the holy doctrine, knew what were the offices of the Sacerdotal priests, what were the offices of the Emperors,) he returned with sighs and tears into the Court, etc. For the which fact (although perhaps somewhat more rough than needed, unto so penitent a Prince) not only Ambrose, but also Theodosius, is of all writers highly commended. Generally, whatsoever Heretics or other malefactors in any of the general or provincial councils be condemned, by the Censure of Excommunication, it was done by such Bishops, priests, or Elders, as were Ministers of the word of God. Neither do any of the Fathers ascribe the denunciation of this spiritual Censure (in the proper sense thereof) to any other, Cyprianus ut sup●a. than to a Bishop or to a minister of the word. We have seen in Cyprian, how, although he promised that he would do nothing, (in receiving those that were fallen from the faith into the lapse of Idolatry, junii ecclesiasticus, cap. 3. and so became abstenti, that is, Excommunicated, to be admitted on their repentance to the communion and peace of the church) without the consent of his College of Elders, which as withal we have found were all ministers of the Word and Sacraments, (Which junius himself in his Book called Ecclesiasticus, Capitulo 3▪ treating on these. Seniors: confesseth to be Corpus & Collegium sacerdotum, A body or corporation and College of Sacerdotal priests. Yea in that case, although he promiseth not to receive them, without the consent also of the Deacons and of the people: yet the action of Excommunication and absolving of them, he still maketh it proper tohim self, being the Bishop, and to such only as were ministers of the word. Hierom. in Math. 16. Jerome upon that saying of Christ to Peter, Math. 16, I will give thee the Keys of the kingdom of Heaven, and whatsoever etc. August. of excom. This place (saith he) the Bishops and the priests not understanding, take upon them somewhat of the pharisees pride, to think that either they may condemn the innocent, or lose the offenders. When as with God, not the sentence of the sacerdotal priests, but the life of the guilty is sought out. We read in Leviticus of the Lepers, where they are bidden to show themselves to the priests. And if they have the lepry, then of the sacerdotal priests they are made unclean. Not that the sacerdotal priests make them Lepers and unclean: but that they have the knowledge of him that is a Leper, and of him that is not a Leper. And that they may discern who is clean, or who is unclean. In such sort therefore as the sacerdotal Priest maketh the Leper clean or unclean: so here also either the Bishop and the priest or Elder bindeth or looseth, not those that are either innocent or offenders: but according to his office, when he shall have heard the diversities of the sins, he knoweth who is to be bound, or who is to be loosed. Saint Augustine being complained unto, that Auxilius being a young Bishop had made such a rash Excommunication, Aug. ad Auxilium epistola. 75. as Jerome here spoke of: writeth unto him in this manner. Augustine to his most dearly beloved Lord, and worshipful or reverend brother, and fellow sacerdotal Priest, Auxilius. Our renowned Son Classicianus hath grievously by Letters complained unto me, that he hath sustained of your holiness the injury of accursing. Declaring that he came to the church, accompanied with the appearance of a few persons convenient for his power, and dealt with you, that you should not against his health (or safety) favour them, who by periuring themselves on the Gospel, sought aid for violating of their faith, even in the house of faith. Whom notwithstanding, considering what ill they had done, he saith that they were not taken thence by violence, but went out of their own accord. And hereupon your honour is so offended with him, that by the making of your Ecclesiastical acts, he with all his house, is stricken with the sentence of the Curse Which Letters I having read, being not a little moved with thoughts, tossing me with great vexation of heart, I could not hide it from your lovingness, that if you have your opinion of this matter tried out by sure reasons or testimonies of the Scriptures: you would vouchsafe also to teach us, how the child may rightly be accursed, for the Father's sin, or the wife for the Husbands, or the servant for the Lords, or any in the house also not yet borne, if it should be borne in the same time, that the whole house is bound with the curse, so that it could not in the danger of death be helped by the washing of regeneration. For this is not a corporal punishment, wherewith we read that some despisers of God were slain, together with all theirs, which were not partakers of the same ungodliness. Then indeed to the terror of the living, the mortal bodies were slain, which at sometime verily should have died. But the spiritual punishment, whereby that i● done which is written, Whatsoever things thou shalt bind in earth shall be bound also in Heaven, Math. 16. bindeth the souls. Of whom it is written, The soul of the Father is mine, Exech. 18. and the soul of the Son is mine. The soul that shall sin the same shall die. You have peradventure heard that some sacerdotal priests of great name, have accursed some body with their house. But if perhaps they were demanded, they might be found not able to render a reason of the same. As for me, If any body should demand of me, whether it were well done? I find not what I should answer him. I never durst do this thing, when I have been moved most grievously, about the wicked deeds of some most cruelly committed against the Church. But if the Lord have revealed to you, how it may justly be done: I despise never a whit your young age, & rudiments (or but young beginnings) of the Eccl. honour. Behold I am at hand, I an old man, of my young fellow B▪ a B. of so many years, of my Colleague not yet of one year, am ready to learn, how we may render a just account either to God or to men, if we punish with spiritual punishment the innocent souls, for the offence of another, of whom they take not, as of Adam (in whom all have sinned) original sin. For if the son of Classicianus have taken from his Father the sin of the first man, that is to be washed away in the fountain of baptism. Notwithstanding, after he begat him, whatsoever sin his father committed, wherein he himself was not partaker, who doubteth, that it pertaineth not to him? and what then of so many souls in the whole household? whereupon, if one soul by this severity, whereby this whole house is accursed, S. Aug. error in the Infants dying without baptism. should perish in departing out of the body without baptism, the death of the bodies of innumerable men, if they be taken out of the church and killed is not comparable to this loss. If therefore you can render a reason of this matter, would to God you would also by writing again yield it, that we also might be able to do it. But if you can not, why should you do that by any unadvised passion of your mind, whereof (if you should be demanded) you can not find a right reason? I have said these things, yea, although our son Classicianus hath committed aught, that may seem to you to be most justly punished with accursing. Howbeit, if he hath written true letters unto me, neither aught so much as he alone in his house, to have been punished with this sentence. But hereon I meddle nothing with your holiness. But only request that you would forgive him ask pardon, if that he shall acknowledge a fault. But if you shall wisely acknowledge, that he hath not offended, because he is in the house of faith, hath more justly required that faith ought to be kept, lest it should be broken there, where it is taught: do that which an holy man ought to do, that if that have happened to you, as to a man, which thing verily the man of God speaketh of in the Psalm: Mine eye was troubled for wrath: you should cry out to God: Have mercy on me O Lord, because I am weak, that he may reach out his right hand and repress your wrath, and calm your mind, to see and to do righteousness. For as it is written, The wrath of Man worketh not the righteousness of God. james. 1. But let us rather think, that because we are men, we live most dangerously among the snares of temptations. Take away therefore the Ecclesiastical acts that you have done, being done peradventure more on perturbation. And let that charity come again between you, which you had with him, while you were yet Catechumenus, a scholar, or Learner of the Catechism. Remove the strife, and revoke peace, least both the man that is your friend perish to you, and the Deulll that is your foe rejoice over you. But the mercy of our God is mighty, who also grant to hear me praying, least my heaviness over you be increased. But rather, that that which is already sprung up may be healed, and that he would erect me by his grace, and rejoice your youth, not contemning mine old age. I have set down this whole Epistle, as well for the reverend style thereof, What S. Aug. dissaloweth in this B Exc. one Bishop thus writing to another about this matter of Excommunication: as chiefly that we may the more fully perceive, what Saint Augustine dissoloweth and alloweth in this matter. For although he find fault with this young bishops overhasty Excommunicating of this Gentleman, and namely of his whole household, condemning other for that, which he misse-conceyved was his fault: yet doth he not disallow his Censure, for that he being the Bishop did it himself, and not others joined with him. But he alloweth thereof, so it had been done deservedly, and with mature deliberation, and gone no further than to the offending party. Yea, being done as ill as it was, he entreateth him to undo this Ecclesiastical act, and to release the Censure of his Curse, ascribing the binding and the losing to the Bishop. Although therefore Saint Augustine do often affirm, the power of the keys for opening and shutting, binding and losing, to be given to the Church: yet he maketh the execution of the same, to appertain only, to the Bishops and Ministers of the word. chrysostom likewise in the east, where he ascribeth this power unto the Church, Homilia 2. De David & Saul, Chrysost. Homil. 2. de David & Saul. speaking against them that went to the stage-plays from the sermon, he saith: Verily I think that many of those which forsook us yesterday, and went away to the spectacles of iniquity, are this day present. But I wish, that I might openly know who these are, that I might drive them from the sacred porches. Not that they should perpetually tarry without, but that being corrected, they should return again. Sith that the Fathers also drive out of the doors and from the table, their sons that oftentimes offend, not that they should be always banished from thence, but that being made better by this chastisement, How Chrysost. would Excom. the contemners of the word they may return to their Father's households company, with due commendation. Truly, the same thing do the Pastors also, while as they separate the scabbed sheep from the whole. That they being eased of their wretched disease, may return again safe unto the sound. Rather than that the sick should fill the whole flock with that their disease. For this cause we desired also to know these. But although we be not able to discern them with our eyes, the word notwithstanding, that is, the son of God will know them, and will easily persuade them by reproving their conscience, that they should return of their own voluntary, and willingly, teaching that he only is within, which can give a mind worthy of this exercise. As on the contrary, he that living corruptly is partaker of this congregation, although he stand here present in body, he is cast out and is removed hence, more truly than those that are so shut out of the doors, that they may not be partakers of the holy Table. For they being expulsed according to the Laws of God, and tarrying without, are yet of good hope, if so be they will amend their faults. They are cast out by the Church, that they may return again with a pure conscience. etc. Hear where he saith they are cast out by the Church, yet he wisheth that he might openly know them, to the end, that he might denounce the sentence of Excommunication against them, and do as the Father with his disobedient Child, and as the shepherd with his infected Sheep. So that this Censure by these comparisons, doth properly belong to the Spiritual Father and Pastor of the people. But for the better and more full consideration hereof: Let us see what chrysostom saith in his seventy Homily, against the custom then of hiring Women mourners for the dead, which Homily he also inserteth into his Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Homilia quarta ex Capite secundo Where he also mentioneth Presidents, and after that he had wished them all not to be taken away by untimely death, he saith: God grant this, and this I wish for, and I beseech the Presidents and you all, that ye pray to GOD one for another, Chrysost. of Excom. and make this your common prayer. But if so be (which God forbidden, and grant not, that it should happen) that the bitter death do come: (I call it bitter, not of the own nature thereof, for death now is not bitter, differing nothing from sleep: (but I say, bitter death happeneth in respect of our affection) and any shall higher these Women mourners: believe me that speak it, (I speak none otherwise than I may, and as I am affected, be offended who so list (I will interdict them from the Church, and that for long time, even as though they were Idolaters. Chrysost. in Homil. 70. & homil. 4. in Hebr. 2. For if Paul call the covetous man a worshipper of Idols, much more him that bringeth in, upon the faithful departed, the things that appertain unto Idolaters. To what purpose, I pray thee, dost thou call the Elders and the singers? Dost thou it not that they should comfort thee, and that they should honour the departed? Wherefore dost thou than deface him? Wherefore dost thou prosecute him with public ignominy? Wherefore dost thou play upon a stage? We come to declare the Philosophy of the resurrection, teaching all men, and those also that are yet not stricken, that by the honour rendered to the dead, when as the like shall happen unto them, they bear it out courageously. And thou bringest forth Women, which so much as lieth in them mar all our doings. What is worse than this mockery and derision? what is more grievous than this un-even dealing? And here by the way note these Terms of Presidents, whom he joineth with the people, and of Elders that should comfort the mourners, whom he joineth with the Psalmistes or singers, The Precedents and Elders of whom Chrysost. speaketh. (that he saith were called for at burials) whom also he joineth with himself, saying: We come to show the philosophy of the resurrection, and to teach all men. Whether these were not such Elders, as james willeth the sick to call for before his death, and were called for again at the funerals, to make Exhortations and instructions, to comfort and teach the living, that are assembled at the burial: it appeareth plainly, they were teachers of the word, and not Governors, Praesidentes or Elders that were not Teachers. If our Brethren say that those forenamed precedents were the civil Governors of the people: then again they make nothing for our brethren's Ecclesiastical and not teaching governors or Elders of the Church. But whatsoever they were, that the Ecclesiastical censure of Excommunication belonged to chrysostom himself being their Bishop, and to such only as are Ministers of the word: Let us see further, how chrysostom doth proceed. Be ye ashamed and adread. But if you will not, we will no longer suffer you, to bring into the Church such pernicious customs. For those (saith Paul) th●t sin reprove them before all●. And we forbidden by you those wretched women (that is to say, we charge you, not to suffer them, or, to tell them of this our prohibitation) that they never be present at the deaths of the faithful, nor at the bearing forth of them. For fear we compel them to bewail in very deed their own evils. And least we teach them not to do these things in other folks, but to lament their own calamities. For whereas also, a Godly Father hath a prodigal son, he not only admonisheth him that he join not himself unto wicked men: but also he terrifieth him. Lo therefore I both charge you, and them by you, that ye neither call such together, Chrysost. threat again to Excom. neither that they come unto you. And God grant that this word may do some further good, and that these threats may prevail. But if so be (which God forbidden) we shall be contemned: we shall at length be compelled to bring our threatenings into dooins, chastising you with the Ecclesiastical Laws, and them with such correction as shall be fit for them. But if any being arrogant shall contemn let him hear Christ even now also saying: If any shall offend against thee, go thy ways and reprove him between thee and him alone. Matst. 18. But if he shall not hear thee, take unto thee one or two. And if so also he shall resist thee: tell the Church. And if he shall also dispyise the Church, let him be to thee an Ethnic and Publican. If therefore he command me so to shun him, that hath sinned against me, when he will not hear: judge you, how I ought to account him, that shall sin against himself, and against God. For you would not contemn us, if we proceed so mildly against you. But if any man shall contemn these our bindings that we make, Christ again shall correct him, saying: Whatsoever ye shall bind upon earth shall be also bound in Heaven: and whatsoever ye shall lose upon earth, shall be loosed in Heaven. For if we also be wretched, and of no regard, and worthy of contempt (as in very deed worthy we are) notwithstanding we revenge not ourselves, nor wreck our anger. But think of your salvation. Be ye ashamed, I beseech you, and blush▪ For if a man bear with his friend that contendeth with him more earnestly than is meet, considering his meaning, that he doth it of good will, and not of insolency: How much more should he bear with his Teacher when he reproveth him, nor speaketh these things of a tyrannical authority, nor as though he were appointed in place of a Prince, but as sustaining the care of a Father. For we speak not these things as though we would brag of our power. For how can we speak these things, with this mind, that desire not to come to the experience of the things we speak of, but with grief and mourning? Pardon me, and let not any man despise the ecclesiastical band. For he that bindeth, is not man but Christ, which hath committed this power to us, and hath made men the Lords of so great honour. For we verily would be willing to use this power only to losing, yea, rather we would that we neither had any necessity of that: for we desire that we might bind none. We are not so miserable and wretched, (although we be very vile) but if we be compelled, pardon us. For neither of our own accord or willingly, but rather mourning more for you, we lay the bonds upon you. And, If any man contemn them, the time of judgement is at hand. The residue I will not utter, lest I should beat your minds down right. For this is the thing that we chiefly desire, that we might not be drawn into this necessity. But if we shall come to it, we will fulfil our office, and cast the bonds upon you. And if any shall break them, The B. separate authority in excom. I shall do that is my duty, and then am I clear, and thou shalt give an account to him that commanded me to bind. But tell thou me, if the King sitting in presence, one of the Sergeants standing by, be commanded to bind one of those that stand in the row, and to lay fetters on him, but he not only thrust him back, but also break the bonds: is it the Sergeant that hath sustained the injury, or is it not much more the King, that did command it? The excommunicator such a person as may teach. For if when any thing is done against the faithful, he account the same done against himself: how much more, when he which is appointed to teach sustaineth injury, will he be moved, as though he himself had sustained the contumely? But God forbidden that any of them that are in this Church should come into the necessity of these bonds. For as it is a goodly thing not to offend, so is it profitable to bear the rebuke thereof. Let us therefore bear the reprehension, and let us endeavour never to offend: but if we shall have offended, let us sustain the reproving. For, as it is good not to be stricken, (which notwithstanding if it shall happen, it is necessary to lay a medicine to the wound): even so it is here. But God grant that we never need any such medicines, for of you we hope better things, and such as appertain unto salvation, although we speak thus. We have spoken perhaps more vehemently, but to your greater taking heed. For it is better, that I should be accounted of you bold, cruel, and insolent: than that you should do those things that please not God. But we trust in God, that this our admonition shall not be unprofitable. But that you shall be so changed, that these speeches shall be turned into your praises and commendations. By this it clearly appeareth, that not only the keys of knowledge, and opening the word of God: but the keys of this discipline & Censure of excommunication, appertained chief to the Bishop, and to Teachers of the word, and not to a signory of such Governors as were not teachers, Melancthon. joined with him. And as this was the practice of the Church's Excommunication, in the days of these holy Fathers: so, cutting of all the later corruptions of the ages following, especially in the time of the Popish tyranny, that most tragically abused these keys, and continueth and increaseth those abuses of them: Let us come to the Protestants, and to our Brethren themselves in the reformed Churches, and see their judgements also in this Discipline. When the late Trident Conventicle had falsely burdened the Protestant Churches, that we gave this power of the keys to all Christians indifferently: Kemnitius answereth, in his Examination of the sixth chapter saying: Kemnitius in exam. Trident. Con●. To. cap. 6. This Chapter hath two parts, the first disputeth of the Minister of absolution, to whom appertaineth the ordinary ministry of the keys. The other part treateth what absolution is. So far as pertaineth to the first part, the matter may be dispatched in few words. For in the Examination of the tenth Canon of the Sacraments in general, those things that pertain hereunto are expounded. For although the keys be delivered unto the Church, as the ancient Fathers do well set forth: notwithstanding we think, that by no means every Christian ought or may indifferently, without a lawful calling, usurp or exercise the Ministry of the word and sacraments. But as in case of necessity the old Fathers say, that every lay man may minister the sacrament of baptism: so also Luther said of absolution, in the case of necessity where a priest is not present▪ Melancthon in his common places, Tit. De Regno Christi. Moreover saith he) we must also consider this, Melanct. in locis come. de regno Christi. that the pastors have the commandment of Excommunicating with the word, without bodily force, those that are guilty of manifest crimes. And in his annotations on his common places, he saith: But after that we have known the true church by those signs that he have spoken of: that power whereof Christ speaketh Mat. 16. & 18. and also john. 20. is to be applied to this only church. For neither hath Christ given that power to his enemies, whom he commandeth to be excluded out of the kingdom of heaven, Melanct. in arnot. locorum come. according to that saying: he that believeth not shall be condemned: but unto this only assembly that hath not only his word, but also interpreteth it rightly, and according to the proportion of the faith, not overthrowing the foundation which the Apostles have laid, and before them the Prophets. For neither said he to Peter, as to the son of john, I give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: but because he had said thou art Christ the son of the living God. Therefore the B. of Rome claimeth to himself in vain the keys of Peter, sith that he is most unlike to Peter, & not a minister of Christ, but of Antichrist. Of whom it is written, that about the last time, he shallbe reproved with the spirit of God's mouth. Neither ●id Peter usurp the power of binding & losing to himself alone any more to himself than to other, but judged the same to be common to him with all the apostles, and the whole church which professeth the same word. Save that for order sake, he committeth the public administration of the keys to certain, & to fit persons, that they should either absolve men, or not absolve them, with this choice that Christ himself hath ordained, & that he should rightly distribute the word of God etc. Thus doth Melancthon grant that this power is committed to the church: but the dispensation of the power, is committed to the right distribution of the ministers. And not only he speaketh of the power mentioned Math. 16. and john. 20▪ but also Math. 18. To which purpose he proceedeth, saying: The Church's power of order & jurisdiction But it is usual to divide the power of the church, into the power of order, & into the power of jurisdiction. The power of order they call the right of teaching, & of administering the sacraments: which the prophets and th'apostles immediately received of God: the other doctors or teachers (received it) by men. To this power we must hearken simply, even as to the voice of the gospel, according to the commandment of God: Hear him. Howbeit, the good doctors or teachers have liberty of ordaining times, &: of Instituting certain traditions for good order sake. Which to obey, it is the duty of a godly mind. The powe● of order. To which mind nothing is more joyful, than in all things to agree with the true church, without offence of conscience. The power of jurisdiction is, when as those which are defiled with manifest wickednesses, & being admonished, do not desist, are excommunicated from the society of the Church, not only the inward and spiritual society. Which excom. is made by the general voice of the gospel: The powe● of Iurisd. he that shall not believe shallbe condemned: but also from the external communion of the church, by a spiritual sentence, to the intent, the honour of God may be less blemished, & the society of men also less ill reported. This other power in the primitive church was more necessary, when the Ethnic magistrates governed the cities. For there, when by the civil judgement, punishment should have been given upon the blasphemers, & on others openly violating the commandments of God: the church necessarily executed judgement on the corrupted members, without sedition, that is, without bodily force. Excluding the wicked with the only word, & yet receiving them again, if they were converted. But now after that they also which are the magistrates, have embraced the name of Christ, it is be●ter & more meet for the common profit, to bring them under the civil punishment, that manifestly lead a wicked life. Especially when as the magistrate by name is charged that he taketh away the authors of offences, to th'end that the name of god be less il spoken of. Thus also the offices remain distinct, that by the church's power, secret & manifest sins be reproved, by the only word of God, but they that suffer not themselves to be ruled by the doctrine, may be punished by the civil jurisdiction. Aretius. verily this were a m●●t beautiful harmony of the two powers, if it were kept: but in this extreme confusion of all things, and heedlessness of Princes, there is not so much as hope of ordaining this harmony. This only thing remaineth, that the King of Kings come, and purge his Church for ever from all offences. Thus complaineth Melancthon, and distinguisheth of these powers. But he would so little have the Eccl. jurisdiction of excommunication, to be used by governing Seniors that were not teachers: that he would either have them teachers, or else their jurisdiction to be but civil, and the mere punishment of the Christian Magistrate. Aretius' in locis come. part 2. de excomm. Aretius' in his Common-place thereon, saith: Excommunication is an exclusion of some body that professeth our Religion, out of the company of the faithful in holy and profane matters, being made in the name and power of Christ, by the ordinary Ministers of the Church, the residue of the Church consenting, The definition of excommunication. and being made for the cause of amending the sinner, and of delivering the Church from the contagion of the sin. And afterward proving the parts of this definition, coming to the 5. part, By whom it ought to be administered? he saith; We answer out of the definition: By the ordinary Ministers, the residue of the Church consenting. We would have the Ministers ordinary, because except their vocation be lawful, the discipline of the manners shall be frustrate. For Christ hath delivered the same to the Apostles, and for that cause to their lawful successors, and therefore they labour here in vain, whom the lawful succession doth remove. And furthermore, that the discipline be administered of the Ministers, as Ministers, that is, that they use the same by ministery or service, not by Empire or rule. In which matter, how greatly in Popery they offended, is not here to the purpose to declare. The Minister is the excommunicator, and the Church consenteth. We add, The residue of the Church consenting: lest the Minister would exercise dominion of his own wil Christ Mat. 18. biddeth, Tell the Church, not the ministery only. And Paul would not the incestuous man to be excluded by his authority alone, but the Church of Corinth being gathered together 1. Cor. 5. Cyprian declareth it to the people, if any were to be received, doing the same (no doubt) in those that were to be excommunicated. Epist. 16. li. 3. You being present and judging, all shall be excommunicated. So in another place, for those that were fallen, he entreateth the people that the peace might be given them. Tertul. Apolog. cap. 39 saith; Every of the approved Seniors do govern, having gotten a just honour, not with money, but with testimony, for no matter of God consisteth on price, etc. Here Aretius maketh excommunication to be necessarily made by ●he ordinary Ministers. And that we might know wh● these are, Cyprianus▪ he addeth, that Christie delivered it to the Apostles, and to the successors of the Apostles. And therefore those that labour here, to have other Ministers than Teachers, labour in vain, because they are removed from the lawful succession, and their discipline is all frustrate. This being set set down for the Minister, where he addeth, the residue of the Church's consent; and thereto apply this testimony of Christ Mat. 18. Tell the Church, not the Minister only: he maketh no especial Senate of ecclesiast. Seniors, but putteth altogether in this general name, The Eccl. Senate of Governors not teachers rejected. the residue of the church. Neither giveth he them herein a joint ministery with the Ministers, that the excommunication should be made by all the residue: but that it should be done by their consent. So that if our Br. fearing confusion in the people's consent, would have a signory to represent them, and to whom their consent should be compromitted: yet beyond consent they have nothing to do, more than the residue of the Church and people have, whom (as they say) they represent: except they will be Comministers of the word, and successors of the Apostles. And this doth the very example 1. Cor. 5. (here also alleged) excellently we'll declare. The example of Saint Paul. 1. Co●. 5. Where Paul was the Minister and the judge, and the People gave their consent to his judgement. Howbeit, if they had not consented, that had not defeated the virtue and power of S. Paul's Censure, as we have already at large seen. And likewise the dealing of Cyprian, in receiving of them that were excommunicated. The words of Cyprian in this alleged 16. epist. li. 3. writing to the people in his absence from them, are these. Cyprian. epist. li. 3. epist. 16. That you do mourn & bewail the falls of our brethren; of myself withal I know it, and do bewail it, and I suffer and feel that, which the blessed Apostle saith: Who is weakened, (faith he) and I am not weakened? who is offended, and I am not burned? And again, he put in his Epistle, saying; 2. Co. 11.29 1. Co. 12. 2● If one member suffer, the other members also suffer with it: and if one member rejoice, the other members also rejoice wish it. I have compassion therefore, & mourn together with our brethren that have fallen, and overthrown themselves in the trouble of persecution, and trailing with them part of our bowels, they have with their wounds brought unto us sharp grief. To whom God by his divine mercy, is able to give remedy. While notwithstanding they should not think that any should be done hastily, unadvisedly, & out of hand, lest if the peace should be usurped rashly, the offence of God's indignation should more grievously be provoked. The blessed martyrs have written letters to us concerning some, beseeching that their desires maybe examined, when as we shall begin to return to the church, peace being before of the Lord given to us all. All their desires were examined, you being present and judges. Aretius. Thus writeth Cyprian, not that the persons were Excommunicated, they being the judges of their Excommunication: How farthe people had to deal for their consent of restoring to the Courche in Cypria●s time but as they were ipso facto Excommunicated by their grievous apostasy: so the fault being so heighnous and offensive to the people, no marvel if Cyprian would not permit, that they should be received into the Church, before the offended people their-selves were content. And for this cause they had made before their requests, unto the people, that they might on their repentance be received. And the people examined and judged their requests to be reasonable. But because it lay not in them to admit them: both they and other that had been constant in their persecutions, whom Cyprian calleth Martyrs, wrote unto him being their Bishop, that he at his return unto them, would receive them. Which although Cyprian of himself were willing to do, yet he maketh this his conclusion: I pray them that they would patiently hear our Counsel. Let them expect our return, and when as by the mercy of God, we shall come unto you, calling together more of our fellowe-Bishops, according to the Discipline of the Lord, and the presence of the blessed Martyrs, we may examine the Letters and the requests. And to the confessors I have written Letters, which I have commanded to be read to you. So that Cyprian writeth not to the people for them, as though the people had had the chief authority or any power herein: but contrariwise, the people had written to him, that whereas, neither they, nor the Martyrs among them, nor yet the priests without him, could receive them, he (having the chief power hereof) would vouchsafe to do it. Whereupon, he writeth this Epistle, to stay their desire herein, till it might be done more orderly at his coming to them. This therefore being no ordinary matter, wherein so many Bishops should appear, to the more solemn receiving of these so grievous lapsed persons: whereas diverse of the priests or Elders of Carthage had already received these offenders, and administered the Sacraments unto them: He complaineth hereof, saying: I hear notwithstanding that certain of the Elders, neither mindful of the Gospel, neither thinking what the Martyrs have written to us, neither keeping to the Bishop the honour of his sacerdotal preesthoode, and of the Chair: have begun already to communicate to them that are fallen, and to offer for them, (to wit, the public prayers) and to give them the sacrament of thanksgiving. When as they ought to have come by order to these things. Whereby it appeareth that these Elders were Ministers of the word and Sacraments, and yet distinct from those which after he calleth Bishops, that should all be joined with him, in the receiving of these so great offenders. As for that Aretius addeth of the seniors mentioned in Tertullian: I ask no better witness than Aretius himself, even the leaf before, Beza. what they were. Where he saith, (after the example of S. Paul, Excommunicating Alexander and Hymenaeus) Postea usi sunt illa pij Episcopi, ut videre est apud Tertullianum. Apolog. cap. 39 Afterwards the Godly Bishops used it, (to wit, Excommunication) as is to see in Tertullian. etc. Beza himself that referreth Christ's words to a translation of the Synedrion from the Israelites to the Christian Church, Beza in confess. Christ. cap. 5. artic. 43. ) in his Confession, Cap-5▪ De Ecclesia, Artic. 43. saith: secondly, we must know, that this power resteth not upon man's ordinance, but upon the express word of God. For this is part of the jurisdiction of the Keys delivered to the Apostles, and to all true priests (or Elders) in the person of the Apostles. Which Paul himself exercised at Corinth & in other places. So that if these Presbyters, priests or Elders▪ be not such as use the keys delivered to the Apostles, and do it not in the person of the Apostles, as their Successors: it is not the true Ecclesiastical Excommunication by Beza his own Confession. But they be not the Apostles successors, if they be not teachers of the word & ministers of the sacraments as Paul saith: 1. Cor. 4.1. Let a man so esteem us as Ministers of Christ & Stewards of the Mysteries of God? And therefore, of good consequence it doth follow, that the sentences of Excommunication made by such Seniors, as are not teachers, nor Ministers of the word and sacraments, is no lawful Excommunication, nor is the power of the keys that Christ delivered. Gellius Snecanus de Disciplina ecclesiast. 1. methodi part. fol. 437 saith; Thirdly, by the Institution and promise of Christ, Math. 18. ver. 18. Gellius Snecanus de disc. eccl. 1. methodi part. fol. 437 Whatsoever ye shall bind. etc. is as well added to this Discipline, as to the Ministry of the word. Math. 16. ver. 19 We may call it the binding and the losing key of the kingdom of heaven, in respect that it is a part of the Ecclesiastical Government. For by the Figure of the key, is signified the administration of the Church, as appeareth by conference of places. Esay. 22. ver. 22. I will give, or I will lay the key of the house of David upon his shoulder. And Math. 16. ver. 19 & cap. 18. verse 19 Hereupon we learn, that this Discipline is not to be administered according to our private affections, but according to the use in the scripture prescribed, of the keys of the kingdom of Heaven. For Christ ratifieth only those things, that are bound and loosed with his keys of the ministery of the Gospel. We may amplify the same more largely, by the figure of the keys, and of their signification. Math. 16. ver. 19 Mark. 16. ver. 15. Preach ye the Gospel. etc. And john 20. ver. 21. etc. From the example of Peter unto the citizens of jerusalem. etc. Whereby it is plain, that this key consisting in the ministery of the word, is committed to those only, that are the Ministers of the same word. This do his examples prove that he allegeth, for proof, why this government of the presbytery is called spiritual. Snecanus. Whereby (saith he) sins are punished not by bodily force, but by the Ministry of the word. The testimonies which he adjoineth Rom. 12.1. Cor. 12.1. Tim. 4. & 5. Was have sufficiently considered, that they enforce nothing for any other Elders, that meddled not in teaching and ministering the word. The examples which he allegeth, to prove that this Spiritual Discipline may be exercised, without the offence of the politic Magistrate, d●e all of them prove, that the Ministers of the Spiritual Discipline, should be● Ministers of the word. First, from the example (saith he) of the distinct function of Moses and Aaron: The examples in Snecanus. and of all the Godly kings, that never mingled themselves with the Sacerdotal offices. Yea Moses respecting the ordinance of God, by the counsel of jethro his Father in Law, ordained severally by themselves, civil judgements. Exod. 18. ver. 25. Describing in other places, what were the proper offices and judgements of the priests, in spiritual causes, distinct from bodily causes, Deut. 17. ver. 9 As also the Scripture. 1. Paral. 9 ver. 22. & Ezech. 44. This twofold order the godly King josaphat observeth also distinctly, who expressly 2. Chron. 19 ver. 5. etc. Commanded all the judgements or questions of the Law, of the commandment, of the ceremonies, etc. to be referred to the Levites and priests. least any might except that Moses constitution dealt on sacrifices, not on judgements. Secondly, from the punishment of King Saul, sacrificing against the commandment of God. 1. Sam. 15. And of king Ozias stricken with lepry, because he usurped the priests office. 2. Patal, 26, verse 16, etc. The extraordinary examples of Melchisedech, Samuel, and Heli, are not to be drawn into use, contrary to the Law. Thirdly, from the office & use of the priests and Levites, denouncing the blessings to the keepers of God's commandments, and the cursings to the not keepers. Deut. 27, & 28, Fourthly, from the special power and ministry of binding and losing, which Christ committed not to the civil Magistrate, but to the Ministers of the word in the new Testament, Math. 16. Who also commanded significantly, that they that are not obedient, should be showed to the Church, The Presbytery are the Ministers of the word. that is, to the Presbytery, not to the Magistrate, Math, 18. So that, even here where he expoundeth the Church for a Presbytery. Yet he maketh this Presbytery to be only of those, that are the Ministers of the Word. Fiftly, out of Paul 1. Cor. 5. ver. 4, & 12▪ Which (so far as pertaineth to the present business) of all other most evidently teacheth by two arguments, that the presbytery was different from the judgement of things that pertain to the use of this life. First, from the order of the time▪ For that the use of coming together and of judging, was rec●yued in the Corinthian Church, before the Epistle of Paul was written, it is apparent out of his own words: The Presbytery del● in spiritual matters ●heir punishment was by the ministery of the word. You being gathered together in the name of the Lord. Again: Do ye not judge of those things that are within. But speaking afterward, chap. 6. of private controversies, he saith: Appoint you arbiters. Not, ye have appointed, in the preterperfect tense. Moreover, of the diversity of the spiritual things, and civil controversies: for when he forbiddeth them to go to the Magistrate, in those things that pertain to this life: how would he have granted it in spiritual things? That assembly was a singular ornament of the Church: but this judgement of corporal things, is turned to a reproach unto the Corinthians. Insomuch that he adjudgeth each one of the basest, to be mere enough thereunto. Besides that, ●. Cor. 10 refelling the slanders of the adversaries, for the severity of his former Epistle, & for his rebuking the fornicator: he distinguisheth the Ministry of the word, and the revengement with carnal weapons against the disobedient. Thus doth he still continue in proving this signory to be mere spiritual, & their authority wholly to consist in the ministery of the word. sixtly, out of 1. Tim. 5.19. & 20. whereupon it manifestly appeareth, that even then there was an order already appointed at Ephesus, over which Timothy was the Governor. But that these 2. ver. the 19 and the 20. Against an Elder receive no accusation, except in the mouth of 2. or 3. witnesses: and them that sin reprove openly, that the other may fear. are spoken of such Elders, as are pastoral Elders, we have at large before proved, even by the confession of Calvin & Beza: therefore this place, not only maketh nothing for not teaching Elders, but also proveth a manifest standing & appointed superiority, in the Apostles times, among the pastoral Elders, as we have seen. seventhly, unto these approacheth the use of the Apostolical Church, The v●e of the Apost. Church, for excom. only in Teachers which continued many years sound without the help of Kings & Princes. Yea in the more purer Primitive Church, under the Christian Emperor's, the use of the keys remained appertaining to the Ministers of the word and Elders of the Church, distinct from the civil Magistrate. Hear Snecanus telleth not how the Church flourished without the help of Christian Princes, which he showed before was one of the Anabaptists chief arguments: but that the use of the keys was not helped by them, but pertained only to the Ministers of the word, not to Elders, not teachers. To conclude, the things aforesaid are confirmed, by the distinct properties of their government. For the civil Magistrate punisheth crimes with external punishments only, as with fines of money, imprisonments, etc. Insomuch that oftentimes it punisheth also the very penitent, by reason of their civil transgressions, not correcting in the mean ewhile, the impoenitent which do not publicly disturb the peace. It stoppeth indeed now and then an evil, The eccl. discipline by the word of God & instrument of the voice. that it creep not further abroad: but the evil lurking within, it helpeth not. But the discipline eccl. executeth her power against sinners, by the word of God alone, and by the instrument of the voice: and acknowledgeth none among the citizens and members of Christ, but those that repent them. And is so far off from compelling any against their will, that it accepteth the repentance of none, unless it be voluntary. And endeavoureth chiefly in this, that offences might be removed, & the repentance of mind performed before God, and those that are fallen, to be reconciled unto their neighbour, & to the Church. Finally, that the holy things may not be polluted, being cast to dogs & swine. How the charge of both the Tables but not the administration of all matters contained in them, belong to the civil Magistrate. This double limitation is reciprocally to be observed: for as it is not lawful for them that attend on the Church in spiritual things, to arrogate any thing to themselves of the civil power: so also is it not lawful for the civil Magistrate to pass his bounds. The Magistrate is indeed the keeper of either table, and ordained of God the chiefest member of Christ. Howbeit the administration of things in those matters that directly respect the conscience, do not therefore pertain unto him. For it belongeth to God to prescribe in the church, how the consciences should convert themselves by repentance, it belongeth not to the Magistrate: to whom it belongeth to teach & to administer the sacraments, it is their parts also to take notice and to judge by the word, of them that are the despisers of the doctrine and of the sacrament, so far as pertaineth to the controversy of the law (or right), although the execution of the fact in politic matters, do appertain to the civil Magistrate. What can b● plainer spoken than this, to prove that these Seniors either must not deal with this spiritual discipline of excom. or they must be such Presbyters, Priests or Elders, as be Ministers of the word and sacraments. Danaeus in his Christian Introduction, 3. part, in his treatise, De potestate Ecclesiae, Daneus in Christ. Isag. 3. part. de potestate eccl. cap. 48. cap. 48. concerning the author of the power of the keys, saith on this wise. Moreover this thing itself, is able to establish & ratify this power of the Church, against the slanders of all men, as though this power were a certain tyranny, besides the word of God, usurped of the Pastors of the Church. The power of the keys pertains to the Pastors. In which words, he plainly maketh this power, to belong, by the institution of God, to the Pastors of the Church. thirdly (saith he) this is to be objected against the bitings and scoffs, & rebellions of obstinate persons, to wit, that it is given to the Church of Christ himself, being God, and not of men, neither yet hath this power been usurped of the Church. Here therefore is this saying in force, He that despiseth you, Luc. 10.16. despiseth me. Mat. 10. For it is not man that bindeth, but Christ. Chrysost. in the Epist. to the Hebr. (whose sayings thereon we have seen at large already). & it is in the Canon, Nemo contemnat. 11. quaest. 3. Moreover, the charter of this power & jurisdiction, Danaeus. which pertaineth to the church, remaineth in writing in 2. evangelists, as two public Notaries, & Secretaries of the highest King, to wit, Matthew & john. Matth. 18. v. 18. Io. 20. v. 23. To whom agreeth that, which is in jer. chap. 1. ver. 18. Here Danaeus joineth unto Mat. 18. all these testimonies Luc. 10. joh. 20. ● jer. 1. which are all spoken of the Ministers of the word. Luc. 10.16. joh. 20.23. That in Luc. 10. (to the which matter also, that in Mat. 10. agreeth,) was spoken to the comfort of the disciples, being sent out to preach. Concerning that of the keys given to the disciples, joh. 20. Calvin in joh. 20. Calvin himself saith: After that Christ hath appointed, & ordained Legates to be sent into the world, he now more significantly & expressly describeth the office or ministry of them, Remission of sins not separate from the office of Teaching. & in few words comprehendeth the sum of the Gospel. For this power of remitting sins, is not to be separated from the office of teaching, and is annexed to it in one context. And as for that of jer. 1. v. 18. jer. 1.18. Behold this day have I made thee a defensed City, & an iron pillar, & walls of brass, against the whole land, against the kings of judah, & against the princes thereof, against the priests thereof, & against ●he people of the land. Tremelij arnot. in jer. 1. As this was only spoken to the prophet, so Tremelius expounds these words, wherein they should be understood, Behold I set thee, that is, I confirm thee in this thy function, that thou shouldest stand firm against the obstinacy of these men, The Geneva note. & shouldest continued unbroken & immovable. And the very note in the Geneva Bible, observeth on this word, an iron pillar: signifying on the one part, that the more Satan & the world rageth against God's ministers, the more present will he be to help them. And this doth the text itself, even in the ver. next going before, declare, where God saith? Thou therefore gird up thy loins, & arising up speak unto them, all the things that I command thee. Be not afraid at the sighed of them, lest I strike thee before their faces. So that this encouragement of God, was only for the ministery of his word. Bulling. in jer. 1. And very well noteth Bullinger thereon: He declareth to the Prophet what should be his office, that thou shouldest (I say) speak unto them. He constituteth him therefore a Prophet, that is, a Preacher, whose office should be to speak unto the people. And what now he should speak, he expressly signifieth, All things that I command thee. All things (I say) not only some things. Neither shalt thou dissemble any thing, neither shalt thou bring the things that seem good to thee, but that that I command thee, Mark, the things saith he that I command thee, not that other command thee, or that seem good to other. These things agree with this commandment of the L. which the L. This sentence is spoken of a Preacher. jesus himself hath prescribed, & in the last chap. of Mat. said, Teaching them to keep all things that I have commanded you, etc. And on this comfort to him, he saith: For howsoever tyrants would seem to set the preachers at nought, yet the●selues witness, that they are afraid of the servants of god, whom they have contemned, Herode feared john, & Achab Elias, etc. If now these testimonies of Danaeus, be ●it for those to whom this power of the keys belongeth, who seeth not, that it is proper only to the Ministers and Teachers of God's word? Danaeus in Christ. Isag. 3 pa●●. cap. 50. In the 50. cha. Danaeus cometh directly to the party to whom the keys are given. But (saith he) this power or jurisdiction of the keys is given unto the whole Church, & therefore to all & singular the Apostles & true Pastors of the Church, and that indeed equally: but not only to Peter alone and to his successors, or to himself principally or chiefly, as some say, but unto other by a communicating made from Peter. It is given therefore unto the whole Church herself, howbeit the same is exercised by the B. & Prelates of the Church, Excom. exercised by the B and Prelates. in her name, consent, & conscience. Aug. in 50. Homil. homil. 50. Héerupon (to confute the Papists error, that would make all this power to be given principally to Peter, & to be derived from him) he faith: The first reason is the authority of the scripture. For Christ speaking to all his Apostles, The powe● of the keys not given to Peter only, but to all the Apostles. not only to Peter alone, saith in the plural number, What sins soever ye shall bind upon earth, etc. Math. 18. v. 18. The same Christ after his resurrection, Omnibus hanc eandem potestatem confirmanit quoque, confirmed also unto all of them this self same power, not only to Peter alone: for upon whom he breathed the holy Ghost, to them he said; Whose sins soever ye shall remit, etc. john 20. ve. 23. If now the power given Mat. 18. be the self same power that given Io. 22. & the power given joh. 20. is the power of teaching and preaching the word of God, The power given Mat. 18. is given only to Teachers. & as calvin saith, is not to be separated from the office of teaching: how followeth it not, that whosoever have this power given them Mat. 18. must be all Teachers of the word of God? And how then do our Br. give this power to such a Senate of Elders▪ as are not Teachers? The 2. reason (saith Danaeus) is drawn from the things that are necessarily annexed. Thus, wheresoever is the true Church of God, there the gates of hell do not prevail, there is remission of sins, there is the fountain of grace open, and also equally appeareth out of the word of God. Therefore wheresoever the church is, the other equally accord thereto, that are the Church's gifts, & follow the same. Zach. 13 v. 1. Among the which chiefly is this power of the keys: for by it, the remission & retention of sins is denounced. The power mentioned M●th. 18. is the same mentioned Mat. 16. Christ said of the Church universally, The gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Whereupon it is rightly gathered, that this power of the keys pertaineth to her, and that indeed universally. Math. 16. v. 18. For the mean whereby the gates of hell do not prevail against the Church, is the self same power. If this also be the self same power mentioned Math. 16. which calvin also ascribeth to the ministery of the word, saying: Hear Christ beginneth to treat of the public office, that is, of the Apostleship, whose dignity is adorned with a double commendation. For Christ saith, that the Ministers of the Gospel, are (as it were) the porters of the Kingdom of heaven, because they bear the keys thereof. secondly he addeth, that they are endued with a power of binding and losing that is effectual in heaven. The similitude of the keys, is aptly fitted unto the office of teaching. This again manifestly proveth, that the exercise of this power belongeth only to those that are Teachers of the word. To conclude (saith Danaeus) Paul himself that used this power both in binding and also in losing, 1. Cor. 5. & 2. Cor. 2. 1. Tim. 1. vers. 20. used the same by his own right, in respect he was an Apostle, not by a right granted him from Peter, or by delegation of this power made to him of Peter, Gal. 2. vers. 8. Therefore it appertained to Paul, The power of binding and losing pertaineth to Pastors. as much as to Peter. But if as much to Paul, then as much to other Apostles also, yea and unto their successors, that is, unto every of the Churches, & to the Pastors of them, sith that Paul calleth himself the least among the Apostles, 1. Cor. 15. verse 8. & 9 Wherefore we must doubt no whit, but that this power was given of God unto the Church, and not unto Peter alone, and also that it was equally given to every of the Pastors & Churches, that they may have & keep sound & obedient to the word of God, the flock of the Lord committed unto them. This reason is again a good argument, that the exercise of this power belongeth only to the Ministers of the word, not only from the example of Paul in the places here cited, and of the other Apostles, but also of their right and interest therein, and that in respect they were Apostles; and to the successors of the Apostles, in respect of their succeeding therein, in teaching the doctrine that they planted. But those that are no teachers, are no successors of the Apostles: therefore the exercise of this power belongs not to them. And if Paul so well as Peter, The power of the keys is several to the Apostles, and to Pastors. and every one of the Apostles had this power in their own rights, and Pastors likewise in their own rights: and their rights and offices be severed from those in the Churches that be not Pastors nor Teachers: then had Paul and Peter and every of the Apostles, and in succession from them, every Pastor and Teacher, a power and right herein by himself, separate from all other in the Churches. And to this accordeth the testimony of S. August. which Daneus here citeth: Erogate rem me posuit Dominus, etc. Aug. sermone de tempore 164. God hath set me to be a layer forth, not an exactor, notwithstanding where we may, where place is given, I cease not: where we know, we reprehend, we rebuke, we accurse, Aug. attributeth not exc. to any Elders not teaching. we excommunicate, and notwithstanding we amend them not. Why so? Because He that planteth, nor he that watereth is any thing, but God that giveth the increase. Who is this, that he ascribeth this accursing and excommunicating unto? Is it to any that are not Teachers? Is it not to them, that he saith, do also reprehend, and rebuke, and plant, and water? And is not that by preaching or teaching the word? Danaeus for the Elders ixion. And if Danaeus had set down the sentence more full, the words that ●o before, would have declared it: Behold (saith Aug.) I say unto you, behold I cry unto you, I clear myself. God hath set me to be a layer forth, etc. And the words also following immediately after: I that now speak, that now admonish, what need is there, but that God hear me for you, that is, in your hearts? Briefly I say, and I commend it unto you, and I terrify the faithful, and I edify you. Thus doth he still join teaching and preaching with his accursing and excommunicating. And even there, he so threateneth them that kept concubines besides their wives, that he maketh the sinner to say, O holy Bishop, thou hast made my concubine an harlot. Did I say so (saith Augustine) the Apostle crieth it out, & I have incurred the blame, etc. Thus doth S. Augustine threaten them with his excommunicating: but he teacheth and reproveth them withal. As for such as are not, as he was a Teacher, & open reprehender of sins, he ascribeth not the action of excommunication to them. Moreover, in 52. chap. saith Danaeus: Therefore as the King being sick obeyeth as he is a man, the Physicians, although they be his subjects: & as he that saileth obeyeth the Mariners, because he hath not the government over the Sea, nor over the diseases: so doth he also obey the Pastors, because the highest Magistrate Politic, hath not any law over the heavens. Wherefore in this power to be exercised, the Pastors and Prelates of the Church, have also over the chief Magistrate a right & power, in respect that they arethe faithful Ministers of God, & Dispensors & Pastors of the whole Church. Hie. 1. v. 10. What can be plainer spoken than this, that this right and power to excommunicate, belongeth to none that be no Teachers? The examples that he allegeth, of Nathan reproving David: john Baptist reproving Herode: Fabian repelling Philip: Ambrose excommunicating Theodosius: we have either seen before, or they are apparent, that they all confirm the Censure of the Minister only of God's word. And in the 53. chap. fourthly (saith Danaeus) it is the office of the Bishops and Prelates of the Church, to intend unto the word of God, to remove the offences of the Church, to seek the lost sheep, to gather the dispersed. For thus do Ezech. 34.37. and Zach. 11. ver. 16. describe the office of Pastors. In the 54. cha. he treateth again of purpose, By whom this power of the keys in the Church ought to be exercised. Cap. ●●. And he moveth the question, whether by all the People; or by the whole College of the Presbytery. And after he hath set down their opinions, that would have it exercised of all the people, D●naeus assertions for the eccl. Senate. he saith: But we say & teach thus out of the word of God, and the discipline of the ancient Church: first, that in every Church there ought to be chosen an Ecclesiastical Senate▪ whic● is named by the consent of all the people. This, (by the way) agreeth not with that, Danaeus for the Senate. which Danaeus affirmed before, in the 10. chap. that, the second kind of Presbyters, Priests or Elders, was wont to be ordained in every greater City only, wherein there was a large and populous Church, and a great number of the faithful. Danaeus jarring and reconciling. And here he speaketh of every Church. Except we shall reconcile Danaeus thus: that there, he speaketh of Elders, not Teachers: and here, of such as are all Teachers of the word. But that Senate (saith Danaeus) ought chiefly to consist of Pastors or Bishops, and Presbyters, or those that we call Super-vigilants, as before also we have declared. This Senate Paul calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 1. Tim. 4. ver. 14. We before have called it the College of the Presbytery, The Presbytery. or the Consist. This also have we showed even by calvin, that it necessarily inferreth no such College, but may be well understood, for the office or function of the Presbytery, Priesthood or Eldership. But Danaeus so calleth it, Because (saith he) it consists chiefly of those persons, to wit Presbyters, Priests, or Elders, that is, Danaeus assertion that the Senate may consist of Deacons. they that are in the Church called Presbyters, Priests, or Elders. For it may also consist of Deacons, if the Church so think it good, or if the number of Presbyters in that place be small. Here again Danaeus cas●eth to our Brethren a fresh bone to gnaw upon. For if none of these offices in this tetrarchy that our Br. would erect, may be joined together in one person: how shall it be lawful for a Church, to have the Deacons to be the governing Elders, yea the whole Consistory of these governing Elders, (if they so think good) to consist of Deacons? And why not then the same to be Teachers and Pastors? And so all to be resolved into one, if they shall think it good? at least, if the Church shall think it good, (as our Church doth) there is no necessity of these governing and not teaching Elders. We say therefore (saith Danaeus) that unto this Senate Ecclesiastical, or College of the Presbytery, the moderation, the administration, Cap. 54. the adjudging, and the exercise of this power of the keys doth appertain, Danaeus assertion for the College of the Presbytery. and of consequence, this power ought to be exercised by the Pastors & Presbyters, Priests, or Elders of the Church, as by men advanced thereunto of God, by the consent and suffrage of the people, that is, of his Church, etc. The administration, and dispensation therefore of this power of itself, & in consideration of the exercise thereof, pertaineth not to every one of the people, but to the Presbytery, that is, to the Pastors, and Priests or Elders of the Church howbeit the right & authority thereof pertaineth to the whole Church, because that that is done by them, is done by the whole Church. This is Danaeus judgement for this power. Which being thus set down, in coming to the proves héerof, that better to see what kind of Presbyters or Priests all this while he meaneth, Danaeus. he proceedeth saying: But by these reasons, Danaeus reasons and proves of his assertions. is our sentence proved. First, unto them, that is, to the Pastors and Presbyters, Priests or Elders, pertaineth the Church's regiment, as to the public Advocates and Proctors of the Church. Therefore they are every where called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Governors or Guides, in the Epistle to the hebrews chap. 13. & chap. 1, vers. 24. They are first saluted of Paul to the Philippians. Danaeus first reason for the Presbyrie. Paul directeth to them the Epistle that he writeth to the whole Church. And Paul layeth down the alms among them, 1. Tit. 1. Therefore to them the care, the meddling, and the administration of the right and matters of the Church doth appertain. But this power, and the meddling and exercise thereof, is a part of the Eccl. regiment: therefore the same also pertaineth to them. This Argument grounded on these 4. testimonies, doth not only admit well enough, Danaeus testimonies all for such Elders as are Ministers of the word. that these Presbyters, Priests or Elders, may be also Ministers of the word: but each one of them expressly proveth, that such they were. As first, that which is here cited, Hebr. 13. Hebr. 13.7. Remember (saith the Apostle) your Governors or Guides, which have declared unto you the word of God. Here are no other Governors or Guides named, than such as are the Teachers of the word. The Guides were Pastors And what letteth, but that after also, using the same term in his salutations, Salute all your Guides and Governors: he meaneth still such Guides and Governors, as in the 7. verse before, he bade them obey, that is, the Teachers of the word. Phil. 1. As for those that S. Paul saluteth first, in his Epistle to the Philippians, he plainly calleth them Bishops. The B were Teachers. And what calvin understandeth by the name of Bishops, to wit, the Ministers of the word: we have heard sufficiently already. And to take our brethren's own confession in this their learned discourse, pag. 23. & 24. where treating of Pastors to be all one with Bishops, they say; The same thing is to be observed in the name of Bishops, used by S. Paul, Philip. 1.1. where he and Timothy send salutations unto the Bishops and Deacons of the Church, which was in the City of Philippi: which Bishops were the Elders or Pastors. So that by our brethren's own testimony, this proveth nothing for any not Pastoral Elders. As for the next testimony 1. Tim. 1. mentioneth no Elders or any Eccl. Governors, 1. Tim. 1. The Elders were Teachers. that were not Teachers. Timothy himself to whom he wrote the Ep. was a teaching Governor. And all the other were Teachers good or bad, that there he speaketh of. As I besought thee (saith S. Paul) to abide still in Ephesus, when I departed into Macedonia, so do, that thou mayst command some▪ that they teach none other doctrine. And ver. 7. They would be Doctors of the Law, & yet understand not what they speak. So that, whatsoever these were, yet they took not upon them any eccl. government without teaching, nor any other there mentioned, except peradventure Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom S. Paul excommunicated, Danaeus reasons for the Senate. did take upon them to be eccl. Governors, and not Teachers. But were they Teachers or no, it appeareth they were blasphemers. The Elders that S. Paul mentioneth, Tit. 1. what they were, Tit. 1. our Br. also in this their learned disc. pag. 24, do say: The Elders were Teachers. Likewise unto Titus 1.5. he calleth them Elders, and immediately after, describing the qualities of such as were meet to be ordained Elders, he calleth them Bishops, etc. And again, pag. 35, He requireth that he be such a one, as holdeth fast the faithful word according to doctrine, and that he also may be able to exhort with wholesome doctrine, & improve them that gain say it. Here our Br. apply these testimonies to Bishops & Pastors. By Danaeus reconcilement to our Br. the Consistory must be all of Pastors. And Daneus bringeth them in to prove the Elders of the Consistory. How can we reconcile our Br. and Daneus, but that the Elders of the Consistory, mu●t be all pastoral Elders at the least, and Teachers of the word? But our Br. require a Consistory of eccl. Governors that are not Teachers: and therefore, all these testimonies do clean confute them. But let Danaeus proceed, For why are they called the Bishops of the Church, why the Prelates, Danaeus c. 54. or those that are preferred, but that we should understand, that the government of the Church pertaineth to them, and is of them to be administered? Act. 20. ver. 18. And therefore they ●heir selves not every one of the people are called together, if the Church be to be warned of any matter, or if any thing be to be deliberated upon in the Church, they by reason of their office come together, and deliberate, as it appeareth, Act. 20. ver. 17. and 21. ver. 18: 15. ver. 22. to them also it is to be deferred, if any thing be to be done, or to be treated upon in the Church. Act. 11. ver. 31. Of what function these Elders were in the places here cited, Act. 20. we have already seen at large That they were Ministers and Teachers of the word. As for them mentioned Act. 20. it is both in the text apparent, The Elders were Teachers. and (besides calvin & all other Interpreters;) our Br. in this their learned * Pag. 21.22.33.51.52. & 57 Discourse bear us witness: in all which places, they apply the name of Elders still to Pastors. The 15. & 21. of the Acts do mention also (as we have seen, both by the text itself, and by Calu. gathering thereon) still such Elders, as were Teachers of the word. As for those mentioned Act▪ 11. being the same that are spoken of Act. 15. and 21. the consequent is evident what they were. Act. 15. & 21. The Elders were Teachers. Act. 11. The Elders were Teachers. So that here yet, no Elders appear that are no Teachers. The second reason is (saith Daneus): Danaeus 2. reason 3. part. ca 54. To the Pastors and Prelates of the Church appertaineth the cure, the view, the knowledge and the judgement, concerning the manners of every of the faithful. And this jurisdiction is a part and appendent of that view and care: therefore this care and watchfulness is proper also unto them. Whereupon it followeth, that unto them this administration doth properly belong. For why are they called watchmen? Danaeus reason for the Presbytery. Ezech. 3. vers. 7. Why are they bidden to have the care of the Church? 1. Pet. 5. ver. 2. Hebr. 13.17. Why are they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as I said before? For these titles are not given of the holy Ghost in vain unto them. These titles (we grant) are not given them in vain, sith therefore they are all titles belonging to Teachers and Ministers of the word, more properly in the Eccl. functions, than unto those that are not Ministers nor teachers of the word. It is more likely, that in these places (where these titles be given) are meant Teachers and Ministers of the word. The 3. of Ezechiel ver. 17. is clear for a Teacher. Ezech. 3.17. speaketh of a Teacher. Thou Son of man, I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel, therefore hear my word at my mouth, and give warning from me, etc. The testimony of 1. Pet. 5. ver. 2. besides all other Interpreters, 1. Pet. 5.2. The Elders were, Teachers. the very Geneva translation hath this marginal note: By Elders he understandeth all them which preach, teach, or minister in the Church. And lest we should understand it of other Ministers than of the word; our Brethren themselves in this their learned Discourse, pag. 22.25. & 32. do still apply the same to pastoral Elders. As for the testimony Hebr. 13.17. we saw how it was to be expounded, Hebr. 13.7. speaketh of Teachers. by the 7. verse, for those Guides that are Teachers of the word. And the name fitteth very well, for so by S. Luke also S. Paul is called, Act. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the guider of the word. The 3. reason is (saith Danaeus) it appertaineth to them to judge out of the word of God, Danaeus 3. reason for the Presbytery, that they be expounders of God's word the facts & life of men, and to weigh the manners of men, and to mark the fruit of the Gospel: to whom the explication and treaty of the same word of God, and of the Gospel by the commandment of God, doth appertain: but they are those that are contained in the name of the Presbytery, & Prepositors & Prelates of the Church: whereupon it is manifest, that unto them therefore belongeth this power properly and chiefly, whereby this judgement is made. 1. Peter. 5. ver. 2.1. Tim 4. ver. 11.6. ver. 2. What can be plainer spoken than this, that these Elders of the Presbytery ought to be Teachers and Ministers of the word? 1. Tim. 4. & 6. for Teachers & Exhorters. And these testimonies also do as expressly prove it. The first of Tim. 4. ver. 11. Declare these things and teach them. And 1. Tim. 6.2. Teach and exhort these things. The 4. reason is, (saith Danaeus). Danaeus 4. reason for the Presbytery, Saint Paul's exc. 1. Cor. 5. The use itself of things, and the examples of the Apostles, and of the Primitive Church do confirm it. For Paul while he useth the power of the keys, against the incestuous Corinthian, he asketh not every one of the people their sentence (or opinion): but only denounceth to the Church of Corinth, and to the assembly, that he which deserved, was excommunicated. 1. Cor. 5. ver. 4.2. Cor. 2. ver. 10. And declareth the same to other to whom that care pertained. Paul in deed doth communicate to the people, & denounce his judgement, that either the Church should assent or dissent. But he himself with the Seniors pronounceth of the matter, and claimeth the first and chiefest parts, in the exercise of these keys unto himself, and to the other Pastors. Although here Danaeus add this, more than the text hath, or giveth, that he himself with the Seniors did pronounce of the matter: Danaeus addition to the text, Paul first did the act his self, & then did intimate it to them. for the text is plain, that he himself, and by himself, without any Seniors of theirs, did pronounce, and denounce it to the Corinthians, not, that he was to be excommunicated, but that he was excommunicated (as Danaeus saith well therein) chose they, whether they would assent or dissent. Their dissent could not revoke the excommunication already denounced. But admit, that Paul did it with any other Elders joined with him: yet neither were they among the Corinthians, nor Elders of that Church. If any joined with Paul what those were. But whosoever they were, if there were any, still he maketh them no other than pastoral Elders. whereupon (saith Danaeus) it cometh to pass, that we must conclude, that the administration, exercise & power of the keys, which is both in binding & losing, Danaeus conclusion for Presbytery maketh all for teaching. is properly & first of all to be referred to the College of the Presbytery, or Prelates of the Church: notwithstanding the same is had of the Church, which they ought in the Chur. to exercise with the consent, notice & approbation of the Church. Hereunto I refer that which Aug. writeth, Serm. 18. de verbis Apostoli: If any man suffered a slander of his brother, that is of a christian, he ran to the B. to the end he might clear himself of the slander. All this again maketh the more, that the dealing herein appertained to those Elders only that were Teachers & Ministers of the word. But (saith Danaeus) that the power & arbitrament of the eccl. Censure pertained not to any one: appeareth even of that, that the eccl. regiment should then be transformed into a mere tyranny, or into a politic Kingdom. Therefore neither the B. neither one Eld aught, or can alone, exercise that power, but together at the length with his eccl. Consistory, as appeareth out of the old discipline. Siritius in his 2. Epist. he lived in the Age of Ambrose. In the 2. Council of Carthage, the 2. chap. And in the 4. the 22. & 23. chap. Cypr. in his 12. Ep. In the first Council of Antioch. chap. 23. this self same thing is confirmed. This is another question▪ Whether any one Bishop or Minister may excommunicate, Whether one B or minister may excom. or no? The question is now between our Brethren & us, whether (one or more) there ought any other to exercise this Censure of the Church, than such Elders as are Ministers of the word. But, to consider this conclusion of Danaeus, we deny not, How we allow of the B joining with other in excom. nor mislike of the Bishops joining with many, where the weightiness of the matter so requireth, & where many of these ministerial Elders may conveniently assemble, and adjoin themselves unto him, or where any such College or Consistory of them were. Howbeit, that the B. nor any other Eld. being a Minister, aught or can exercise this power alone, but that either the Eccl regiment should be transformed into a mere tyranny, or into a politic ki●gdome: Danaeus showed here no cause or reason of this saying. And we have great reason to think contrary, Danaeus wrong assertion, & with out proof. for that S. Paul denounced the excommunication against the incestuous person. Though Danaeus, saith he joined with him Elders: yet the text mentioneth none. Yea, it is clean contrary. Paul speaketh of his own action in the singular number: I have judged him. The text here for S. Paul's exc. alone. And the like he saith of Alexander and Hymenaeus: I have delivered them to Satan. 1. Tim. 1.20. And yet S. Paul can not be said héerin to have transformed the Eccl. regiment into a more tyranny, or into a Politic kingdom. These therefore are overhard speeches, if there be no other default in the excommunication, but only in the number of the denouncers of it, or judging of it, so that in the matter itself, it be not Clavis errans, a wrong key, or in a wrong lock, or the key writhed and wrested, but ordered advisedly as it ought to be. Neither is this any thing like the Pope's tyrannical claim, Not the number of the persons, but the use or abuse of the power is material. but clean against it, if every B. have this power as much, and as primarily, and plenarilie as he: and where one ruleth, & ruleth rightly, it is no tyranny. Neither if it were tyranny in one, would the number help it in many. For so it might come to 30. or to 10. tyrants for one tyrant, as it did in Athens and in Rome. But all lies in the parties using or abusing of this power. And if any draw near, if not to a Politic kingdom herein, Pretence of shunning a Politic kingdom. but rather to a Politic government of many: they might rather be suspected, that would draw it from the Ministers of the word of God, to so many Politic men that are not Ministers of God's word: and draw the discipline also to so many Politic matters, that it might be feared, in steed of doubting a Politic kingdom, we should fall into a far worse estate, and overthrow both Church and Kingdom too. But here I wonder what Danaeus meaneth, to allege for proof of the ancient discipline, Danaeus approving Pope Siritius Epistle. this Epistle (whether true or counterfeit) of Pope Siritius. Will our Br. allow of those Epistles? Than not only these Presbyteri are more often called Sacerdotes: but neither may they, nor Deacons, marry: nor, if they were married before, might company any longer with their wives, after their entry into the Clergy: nor could be admitted at all into the Clergy, if they had before married a widow: no nor any might be ordained into the ministery, without the witting and consent of the B. of Rome. What a tyranny would this bring in, so directly to bring in credit and authority these suspected Epistles? And wherefore in the end must all this be done? Forsooth, because Dan●eus findeth in one of his (if his) Epistles, these words. Facto ergo Presbyterio, etc. the Presbytery therefore being made, it is evident, 2. Epist. Papae Siri●j. that it is contrary to the Law of our (that is of the Christian) doctrine. Whereupon we following the Apostolical precept, Danaeus allegations for the Canons. because they declared it in another sort, than that which we received; it is manifest, that this is the only sentence made of all, aswell the Priests, or Elders and Deacons; as also of the whole Clergy: that jovinian, Auxentius, Genilis, Geminator, Felix, Plotinus, Martianus, januarius & Ingeniosus, who are found to be the kindlers of new heresy, and blasphemy, that being condemned for ever by the sentence of God and our judgement, they should remain out of the Church. Which thing not doubting but that your holiness will keep, I have directed unto you these writings, by my Brethren and fellow Elders, Crescent, & Leopard, and Alexander, which by their fervent spirit, can fulfil the religious duty of the faith. Here is an excommunication made by a Presbytery; The Presbytery was of Sacerdotal Priests. but what that Presbytery was, and of what Presbyters, Priests, or Elders it consisted: both the words do declare, where he calleth these men, Compresbyteros, his fellow Elders; and a little before, speaking of the same writing, which here he condemneth in the Heretics, he saith: It was detected, judicio Sacerdotali, by the judgement of the Sacerdotal priests. For although he join all in the consent of the judicial sentence: yet were not the Deacons, and all the Clergy any of that Presbytery. But by the Presbytery he meaneth Compresbyteros; such Priests as himself was. Neither is it marvel, if all these were assembled to the excommunication of them, The highest Censure of excom. whom they call blasphemous Heretics: for this excommunication was of the highest degree, being a condemnation for ever, as Siritius saith: which Danaeus after ward calleth Anathema maranatha. And therefore it followeth not thereupon, that although this was not made by the B. himself: that therefore there was no excommunication made by the B. or by by any Priest himself at all? But to prove this excommunication of the Bishops joined with the Presbyters, to be ever so used, Danaeus adjoineth to this Pope's Epistle, the decree of the 2. Council holden at Carthage about this Pope Siritius time, Concil. 2. Car●. cap. 2. wherae chap. 2. are these words: Aurelius the Bishop said, when in the Council passed before, Danaeus proof for excom. to be made by the Presbytery. it was treated of the moderation of continency & chastity, these 3. degrees were by consecrations annexed in a certain writing unto chastity, I say, Bishops, Priests or Elders, and Deacons: it so pleased them (as it is meet) that the holy Bishops, and the Priests of God, & also the Levites, or those that attend upon the divine sacraments, should in all things be continent: that they may simply obtain of God, the things they pray for, that that which the Apostles have taught, and the Antiquity hath observed, we also should keep. It was said of all the Bishops; it pleaseth all, that the Bishops, the priests or Elders, & the Deacons, or those that handle the sacraments, being keepers of shamefastness: do abstain themselves from their wives. It was said of them all, It pleaseth us, that all, and of all those that serve at the Altar, shamefastness be kept. Here is a goodly Decree, that Danaeus citeth, to prove that no excommunication should be made without a Presbytery. It is a world to see, how our Br. are so bend to erect this Presbytery, that they can scarce find any sentence mencioning Presbyter●s, Our Br. great overshooting to prove their presbytery. Presbyters, Priests, or Elders, though it make clean against them, and against God & all: yet forsooth, this very name is so catched up, to make a show of Antiquity for these Elders, that it seemeth, if ever our Br. have over-shot themselves, it is in this their humour for this Presbytery. What is here (for so excellent and godly learned men, to have alleged this tyrannical Decree, or rather this very doctrine of Devils, in this superstitious Council, against the law of God, against the lawfulness of Bishops, Elders, and Deacons marriage, & against the very Antiquity of the Church, which they pretend? ●ind yet what is there in this Decree, to infer that this power, and Censure of excommunication, appertaineth only, and always to a Presbytery joined with the Bishops? But since Danaeus hath alleged this Council: let us see how this Council directly (even in this matter of excommunication) maketh clean against him. This counsel alleged by Danaeus, maketh clean against him. For in the 8. chap. following, it is said: Alipius the B. of the Church of Tagasta, the Legate of the Province of Numidia, did say: Neither must that be praetermitted, that if perhaps any Priest or Elder, which is corrected, or excommunicated of his B. being puffed up with swelling or pride, shall think that Sacrifices are separatelie to be offered unto God, or shall believe that any other altar should be erected contrary to the eccl. faith and discipline: let him not go unpunished. Valentinus of the first seat of the Province of Numidia, said: The things that our brother Alipius hath prosecuted, are necessarily agreeable to the eccl. discipline and faith. Declare ye therefore what thereupon seemeth good unto your lovingness. Whether if any Priest or Elder shall make a schism against his B he should be accursed? It was said of all the Bishops: If any Priest or Elder shall be excommunicated, or corrected of his Prelate, he ought to complain to the Bishops adjoining, that his cause may be heard of them, and by them he may be reconciled to his B. Here both we see what these Presbyters, Priests, or Elders were, to wit, such as celebrated the L. supper: The Presbyters ministered the Sacraments. The B himself excom. the Priests. & also, that upon just occasion, the B. himself might excom. even these Priests or Elders. And if we may gather an argument, of absolving or reconciling to the Church, which is equivalent to excommunicating, we might have seen before in the 4. chap. that not only a Bishop by himself, but also any particular Priest or Elder, in some cases, might do it: Aurelius the B. (that prop●●ded the decree against Bishops, Priests & Deacons wives, which Danaeus citeth) said: If any man shallbe in danger, & shall desire to be reconciled to God's altars, if the B. shallbe absent: the Priest or Elder aught to take counsel of the B. & so at his commandment to reconcile the party that is in danger. If the Priest or Elder can absolve the repentant party, at the commandment of the B. being absent: is it not likely the B. could do it himself being present? And if the B. or any one Priest could thus absolve: could neither Priest nor B. by themselves, not have excommunicated the said party, being a manifest & notorious offender? So that by examining this council further, it maketh more against Danaeus in this point, than for him. The like Decree unto this, for a Priest's absolving & restoring a penitent in the absence of the B. is also in the 3. Council of Carth. cap. 32. 3. Concil. Cart. cap. 32. These Councils being about the time of Siritius, which Siritius was in the time of Ambrose (as Danaeus confesseth, & Ambrose himself without any Presbytery joined with him, excommunicating the Emperor Theodosius: how is it not apparent, that in those days a B. by himself might excommunicate, & his excommunication held for good & lawful? But Danaeus to confirm it better, that a B. might not excom. by himself, addeth the 4. Council of Carth. chap. 22. & 23. where it is said: Danaeus proof out of the 4. Council of Carth. cha. 22. & 23. that a B. shall not ordain Clerks without the Council of his Clerks, & so that he seek the assent, the sufferance, and the testimony of the Citizens. Again, that the Bishop hear the cause of none, without the presence of his Clerks: otherwise the bishops sentence shall be frustrate, except it be confirmed by the presence of his Clerks. What is here that the Bishop may not by himself excommunicate? The former chap. is only of ordaining Clerks: & yet, it doth not take the power of ordaining from them, but it manifestly giveth the power thereof unto him. Though in ordaining a Priest, the Council say, that all the Priests present should lay their hands also on the head of him that is ordained. But the B. hand only on a Deacon, etc. chap. 3. & 4. etc. As for this Decree chap. 22. is but of the clerk counsel to the B. And though they say also, he should seek the assent, sufferance, & testimony of the Citizens: yet in the action of ordaining, they have no power. As for the 23. cha. requireth only the presence of the Bishop's Clerks, in the process of his judicial sentences. But this proveth not, that they join with him in the authority of the judicial proceeding and giving the sentence. How the Priests were present, when the B. gaue● the judicial sentence. There is no judge can judicially hear and determine any causes temporal, but he must have his clerk and Registers about him, to witness and record the same: but neither their presence, nor yet their enrolling of the acts, giveth them any authority in the judgement. He is Dominus judex for all their presence. And that doth the 28. declare, saying: The unjust condemnation of the bishops is void, & therefore to be retracted of a Synod. But what is this to excommunication, it is said even in the next Decree to that Danaeus here citeth chap. 24. that the sacerdotal priest making ● speech or preaching in the Church, he that shall departed out of the audience, shallbe excommunicated. Might neither the priest nor the Bishop, if they saw any person to use this doing, & obstinately maintain the same. pronounce this sentence of excommunication on him? But that the Bishop might so do in this and in other grievous crimes, we may well conclude by the 55. chap. of that Council: The B. excommunicating with out the Priests. that a Bishop shall excommunicate those that are the accusers of their Brethren: & if they shall amend their fault he may receive them to the Communion, not to the Clergy. Here ●o, is the excommunication and absolution made by the Bishop, without any joined with him in these actions, were they present at the doings never so much. And that this was allowable by the ancient custom of the Church, Concil. Elib. cap. 53. the Council of Eliberis, holden almost an 100 years before any of these Counsels, approveth the excommunicating made by a Bishop himself, saying, chap. 53. It pleased them all, that every one should receive the Communion of that Bishop, of whom being in any fault he was Abstentus, that is, put back, separated or excommunicated. But if so be any Bishop shall presume to admit him, he being not yet willing or consenting, of whom he was deprived of the communion: let him know that he shall answer these causes among the Brethren, with the danger of his estate. Concerning Cyprians Epistles, we have perused them already meetly well, Cyprian concerning the B. authority of the keys. to examine what the presbyters were which Cypian mentioneth and we have still found them, Ministers of the word and Sacraments. In none of his books of Epistles any 12. Epistle toucheth this matter. I grant, that in reconciling of Heretics and those that were fallen to Idolatry, he used to take the advise of his priests, of his Deacons, of his Clergy, and of all the people. But this proveth not that he never restored any otherwise. When he confesseth, that not only a priest, but a Deacon also may in necessity, restore the baptised penitent to the church's peace. But whomsoever Cyprian adjoined to him in any solemn reconciliation: he reserveth the power and authority of losing to himself. As for the first Council of Antioch, Concil. 1. Antioch. cap. 13. which was elder than those of Carthage before cited, in the 23. chapter it is thus decreed: It is not lawful for a Bishop to make unto himself another successor, although death approach upon him. But if any such thing should be done, the same constitution to be void. But let the Ecclesiastical law be kept, which is on this wise, that a Bishop ought not to be made otherwise, than with a Synod and judgement of Bishops, who after the death of him that is departed, have power to promote him that shall be worthy. What is here to abridge the authority of a Bishop, that he cannot excommunicate any offender, without the consent and joint action with him, of a signory? Where if Danaeus had but looked to the ver●● next chapter: he should have found another manner of matter, where the Council saith in the words following, concerning the authority of him that is ma●e Bishop: Cap. 24. Those things that pertain unto the Church, must be kept with all carefulness, and with a good conscience, and faith, that is in God, who considereth and judgeth all things. Which are also to be dispensed by the judgement and power of the Bishop, to whom the people is committed, and the souls that are gathered together in the Church. But to come nearer to the present purpose, for excommunication. The 4. chapter saith: Cap. 4. If any Bishop being condemned of a Synod, or a Priest, or Deacon of his own B. shall presume to meddle in any thing concerning Priesthood, or the holy ministery: it shall not be lawful for him any more, The B himself may excom. to have hope of restitution, neither any place of satisfaction, but all that communicate with him, to be thrust out of the Church: especially, if they obstinately communicate with him, after they have known the sentence pronounced against him. What can be plainer spoken than this, that the Bishop himself may excommunicate. And in the 5. chapter: Cap. 5. If any Priest or Deacon contemning his B. shall separate himself from the Church, and privately by himself gathering the people together, shall dare to erect an Altar, How directly this Canon is against our Breath. (or Communion Table). And albeit his B. exhorting him, and once and twice revoking him, he shall remain disobedient: let this man by all means be condemned, nor let him hope at any time to obtain help, or to receive his own honour. And if so be he shall persist to disturb and solicit the Church: let him be repressed by the outward powers, as a seditious person. And in the 6. chap. Cap. 6. If any man be excommunicated of his own Bishop: he ought not to be received of others, before he be first reconciled to his Bishop, etc. And in the 12. chapter. If any Elder, or Deacon of his own Bishop, Cap. 12. or if any Bishop of a Synod, shall perhaps be condemned, etc. Thus doth this Council also (which Danaeus citeth) prove, The B. exe. of a Pastoral Elder. that upon just occasions, a Bishop himself may excommunicate, not only such among the people, but also among the Pastoral Elders, as be notorious offenders. Now, when Danaeus hath thus far proceeded, on the parties that should exercise this power of the keys given to the Church: Danaeus proves for Christ's ● words Mat. 18. to be meant of a Presbytery of the Church's P●el. he cometh at length, chap. 55. to this sentence of Christ, Mat. 18. v. 17. Tell the Church. Where traveling to comfort them that hold this word Church, to be simply meant, for the People: he pleadeth that it is meant, for the Prelates of the Church. And at length he cometh to this conclusion, with this saying of Ambrose, in libr● d● dignitate Sacerdotali. cap. 3. Danaeus for the Presbytery That which pertaineth unto all, aught to be done of all. True it is, howbeit, according to the diverse vocation of every one in ●he Church of God. Ambr. de dignita●e saecerdotali. cap. 3. By reason whereof, the people are not equal to the ecclesiastical Prelates. So also chrysostom lib. 3. de Sacerdot. beyond the midst of the book: Baptism is given unto the Church. I ask therefore, to whom pertaineth the administration thereof, and to have the power of baptising? Doth it pertain to every one of the people? No: but to the Pastors alone. And yet this gift is given to the whole Church; as also i● the power of the keys. But even as when Baptism and the holy Supper of the Lord, is administered in the Church, the force of Baptism & of the Supper is expounded to the people, The power of the ke●es is given to the Church in such manner as the Sacraments. are given. who all of them seeing it, the seal is added to the healthful promises of God: and so the people is confirmed in their faith, and each one of the people is taught and edified. To conclude, when these things are done, the Church out of the holy Supper, and out of Baptism, feeleth & receiveth the fruit, which it ought to receive: even so, when hypocrites, and wicked ones are cast out of the Church, or when that the penitent are received, the same is done, the whole people, and each one of them withal, perceiving it, & consenting to it: the authority of God's word is ratified, the reformation of manners in the Church established, and the purity of doctrine is conserved. Which when it is done, the Church, and every one of the Church, receiveth the fruit that they ought to receive, out of that power of the keys that is granted to the Church. By this reason therefore, these things, the Supper of the Lord and Baptism, and the power of the keys, are of God given to the whole Church: the administration whereof notwithstanding appertaineth not unto every one, but unto them only, that are lawfully called in the Church to do these things. Thus have we seen at large the judgements and reasons, pro & contrà, of all these excellent men, for these Elders, and for their authority in this ecclesiastical Censure. Let us now return unto the learned Discourse of our Brethren. The learned discourse. Pag. 89. & 90. Therefore in every Church there ought to be a Consistory of Elders, or Governors, which with the Pastor may take charge of ecclesiastical discipline, and good order to be observed in the Church, to the punishment of vice, and the advancement of true virtue. These, if they govern well, as Saint Paul doth testify, are worthy of double honour, both that honour that is due to godly men, and that which is due to good Governors. Bridges The premises that our Brethren have set down, infer no such conclusion. Yea, Our Br. conclusion 1. Tim. 5. had the words of Christ alluded (as our Brethren would threape kindness on us that they do) to the old Sanedrin of the jews: yet could they not press this conclusion so far, T●is conclusion of ou● Br. not yet inferred by any of all these premises. by any proportion, that there ought to be a Consistory of Elders, ●or Governors in every Church. For the jews had not such a Sanedrin in every Synagogue, nor yet in every Tribe, but one throughout the whole Realm for all. Neither yet had they in every Synagogue such Senates nor Assemblies, as are here by our Brethren mentioned, Luc. 22. & Act. 20 although they were nothing comparable to that Consistory of the 70. Elders, appointed by the Lord, Numb. 11. But why do our Brethren here say, that this Consistory may take charge of Ecclesiastical Discipline? For if they ought to be such, Our Br. conclusion of their may, aught to be and they may do it. they ought to do it. But sith they only conclude, that they may do it: why conclude they not also, that there may be such a Consistory of them, and there may not be? As for some to take the charge of Ecclesiastical discipline, it is very necessary, and it ought indeed so to be. But our question is, what is meant by ecclesiastical discipline, and what manner of Elders they ought to be, Eccl. discipline and the charge thereof. that aught to take the charge thereof. As for good order to be observed in the Church, to the punishment of vice, and the advancement of true virtue: this we grant must of duty be done. But as our Brethren conclude, it may be done by this Consistory in every Church: so I conclude, The observing of good order. it may then be done by other. Yea, if we shall examine the state of every Church or Parish better, how it may be done by such a Consistory in every parish Church: neither I, nor I think our Brethren can devise it, without the alteration of the whole State, and of the Princes supreme Government, and of all the Magistrates authorities whatsoever throughout the whole Realm. The danger o● erecting ●hese Consistories in every parish. And therefore I would thus rather conclude, it may better be done (all things considered) by any other means, than by erecting Consistories in every Church, of these governing but not teaching Elders, or Governors. Whether Saint Paul meant of any such Governors, we have already heard how it is in question. Neither can those our Brethren that so think, and favour that Interpretation most, enforce a necessity of such governing Elders, that altogether were not Teachers. Bullinger in his 5. Decade, the 5. Sermon, De Ministris verbi Dei. Bulling Dec. 5 s●rm. 5 de m●n. ●er. Dei. Who when he cometh to entreat of Presbyters, Priests, or Elders, deriving them also even from the Senate of the seventy Elders, among the jews, ordained by God, Numb. 11. And citing also this testimony of S. Discipline. Paul, 1. Tim. 5. concludeth thus: Erant ergo alij quidam, etc. There were certain other therefore in the ecclesiastical office, Elders not continual Teachers. who although they did not teach continually, as did the Bishops, notwithstanding in all their businesses, they were present with those that did teach. So that, he excludeth them not from teaching, but from continual teaching. And as for the double honour that S. Paul speaketh of, I take it not as our Brethren do, to be of 2. kinds of honour in these 2. respects: the one, that which is due to godly men; the other, that which is due to good Governors. Our Br. unproportionate distinction of good man, and good Governor. True it is, there is an ordinary distinction between bonus vir, & bonus civis, a good man and a good citizen: but not so aptly, between bonus vir, & bonus Magistratus: a good, or godly man, and a good Magistrate or Governor. But the relation is rather, bonus Subditus, & bonus Magistratus: a good Subject, and a good Governor. Howbeit I think (as I have showed before) S Paul meant simply, that he which took greater pains in the word, which he calleth, labouring in the word, was worthy double; The plain sense of the double honour 1. Tim. 5.17. that is, the greater honour. Our B. now having thus far proceeded in the proof of their Senate, or Consistory of Elders, enter here into another discourse, which they call the end of discipline, and say as followeth. How necessary it is that Discipline should be in the Church, to keep men in awe from offending, The learned discourse. Pag. 90. and to bring offenders to repentance, to avoid the infection of sin, within the Church, and the reproach that groweth by neglecting the punishment of sin, among them that are without the Church: we think needless to stand long in proving, the matter itself is so apparent, and hath such plentiful testimonies in the Scripture. Herein I am of our brethren's opinion: only wishing this plain dealing in them, Bridges that speaking of the necessity, use, and end of discipline; they had set down some definition or description thereof, that we might certainly have known, what they meant thereby. But now we must collect their meaning, by those péece-meale sentences that do follow. And especially, let the reasons of S. Paul 1. Cor. 5. & 2. Cor. 2. where he purposely entreateth of eccl. discipline, be weighed. A little leaven soureth a whole lump of dough. The learned discourse. Pag 91. For infection: Ye are puffed up, where ye should be sad & ashamed. For ignominy: We deliver him to Satan, to the destruction of his flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord. For repentance, Public reprehension of many, which being godly refuse to eat with such a one, 1. Cor. 5. is profitable both to drive himself to repentance, & to keep other in order, 2. Cor. 2. for fear of like punishment. Where this disc. is not, no marvel if all wickedness overflow, to the dishonour of God & of his Gospel, to the destruction of many, & corrupting of more, to the grief of the godly, offence of the weak, incoragement of the wicked, & rejoicing of the advers. It should seem by the collections of these reasons, Discipl. of excomm. which they would have to be weighed, that our Brethren here by the name of discipline, Bridges mean most especially, the order about excommunication. The discipl. of excom. Which though we have more than once already both seen and weighed sufficiently: yet let us once more weigh again with them, the reasons that in these places S. Paul allegeth. It is no doubt, but S. Paul had many & weighty reasons, The weighing of Saint Paul's reasons, in excom. the incestuous person. moving him to excom. that incestuous person among the Corinth. and to have them obey his sentence of that offender's excommunication. And if we should weigh his reasons on this fashion, as our Brethren would have us: we might weigh many more, which there also he useth, and in better order (as I suppose) than our Brethren very slightly and preposterously (setting aside their learned Discourse) do weigh them. For, the reason that our Brethren make, for ignominy, (as they term it) is both set by S. Paul before that, which they term, for infection: neither are the words in that sort set down by S. Paul: if we must needs go to weighing of them. S. Paul entering into this matter, first beginneth with those reasons that might lay before them, the heinousness of the fact, and horror of the sin, saying; The●e is altogether heard of among you fornication, and such fornication, as is not among the Gentiles named, insomuch, How S. Paul laid forth the crime to the Cor. that it is, for one to have the wife of his father. Which words being weighed, contain many weighty reasons. From the nature of the sin, that it is, fornication. From the public same thereof; that it is altogether heard of: that is to say, a great & constant same, and not a muttering rumour, of an vnknow●n, or but suspected fact. From the persons, among whom this fact was done, & the same divulged; among you, that are the Church of God, and are called Saints in Christ. From the degree and greatness of this fornication; that it was such, and is not so much, as named or allowed among the very Heathen. From exaggerating the crime, & moving them to abhor the same, by specification and laying forth of the fact, the manner and circumstances of it; insomuch, that one should have his father's wife, etc. And then cometh in that, which our Brethren would have us to weigh, for their second reason, saying: Ye are puffed up, where ye s●ould be sad & ashamed. The 2. reason that our Br. g●ther out of S. Paul's words. Although by weighing these words better, we find them to be other than are the Apostles words, which are these; And ye are puffed up, & have not rather had mourning, that he which hath done this work, might be removed from among you: persuading them to the detestation of this fact, not only with the reason of ignominy; but with the consideration of their own grievous sin also, in being puffed up, either boasting in sin, as do the wicked: or in foolish confidence, thinking themselves safe, and not considering the horrible sin unpunished, but rather maintained amongst them. And also from the nature or concomitances of true repentance, reproving them that they mourned not, The ixion. weighed 1. Cor. 5. for such a sin committed in their Church. Now, when Saint Paul had used all these reasons, which likewise infer many other: then he showeth, what he himself had done in thi● matter. I verily being absent in body, but present in spirit, have already, a● present, adjudged (or condemned) him that thus h●th done. And here now, since our Brethren will needs have us fall a weighing the reasons of Saint Paul: S. Paul asc●ibeth the action of excom. to himself. let us weigh also his words, and reasons of his doing, in the chastizing of this offender. First, that he saith, he himself, and none of their Church with him, nor of any other that we read of, took upon him the remedy and correcting of this matter. And he uttereth this word Ego, I, very emphaticallie, as with great and singular authority. secondly, how far did he thus alone proceed herein? To the only considering, misliking, and mourning for it, or reprehending of this vice or vicious person? Nay, he goeth further, even to the very pitch and pith of the matter, How far S. Paul went alone without them in this excom, for he saith, that he judged or condemned him. And the word importeth, as solemn a judicial sentence pronounced against him, as was requisite in so weighty a matter. Neither saith he, that he would stay from this judicial sentence, till they had assembled themselves together, and examined the matter, and found him guilty, and then given their consent or licence to the Apostle, to proceed to judgement against him: no, saith S. Paul, I, even I have of myself done it already, yea, both without your leave, consent, or witting of my doing: and also being absent both from you too, for any bodily presence; and yet shall my judicial sentence, be as effectual, as if I myself had been present with you, or, as if the offender had been present here before me. Howbeit, because it stood them upon, to take notice both of this man's offence, and of their own fault, and also of Saint Paul's doing: to obey this Censure of the Apostle, to amend their default, and to execute the punishment that Saint Paul had inflicted upon this sinner, Saint Paul proceedeth further, telling them what now he would have them to do herein, How far forth Saint Paul chargeth the Corinth to proceed after his doings. and saith unto them: In the name of our Lord jesus Christ, you being gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of the Lord jesus, to deliver that manner of man unto Satan, to the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be safe, in the day of our Lord jesus Christ. These words our Brethren make the third reason, which they call (as I take it) for repentance. I say, I take it; because, if we should follow the Printers pointing of the reasons that they allege, if should indeed have (as they say) neither rhyme nor reason. Our Br. 3. reason. But ascribing that unto the Printer, not to our Brethren: yet, their altering again of the Apostles words, is not the Printers, but their own fault. Not only to say, In the day of the Lord: whereas the words are, 1. Cor. 5. In the day of our L. jesus Christ: which though it be not to the matter now in question, yet, Our Br too far altering of the text. to say, we deliver him to Satan, as though they joined with the Apostle, in pronouncing the sentence of the excommunication; that is here no light fault in our Brethren, and material to the present purpose, if we should exactly weigh the same. Albeit, in some respect of the execution, I allow these words, we deliver him to Satan: because, though Paul himself had alone pronounced the sentence without them; nevertheless, the same was executed by them, assembled in the name of our Lord Iesu● Christ, as he commanded them, and with the power of the Lord jesus, his spirit was present with them at the doing. Now when S. Paul had thus prescribed unto them what they should do, than he goeth again unto his reasons, and for that they had not dealt any thing at all against this offender, but rather boasted, either of his fact, or of their security: S. Paul reproveth them, saying; Your boasting is not good. And here at length, he cometh in with that, which our Brethren make the first reason, for infection: Our Br. collection of S. Paul's first reason. A little leaven soureth a whole lump of dough. Although the Apostle also, uttereth the same in an other manner, than here our Brethren do, to wit, by way of question: Know ye not, that a little leaven soureth the whole lump? And so he proceedeth ●o a number of other reasons: saying, Purge therefore ●e old leaven, that ye may be a new sprinkling, as ye are unleavened. For Christ our paschal Lamb, is offered up, etc. Thus, if we should fall to weighing the Apostles words, and reasons; we should find, that our Brethren which will them to be weighed, did not their selves weigh the poise of them so deliberately, either as they might, or as they ought to have done. For than should they have found, that the only Censure of the Apostle, would have weighed down all their light reasons, which they concèave, of a Consistory among the Corinthians of ruling and not teaching Seniors, that were joined with S. Paul in the authority of examining & excommunicating this offender. Which Seniors had so little any especial authority in this matter, or in any other, Nothing in either Epistle to the Co. to prove any Consistory of such Elders. among so many matters mentioned in that whole Epistle, or in the other Epistle, written to these Corinthians: that in weighing withal, to whom these words, & both the whole Epistles were written: it is enough to prove (for any express word we can find in them, or any necessary argument we can gather on them) that the discipline of excommunication which S. Paul used, or willed the Corinthians to use, may be used well enough in our Churches, without any such Consistory of Seniors, to be joined in authority with the Pastors. As for that which our Br. add, that, public reprehension of many, which being godly refuse to eat with such a one, Discipl. of excomm. is profitable both to drive himself to repentance, and to keep other in order, for fear of like punishment. I grant this is true. But, that S. Paul meant those many, to be the Elders of a Consistory, Public reprehension may be without this Consist. and withal, such Elders, as were ecclesiastical governors and reprehenders, but not teachers: and that this public reprehension of many, if it were not of the whole Church, might well enough be made by the public Minister, before them all, or in their name, and so be a public reprehension of many, to drive him to repentance, and terrify other: and that refusing to eat with such an one, might not, yea, ought not, to be of all and every one, but of such a many, meaning such a Consistory of Elders, that I utterly deny. And therefore, that which followeth: Where this discipline is not, no marvel if all wickedness overflow, to the dishonour of God, and of his Gospel, to the destruction of many and corruption of more, to the grief of the godly offence of the weak, encouragement of the wicked, and rejoicing of the adversary, Sith the discipline of this signory that our Brethren would bring in, is so clean different (as we have seen) from the discipline that the Apostle used herein, among the Corinthians: we have great cause to take good heed, lest these dangers might happen to us, not by the want, but rather by the admission, Our discipl. of excom. is nearer to S. Paul's, than is our Br. discipline. of this their governing and not teaching Seniors discipline. And if we permit those, which in the ministery of the word succeed the Apostles, when any such notorious sinners, as this person was among the Corinthians, shall offend, to proceed against them, as S. Paul did against him; and the Minister to notify his proceeding to the whole Church: and they with all obedience, to put in execution those sentences of excommunication, and to shun such offender's company, and not to eat with them, but rather publicly to reprehend them: this discipline is not to be misliked. And our order of excommunication, (if it be not accidentally abused by any particular person or occasion) is in law, and effect, the very same. As for this devise of a governing signory of not teaching, but of dumb Presbyters, Priests, or Elders, to be raised up in every Church or Parish, to have the power and authority of this ecclesiastical discipline, as it is nothing like the Apostles practise: so our Brethren's unnecessary stirs for it, The manifold dangers by this signory. hath bred many troublesome events: and it is to be feared, would soon breed more and greater, to the manifest danger both of her majesties sovereignty, and so, of her sacred person: to the altering and innovating of the whole State, to the disquieting of the orders established in all the Realm, and in every Church: and than what followeth, but as our Br. here conclude? To the dishonour of God, and of his Gospel, to the destruction of many, Excom. for light offences. and corrupting of more, to the grief of the godly, offence of the weak, encouragement of the wicked, and rejoicing of the adversary: and therefore (in my opinion) this Seniory were a great deal better suppressed, then erected. Now upon these premises our brethren thus conclude: Let us therefore proceed, in setting forth the authority of the Pastor with the Elders, The learned disc. pag. 91. which is, first to punish offenders, and bring them to repentance, or else to cut them clean from the Church, as rotten and infected members. This conclusion, inferring the authority of the Pastor with the Elders aforesaid (these Elders being not yet sufficiently proved, Bridges. to have any such authority, or to be any such Elders at all) is a weak conclusion? the Bishop or Pastor may do all this well enough without them, except our brethren shall have better proves to infer them, then as yet we have heard any. But now, as though they had already clearly proved these Seniors, and their authority, they proceed from their persons, and from this their authority, to the offences wherefore this authority should be put in practice. But here (say they) we have to inquire, for what offences the Church may proceed to so sharp a punishment: for God forbidden, The learned disc. pag. 91. & 92. that the sword of excommunication should be drawn out, to cut off the members of our body for every small disease that is in them, but only where the disease is deadly, and the members rotten thereby: for we ought as hardly to be brought to excommunicate any of our brethren, as we would have a leg or an arm cut off from our body. God forbidden (as our brethren say very well therein) we should proceed to so sharp a punishment, Bridges. How hardly we should proceed to excommunicate. that the spiritual sword of excommunication should be drawn out, to cut off the members of our mystical body in Christ, for every small disease that is in them. Yea rather, now and then in some principal members of the natural body, though the disease be deadly, and the members rotted thereby, yet to cut them strait way off, were to hasten the present destruction of all the body. We grant therefore, that we ought to be brought very hardly to excommunicate any of our brethren, especially such principal parts among them, as may endanger their whole estate. Howbeit, this resemblance herein, of cutting off a leg or arm from the mystical body, The difference of cutting a part of the natural and mystical body. and from the natural, is very different, even from the principal point of that excommunication, that we speak of, and that is in use among us. For if we cut off a leg or arm from the natural body, it is done, both for utter despair that it can never be healed, and we are assured, that being cut off, it can by no natural or artificial means, except miraculous, be ever again joined to the body, but is utterly without all life, and for ever in this world destroyed, till the resurrection of the body in the life to come. The Popish Excomm. But it is not so in every Excommunication, except only in the highest and extremest degree, called Anathematization, which is seldom, Difference of anathematization, and Excom. or not at all in use amongst us. Whereas, in the ordinary Excommunication, it is not an absolute spiritual cutting off the mystical member: but such a conditional cutting off, only from these, and those respects: that it is done not only with hope, but also even to the end and purpose of amendment, and of restoring. Although therefore the separation be of more importance and danger, in respect of the more excellent object, and subject matter: notwithstanding for the foresaid respects of hope and purpose, it can be hardly justified, that we ought as hardly to be brought to Excommunicate any of our Brethren, as we would have a leg, or an arm cut off from our body. But herein we yield unto our Brethren, that though this spiritual cutting off may easilier be done, than the natural, in the foresaid respects: notwithstanding we ought most hardly to be drawn unto it, and in some principal persons (all things duly pondered) not to cut them off at all. Hereupon, our Brethren conclude further: Therefore the Popish tyranny is detestable, which thundereth out their pretended Excommunication for every trifle, The learned disc. pag. 92. yea such as are no sins, as non payment of a little money, where it is not detained of fraud: non appearance, where men otherwise have necessary impediments, as though it were but a small matter to put men out of the protection of Christ, and to deliver them to the tyranny of Satan, and to deprive them of eternal salvation, and to cast them into everlasting damnation. We detest the Popish detestable tyranny, and errors in their Excommunications, Bridges. so well as do the most zealous of our brethren. Howbeit, it is meet our zeal herein be tempered with discretion. I grant there were great abuses among them, The Popish abuses of Excomm. in abusing so great a censure in so trifling matters: notwithstanding their detestable tyranny in Excommunication, is not so much for proceeding so far in their light causes, as for their erring in the most weighty, and for Excommunicating the true professors of the Gospel (as the Pharisees did Christ and his Apostles) while they themselves maintain most gross errors, and plain heresies, besides most horrible, and notorious vices, and so are altogether unfit to Excommunicate any at all, but rather to be themselves Excommunicated: and not so much as knowing what this power is, and how far forth man is the minister thereof, they not only presume to Excommunicate those that offend not, but whole Realms, and all Princes, over whom they have no charge nor jurisdiction. We need not fear the Papists Excomm. But the best is, that we have no cause to fear the thundering of their Excommunications, but rather to rejoice the more, feeling how graciously (blessed be he therefore) the Lord turneth still their cursings into blessings, save that we pity (so far as standeth with Gods will) this their mad spite, The vices Excommunicable. and furious blindness against the Gospel of Christ, and the true professors of it. Leas● therefore (say they) we should use such unreasonable rigour, The learned disc. pag. 92. the spirit of God teacheth us, what manner of sins deserve Excommunication. 1. Cor. 5.11. 1. Cor. 5.11. If any that is called a brother, be an whoremonger, or a covetous person, or an Idolater, or a selanderer, or a dr●nkard, or an extortioner; with such a one see that ye eat not. These offences therefore and such like, are to be punished by Excommunication. And also an obstinate Heretic, that will not repent by admonition, is worthy of this punishment. Tit. 3.10. 2. Tim. 2.16. 1. Tim. 1.20. 2. john 10. and 11. Tit. 3.10. 2. Tim. 2.16. 1. Tim. 1.20. 2. john. vers. 10. and 11. Whether Saint Paul's words must needs in that place be understood also for Excommunication, (though divers do so take them) might be called in question, sith men might shun such an offenders conversation, Bridges. and not eat with him, 1. Cor. 5.11. although the person were not yet so proceeded against, as by the censure of Excommunication, to make him understand, how much they aborted his wickedness, as we have seen in Brentius, Bucer, and other Protestants judgements. But if these be the vices that our Brethren will always have to be prosecuted by Excommunication, how many shall run in danger of these Seniors censure, The vices for which the Seniors should Excomm. 2. especially under the general name of covetousness: notwithstanding these sinners, (namely, obstinate Heretics) that will not repent by admonition, we grant, are well worthy of this punishment; though the Apostle also name it not, in that place to Titus. Tit. 3.10. Tit. 3.10. As for S. Paul's testimony 2. Tim. 2.16. where he saith to Timothy, Tim. 2.16. but profane voices of vanity pass over them, is neither spoken, nor meant of Excommunication. 1. Tim. 1.20. The next place here cited, 1. Tim. 1.20. is apparently enough spoken of Excommunication, of whom, is Hymenaeus and Alexander, The Apost'l his self Excomm. Hymenaeus. whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme. But here is no Seniory mentioned, but only Saint Paul's own act, without the authority of any Consistory joined with him. And as concerning the 2. Epistle of john. verse 10. and 11. 2. john ver●. 10. and 11. If there come any unto you, and bring not this learning, him receive not to house, neither bid him godspeede, for he that biddeth him godspeede, is partaker of his ill deeds. Neither doth yet this sentence infer any necessity of Excommunication: for although all those persons be Excommunicable, and their sins deserve Excommunication, and they may be said also, to be before God, or ipso facto, Excommunicated, yet are they not so accounted to the Church, till the sentence be published against them. Howbeit, The learned disc pag. 93. I will not stand with our brethren upon this point. And not only (say they) these great and notorious sins deserve this correction, but also lesser crimes increased with contumacy and contempt of the Church's admonition, Excom. for the lesser crimes. become worthy of the same castigation. Therefore saith our Saviour Christ of private offences, Math. 18.15.16. etc. Matth. 18.15.16. etc. If thy brother sin against thee, go and reprove him between thee and him alone: if he hear thee, thou hast won thy brother, but if he hear thee not, take with thee one or two, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses, every word may stand: if he disobey them, then tell the Church: if he disobey the Church, then let him be to thee as an heathen or publican. The Apostle S. Paul likewise 2. Thess. 3.6. etc. concerning those that were idle, 2. Thess. 3.6. and walked disorderly, will have all gentle means used to bring them to labour and good order, but if they would not be reformed for any admonition, he commandeth them to be separated by excommunication. Here our brethren themselves come down to lesser crimes, yea even to the private offences between brother and brother. Bridges. Were they not afraid, Our Bre. confess. of excommunication for lesser crimes. lest they should return their own words on their own selves, that it were popish and detestable tyranny, to arise to so high a censure, for so mean offences? as though it were but a small matter, to put men out of the protection of Christ, and to deliver them unto the tyranny of Satan: to deprive them of eternal salvation, and to cast them into everlasting condemnation? Did they not fear that this also might be accounted unreasonable rigour? no (say they) because these lesser crimes are increased with contumacy and contempt of the Church's admonition, and therefore become worthy of the same castigation: and may contumacy then and contempt so increase the crime? Contumacy & contempt may aggravate the crime. And were not our brethren here again afraid of jumping with the Papists? for what other thing do the very Papists allege, for the most part of their excommunications, more than contumacy and contempt? Yea, but (say our brethren) this contumacy, and contempt is of the Church's admonition. In deed, so saith Christ in the place here cited, Math. 18.17. If he hear not the Church. But can our brethren here understand by the nam● of Church, some few persons, chosen by the Church, and may not the Papists do so to? have not they also their Consistories, and that, many of them, of more persons than one? yea, if the Church choose one man, (as for example, their Bishop or Pastor,) before whom those matters should be heard, debated & decided, doth not the contumacy, and contempt against that one man, increase the sin, as well as the contumacy and contempt against any other persons, that the Church may choose to this purpose. I speak not in defence of the Popish excommunications, not acknowledging them (as they stand now in open resisting of the truth revealed) to be the true Church: Why the Popish Church's excom. is no true excomm. so that they being now neither of, (nor properly in) the true Church, can not rightly expel others out of the true Church, in, and of which their selves have no pa●●, for all their craking of the bare name, and therefore their Excommunications are of no force. Contumaty. But if in deed they were (as would God, if it pleased him they were) of, and in the true Church, (as by the grace of God, his name be blessed for it, we are) and in lesser crimes the contempt, and contumacy of the Church's admonition, given by a few persons chosen by the Church thereunto, be worthy excommunication: then, where the Church hath chosen but one, that is to wit, a Bishop, to execute her authority in those matters: the contumacy and contempt against his just and lawful admonitions, is not so much against that one man, as against the Churches, and so, is worthy of the same castigation. This testimony here rehearsed Matth. 18.15.16.17. Matth. 18.15.16.17. I trust we have already sufficiently showed, how it maketh nothing at all for any such Seniors as our brethren before alleged it for, and much less for any their authority of excommunicating, nor prescribeth any certain order, in what manner, or by what persons any Excommunication should be made, against the offenders, which there it speaketh of, as we have heard thereon the divers judgements, not only of the ancient Fathers, but of our best brethren. As for the 2. Thess. 3.6. etc. the Apostle hath these words: 2. Thess. 3.6. We command you brethren in the name of our Lord jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh inordinately, and not after the institution that he received of us: And in the 11. verse. Verse 11. For we hear that there are some among you walking inordinately, working not at all, but be busy bodies. But to such we denounce, and beseech in our Lord jesus Christ, that labouring with silence, they eat their bread. And in the 14. verse, Verse 14. But if any obey not our word, note him by an Epistle, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. What kind of persons he seemeth here to note, and what fault he findeth in them, I overpass. True it is, he would have them first induced by all gentle means, but if thereby they will not be reform, he yet commandeth them not here to be separated by Excommunication, though they have well deserved it. Neither yet in this solemn denouncing, ●oth he Excommunicate any, but would have them write unto him of such inordinate persons, insinuating that he himself would Excommunicate them, as he had done with the incestuous person at Corinthus, and with Hymeneus Alexander and Philetus. But now our brethren foreseeing, that this is nothing to the fortifying of their Seniory, they return to that point to answer the objections made against it. But it may be objected (say they) that hitherto appeareth not so great use of this Consistory, The learned disc. Pag. 94. why it should be thought necessary for Excommunication: neither doth S. Paul make mention of it in all places, where he speaketh of Excommunication. In good time be it spoken, not only it may be objected, Bridges but it is objected, Our Objection. that hitherto appeareth not so great use of this Consistory, why it should be thought necessary for Excommunication, or for anything else: having been so little, or not in use at all, for any necessary proof, or use thereof, and the Church of Christ, having continued so many hundredth years utterly without it. As for all these examples of Excommunicating the incestuous person, Hymenaeus, Philetus, Alexander, etc. or any other testimony of Saint Paul here mentioned. What is here either necessary, or likely that may be referred to a Consistory? Neither will we so much object this, that Saint Paul maketh no mention of it, in all places where he speaketh of Excommunication, but that he maketh no mention of it in any place where he speaketh of Excommunication. And here let us mark our brethren's confession, for if this may be objected that hitherto appeareth not so great use of this Consistory, that it should be thought necessary for Excom. than all that hitherto is alleged, may be thought unnecessary to infer this, and this appearing, that it may be so thought, of all that hitherto hath been alleged: let our Brethren look better to that, that is to come, to allege such proves, as whereby it should be thought more necessary. But to these objections, say our brethren, we answer, that although the simple institution of Christ, The learned disc pag. 94. and approbation of the holy Ghost, should suffice us to think it necessary: yet there are many necessary uses thereof to be alleged. And to this answer we reply: if this place can be showed and proved so to be, Bridges. where this simple institution of Christ, and approbation of the holy Ghost was made▪ Our brethren's answer to our objection. (speaking of the state of the new testament, and since the time of Christ's incarnation) it shall suffice us forthwith, simply to think it necessary. But if this be rather supposed and threaped upon us, then showed and proved unto us, our Brethren have to pardon us, if we think it not so necessary, or rather to ask pardon of God, that dare thus without plain, and manifest proof, pretend the simple institution of Christ, and the holy Ghosts approbation of it. But to our further satisfaction, to prove this, they tell us, that there are many necessary uses thereof to be alleged: let us therefore hear also these so many, and so necessary uses. The learned disc. pag. 94. & 95. For whereas our Saviour Christ (say they) commandeth in private offences, the matter to be brought before the congregation, except you understand thereby, the congregation or assembly of Elders, there shall follow horrible discord and confusion thereby. For admit a man might accuse his brother unto the whole multitude, yet how should the whole multitude admonish him, and exhort him to repentance? Our Brethren here take upon them, Our brethren's answer. to prove many necessary uses of this Consistory, besides Christ's simple institution thereof: and do they now for these uses, begin with that, Bridges. which they make his simple institution? and what have they alleged for Christ's institution, Our brethren's confusion of the uses and institution of this supposed Seniory. simple or compound, but only that saying of Christ, Math. 18.17. tell the Church? which though it be but a simple argument of theirs, to prove any institution at all of this Consistory: yet what dealing shall we call this, simple or double? to tell us, they will show the uses of it, besides the institution: and when they come to show them, they allege that which they pretended before, to be the very institution. But now coming to these words of Christ, what reason enforceth, No confusion in understanding Christ's words, Math. 18.17. in the plain and literal sense. that we must understand by the Church or Congregation, the Congregation or assembly of Elders in the Church? doth any horrible confusion and disorder, or any other inconvenience follow, by understanding here the Church or Congregation, in the plain and simple sense thereof? Our Brethren do admit, that a man might accuse his brother unto the whole multitude. Yea, there is no need to put the case thereon, and say, admit a man might do it: for why may he not do it well enough? and in admitting this, they admit withal, that these words, Tell the Church, may be well understood of the whole multitude, without any disorder or confusion, for one may speak to a whole multitude, and every one may well understand him. But say our brethren yet, (where Christ goeth further: If he will not hear the Church) how should the whole multitude admonish him, and exhort him to repentance? very well (say I) without any necessity of this Consistory. For both their Pastor can do it in their name, or any public Officer, How the Church may admonish the offender. or the Church may do it, without any horrible confusion or disorder, at several times, and by several persons, either all, or the most of them, or by some one person appointed thereunto, which may well be called the Church's admonition, although they have no such Consistory of Elders among them. Again, of these notorious offences that are worthy of Excommunication, some are openly known, The learned disc. pag. 95. so that they need no trial, as the adultery of that Corinthian. 1. Corinth. 5. foam are in controversy, 1. Cor. 5. and are to be examined, concerning which, Saint Paul warneth Timothy, that he admit not any accusation against an Elder, but under two or three witnesses, and chargeth him before God, and the Lord jesus Christ, and his elect Angels, that he do nothing through rash, or overhasty judgement, and that he do all things without partiality, or affection unto parties. 1. Tim. 5. chap. 19 & 21. verse. We see here manifestly, Notorious offences. a necessary use of the Eldership: for how is it possible for the whole Church, to examine and discuss such difficult controversies? therefore it behoveth the Church to have such ordinary delegates, as may and aught to apply their diligence unto such matters. Bridges. This division of offences doth again both imply a contradiction to itself, in saying: of these notorious offences that are worthy of excommunication, some are openly known, so that they need no trial: some are in controversy, and are to be examined: for if they be not openly known, how are they notorious? if they be notorious, how be they 〈◊〉 openly known? And also this division doth clean overthrow the necessity of our brethren's Consistory. For where they say, some are openly known, so that they need no trial, as the adultery of the Corinthian, 1. Cor. 5. it followeth, that these notorious offences are out of the examining and discussing of such difficult controversies, Our brethren's evil division of offences. so that the Church hath no need of such Delegates, to apply their diligence to such matters. And if the saying of Christ, Matth. 18. be not of such open offences, till they be opened by complaint, then are not Christ's words to be draw●● to such matters, but are rather to be referred unto this other some, that they say are in controversy, and to be examined: concerning which, S. Paul warneth Timothy, that he admit not an accusation against an Elder, etc. and that he do nothing through rash, or overhasty judgement, and that he do all things without partiality, etc. but in all these warnings, Saint Paul adjoineth no Consistory of governing Elders unto Timothy in the admitting and judging of these things, but giveth him, No necessary use of this Seniory. as this great charge, so the doing, and accomplishment of the same. Therefore, we see here manifestly, (quite contrary to that which our brethren conclude thereon) no necessary use of the Eldership, or that, it behoveth the Church to have any such ordinary Delegates, as may, and aught to apply their diligence unto such matters, when the Bishop or Pastor (as here Timothy was) is willed to do, and (no doubt, did, as he was willed) may examine, and discuss such difficult controversies, and may, and aught to apply his diligence unto such matters. Moreover (say our Brethren) to oversee the Church for matters pertaining to order and discipline: The learned disc Pag. 96. how can the multitude oversee themselves, or the Pastors only, which have a principal care of doctrine to attend upon? The Church may oversee, and be overseen by her overseers: as for the Pastors only, Bridge's we say not, they are the only overseers: for although the several Pastors have their special oversight of the people, Overseers now without these Seniors. in the●r several charges, and have a principal care of doctrine to attend upon: nevertheless, as they may have a care also, though not so principal, (as Timothy had, and yet his principal care was of Doctrine: The necessary form of Excom. ) so may they well have other higher overseers over them, both Bishops and Magistrates, and the Prince the Principal over them all, without any such overseers among them, as this Consistory that our Brethren would erect. And to the second part of the objection, that Saint Paul doth make mention of the Eldership or Consistory of Elders in all places, The learned disc. pag. 96. & 97. where he speaketh of Excommunication: we answer that it is not necessary he should so do. For whereas our Saviour Christ hath prescribed a form thereof, that he which obeyeth not the Congregation should be Excommunicated: and that in other places he maketh sufficient mention both of the Elders & of the assembly, we ought to understand that his purpose is, to observe that form to the uttermost. And although he do not always make express mention thereof, yet must we not imagine, that he meant to alter or change the same. Having thus answered to the former part of this objection, that there is not so great use of this, consistory, Bridges. why it should be thought necessary to Excommunication: they now proceed to the second part of the objection: which they propounded, The answer to the second part of the objection. that S. Paul doth make no mention of the Eldership or Consistory of Elders in all places, where he speaketh of Excommunication: they answer, that it is not necessary Bee should so do. And their reason is this. For whereas our saviour Christ hath prescribed a form thereof, that he which obeyeth not should be Excommunicated▪ and that in other places, he maketh sufficient mention, both of the Elders and of the assembly, we ought to understand that his purpose is to observe that form to the uttermost. Hereunto I reply, first that this part of the objection, is of their own ●r●ming and therefore, they may answer it, as they please. How we make the objection, otherwise than they set it down to our Br. more advantage. We object it thus, that Saint Paul doth not make mention of this Eldership or Consistory of Elders, in any place where he speaketh of Excommunication: therefore, (by any thing that we can gather out of Saint Paul) it is not necessary, that they should have authority with the Pastor to Excommunicate. If they now can show it (not in all places) but in any one place, which is a great deal the larger offer of us unto them: they should easilier overthrow our objection. Which since they can not do: It is the greater overthrow of their assertion: The objection taken as they put it. But now to take the objection as they object it, not for any, but for all places: why might it not be well said, that if in all places, where Saint Paul speaketh of Excommunication, he not only maketh no mention of this Eldership or Consistory of Elders, but also maketh such mention of the Bishop or Pastor, that it may be fully done by him: Doth it not sufficiently follow them, that their joining in authority with the Pastor is not so necessary? But they add a reason, why It is not necessary, that S. P●●le should● in all places make mention of this consistory of Elders. Our Br. reason why S. Paul mentioneth not a consistory in all places. Our Br. reason a petitione principij. For (say they) whereas our Saviour Christ hath prescribed a form thereof, that he which obeyeth not the Congregation should be Excommunicated: What is this to authorize this consistory of Elders? But they still h●ry 〈◊〉 their former broken string, of the allusion of Christ's words, that by the Congregation, is not meant simply the Congregation: but the Congregation of the Eldership, or Consistory of Elders in the Congregation. But sith not only no necessity (as we have seen) dr●●●th th●●● plain words of our Saviour Christ, Tell the Church or Congregation, to this allusion: Yea, we have seen how hardly they can be draw●● thereto, sith the words Congregation and Senate, are (as membra dividentia) words divided, S Paul's words not referred to any order prescribed in Christ's words. and opposite the one to the other: & withal, Christ neither setteth down any form at all of Excommunication, either who should be the doer, or in what order it should be d●n●: what necessary argument can our Br. gather hereupon: that Saint Paul's 〈◊〉 where he mentioneth Excommunication, ought always to be understanded, that his purpose was to observe that form to the vttermost●, that our Saviour Christ prescribed? And yet good reason, that no wor●● of S. Paul should be understanded, to break any form that Christ pr●scribed. But if those words of Christ, prescribe no form, and 〈◊〉 of other matters than S. Paul's words now and then be, where he ●●keth mention of Excommunication: how shall we so understand Christ's words, except we would wrest them and misunderstand his words of purpose? As for S. Paul, we grant, he maketh mention both of Elders, and of the assembly of Elders in other places: but what is this, 〈…〉 this present purpose of Excommunication: S. Paul mentioneth assemblies of Elders. or of such Elders, or 〈◊〉 assembly or Consistory of Elders, Governing and not meddling with the word, and yet meddling with Excommunication or absoluti●● 〈◊〉 of the chiefest parts of the word? Cannot S. Paul speak of Elders, nor of assemblies in any place, S. Paul neither speaks of Elders, nor that they always did Excom. but it must needs be understood for 〈◊〉 Elders, and such Consistories of them? Yea, can he not sp●●ke of Excommunication in any place, but because he speaketh of Elders, and ●ss●●bl●●● i●●ther places, that therefore we ought to understand that his purpose w●s, that those Elders and assemblies do always Excommunicate? and that his purpose is to observe that form to the uttermost? No necessary form & perpetual rule prescribed how to Excom. If o●r 〈◊〉 ●●n prove that either Christ, or S. Paul, who had the spirit of Christ, 〈◊〉 ●own any necessary form and perpetual rule thereof: then we grant ●hat although he always make no express mention thereof, yet must we not imagine that he meant to alter or change the same. But if he set down no such necessary form, nor any rule thereof. Yea, i● that (which is much more) neither Christ, nor S. Paul, nor any other of the Apostles or Evangelists, make any mention at all of such a Consistory as our Br. do urge nor these or any other their words, No express mention or necessary inferrence of this Consistory in Christ's or the apostles words. can of any necessity be drawn so to be understood: than not only we are free from the necessity thereof: but let our Br. look● unto it, with what conscience they dare use the names and words of our ●●●●●r Christ, and of S. Paul, to the necessary inferring of this Consistory, and of this surmised authority of th●m. In the first to the Corinthians the fift verse, it is manifest, that albeit, he desired nothing more, than that the incestuous adulterer should be Excommunicated, The learned disc Pag. 97. and therefore determined of him for his own part, as absent in body but present in spirit: yet he acknowledgeth that he could not be excommunicated, without the consent of the Congregation, being gathered together in the name of our Lord jesus Christ. 1. Co●. 5.4. 1. Cor. 5.4. Likewise when he should be received again, he was to be pardoned, not only by him, but by them also. 2. Cor. 1.10. 1. Cor. 1.10. Although I dare not say as our Br. here (me thinks) over boldly do, that S. Paul desired nothing more, Bridges. than that the incestuous adulterer should be Excommunicated: For, Our Br. overbold words of S. Paul● desire how he wrote thereof with anguish and tears, it appeareth, 2. Cor. 2. verse 4. and many other things there were, (which we may well think) he desired much more, than the giving of that incestuous adulterer unto Satan; which he was rather driven to do, than that he had any great desire to do it: nevertheless, (to set ●●●de the desire of S. Paul thereunto) how can our Br. justify this, which h●●e they conclude? saying: and therefore determined of him for his own part, as absent in body, but present in spirit: yet he acknowledgeth that he could not be Excommunicated, without the consent of the congregation, being gathered together in the name of our Lord jesus Christ, 1. Cor. 5.4. Had not S. Paul pronounced the sentence of that judgement on him before, verse. 3? Paul's Excom. by himself & in his absence. and this he had done so far forth without their consent: that it was also done without their knowledge, being absent in body from them, though in spirit present with them, that is (as I take it) wishing himself among them. And this his judgement, being absent, he accounted as available (for the effect of the matter) as if he had been present with them. The words are plain: I verily absent in body, but present in spirit, have already judged him that thus hath done, even as if I were present. True it is, that in this fourth and next verse immediately following, (which our Br. cite, for the solemn publication, an● execution of this his former sentence,) he willeth them, saying; When ye are gathered together, and my spirit, in the name of our Lord jesus Christ, that such a one, 1. Cor. 5.4. with the power of the Lord jesus Christ be delivered tò Satan, to the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit● might be saved, in the day of our Lord jesus. That is to wit, The sense of S. Paul's words. to exclude, or pronounce that man excluded, out of the Congregation, which is the mystical body of Christ, and so to be under the power of Satan, to the intent, that he being thus punished in the flesh, by this bodily exclusion, it might make him sorrowful to repentance, and so redound to the salvation of his soul. Now to the execution hereof, it being requisite that they should give their consent: he willeth th●m to gather themselves together so to do. Which thing notwithstanding he desireth not of them, How far their consent was requisite for the execution of S. Paul's ●●ntence. that they would vouchsafe to do: but he flatly commandeth them to do it. And therefore he saith. 2. Cor. 2. For that also have I written to you, that I might know the trial of you, whether ye were or no, obedient in all things. So that this is true, that Saint Paul could not excommunicate him without their consent. For although he thus tried them and commanded them to put his sentence in execution: yet had his sentence been good and effectual before God, though not so reputed of them, if they had not obeyed him, nor consented unto him. So that, in this sense, the Church that is, The Church's authority in the Excom. the multitude, (I grant) hath a duty of consent, to the approbation and execution of the Bishops or Pastor's sentence of Excommunication, whereby, when they perceive he hath not abused the authority of the keys committed unto him, they obey the same, or denounce solemn notice thereof unto the party, and so repute him, reprove him, and avoid him. And in this respect, where our Brethren say: Likewise when he should be received again, he was to be pardoned, not only by him, but by them also: How far forth their pardon was requisite. 2. Cor. ver. ver. 10. So far forth as offence was given to them, and that they had obeyed and approved Saint Paul's Censure: their pardon also of him (I grant) was requisite. And therefore Saint Paul said before, 2. Cor. 2. verse 6. etc. 2. Cor. 2. vers. 6. etc. It sufficeth to such an one, this rebuking, which is made of many, insomuch that contrariwise, ye should rather forgive him and comfort him, least peradventure he that is such a one, should be swallowed up with too much heaviness. Wherefore I pray you, that ye confirm your charity to him. The diverse manner of S. Paul's, and of their action, in the offenders pardon. For therefore also I wrote to you, that I might know the experiment of you, whether ye be obedient in all things. And heer● cometh in this sentence that our Brethren note: But if ye have forgiven any thing: and I also. For, I also, if I have forgiven aught, for you I have forgiven it, in the person of Christ, that we should not be circumvented of Satan. So that their pardoning of this man, and S. Paul's pardoning of him, were not concurrent in one respect, nor after one manner, nor of one matter in the pardon. They had not this Ministerial office of binding and losing, nor the keys of shutting and opening, Hymenaeus Philetus, Alexander, in the person of Christ, which S. Paul had, to denounce in Christ's name, the sin to be forgiven him, and the man to be reconciled to God's favour: this pardon, in the person of Christ, S. Paul gave, and not they. What and how S. Paul forgave. They forgave only the scandal and offence towards them. And this is that S. Paul desireth them to pardon him. For it lay in them to do it, both to receive and comfort him, they being members of the body, What & how they forgave. whereof he was reunited to the head. And in this sense, I hold well with our Brother's saying, that when he should be received again, he was to be pardoned not only by him, but by them also. But what do they now conclude hereon? And therefore, if so high an Apostle, could not by his private authority excommunicate that Corinthian: The learned disc. Pag. 97. we must not think that by his private authority, but by consent of the Church of Ephesus he excommunicated Hymenaeus and Alexander, although he do not make express mention of the consent of the Church in that place. 1. Tim. ● 20. Our Brethren conclude not herein indifferently. They require of us to show some express testimony of Scripture, Bridges where the censure of Excommunication was executed by any one person or Minister of the Church? Our brothers eluding of the manifest scirpture by coniecturs of other places. we show it in S. Paul's excommunicating Hymenaeus and Alexander. Besides the Excommunication of Philetus and this Corinthian. Hear they r●ply. We must not think, that by his private authority, but by the consent of the church of Ephesus, he excommunicated Hymeneus and Alexander, although he do not make express mention of the consent of the church in that place. If this answer shall be counted sufficient: what manifest and express testimony of the scripture, may not be thus eluded? But why should we not think, that S Paul did it by his own authority? For as for these captions words, The captions term of private authority. his private private authority, I reckon not on them; for he did it in the person of God and by his apostolical and Ministerial authority, which was public and not private, notwithstanding proper to himself, and to such as were of the Apostleship, and ministers of the word, as he was. Doth S. Paul make mention any where else, of the Church's consent in these men's Excommunication, taking consent of the Church, How the Churches might consent in the Excommunication of Hymenaeus, Al●xand●r, & ●hile●us. (as our Brethren herein do,) that he could not do it at all, except they had consented, and given their suffrages before hand, that he should do it? for otherwise, we deny not, but that they consented. Howbeit, their consent came after the thing was done, or at the most, it was not the authorising of his doing, but an allowing of it, because it was their duty so to do, seeing that he abused not his authority, nor erred in the exercise of the same Which if he had done; Singular authority. then might they justly have disobeyed his doing. As they mig●● also refuse the doctrine of him that preached any other Gospel. And yet, it followeth not thereupon, that in preaching the pure and sincere gospel, the Church had joint authority with the Preacher, to preach the same. But why would our Brethren have us thus to think? If so high an Apostle could not by his private authority excommunicate that Corinthian: We must not think, that by his private authority, but by consent of the Church of Ephesus, he Excommunicated Hymenaeus and Alexander, although he do not make express mention of the consent of the Church in that place. This conclusion runneth upon their former assumptions, Our Br. conclusions on their own assumptions. that S. Paul could not by himself Excommunicate that Corinthian. Whereas that place mentioneth not at all, what he could or he could not do in that matter, but only what he did, and would have them to do. And if the other place, 1. Tim. 2.20. concerning the Excommunication of Hymenaeus and Alexander, be to be measured by this place, 1. Cor. 4. Then as we have seen, how both he himself could, and did Excommunicate that Corinthian, both in their Church's absence, & they being not made privy of his doing, Our Br. referring the other Excommunication to this. 1 Cor. 5 do yetmore confute themselves. till he had done it, and written to them thereof, willing them to solemnize and denounce the public execution of the same: which if they would not have done, had no whit impaired the bertue of his censure, but aggravated an other offcence in them. And therefore in measuring the Excommunication at Ephesus, by that at Corinthus: our express instance of S. Paul's Excommunicating by himself, in the absence of the congregation, and the congregations duty of obedience afterward, in approving, obeying and consenting to the same, is a good instance that neither the whole Congregation, nor any Seniory among them, had any necessary joint authority with S. Paul in the inflicting of this censure. So likewise where he speaketh to Timothy in the singular number, The learned disc. pag. 98. 1. Tim. 2.20 concerning the hearing and determining of matters pertaining to Discipline, we ought to acknowledge that he teacheth in Timothy's person the duty of Elders, and never meant to give to Timothy, an absolute or singular authority, to be judge in those matters, without consent of the Eldership, whereof he maketh mention but a little before. To conclude therefore, the Pastor with the advice and consent of the Elders, hath authority to hear and examine matters, pertaining to Ecclesiastical Discipline, and as the case requireth to Excommunicate offenders, and upon their repentance and amendment, to receive them again into the bosom of the Church, approved by the word of God. Those testimonies likewise where Saint Paul speaketh to Timothy in the singular number, give unto Timothy, though no absolute, yet a singular authority, Bridges not singular (I grant) as though he should single out himself to do all things alone: but singular in preeminence above all, What single authority S. Paul giveth to Timothy. which pre-eminence was alonely in Ephesus, singular and proper unto Timothy. And this hath Beza himself, even where he speaketh against the usurpation of the Popish Bishops & Pastors, confessed, saying, a●●●e have also heard before, on these words of the Apostle: against an Elder receive no accusation, etc. Moreover we must note, out of this placc, Bezaes' confession of the singular authority of one. Timothy in the Ephesine eldership to have then been the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, the Bishop, as justine calleth it, not that he did all things as he list: but, which according to his godliness and prudence, moderated all things, that all things might be well done and in order in the assembly. Neither is this any hindrance hereunto, that S. Paul teacheth in Timothy's person the duty of Elders: but rather confuteth our brethren's shift, in saying, that Timothy had a prerogative as an Evangelist, and proveth that such Elders as Timothy was, (that is to say with Beza and justine, such Bishops) notwithstanding his prerogative of Evangelist, have a like singular authority as Timothy had, concerning the hearing and determining of matters pertaining to Discipline. And if (as here they say) Saint Paul in Timothy's person, taught the duty of Elders: then should these Elders, whose duty is here taught in the person of Timothy, be such as should be answerable to the person of Timothy, and not such Governing Elders, as are no Teachers. And so saith calvin on these words, 1. Timoth. 5. verse 21. I testify before the Lord. etc. This protestation was interposed of Paul, not only as in a matter most weighty, but also for the great difficulty thereof. For there is nothing more hard, than to exercise judgements with such equity, that neither thou art moved at any time with favour, nor givest entry unto suspicion, nor art moved with tales, Timothy in his Ecclesiastical judgements, represented only the person of Pastoral Elders. nor yet art overstraight in rigour, nor lookest on any other thing in all causes, than the cause itself. For from thence (shall spring) an equal right, when the eyes are shut unto the persons. But we must remember, that under the person of Timothy, all Pastors are admonished. So that this admonition comprehending the dignity, and the duty of an ecclesiastical judge, the same is here made unto Timothy, and in his person, only unto such governing Elders, as are Pastoral elders. In whom their teaching, though it be done publicly, All jurisdiction of one is not Antichristian. is notwithstanding their singular authority: as Saint Paul also gave unto Timothy singular precepts thereof, and ●et in Timothy's person, he gave those precepts, to all Bishops and Pastors, wherein no other kind of Elders, ordinarily nor the congregation, do● join with the Bishops or Pastors in the authority of teaching, though in obedience and consent of hearing. And so in these matters, concerning the hearing and determining of Ecclesiastical Discipline, and judicial causes, he giveth Timothy, and (in Timothy's person) other Bishops and such superior pastors as he was, the charge and authority of a righteous judge. But the judges authority is singular to the judge, and not communicated with other, no, though they sit on the Bench with him as his assistants, but such only as are of his function, judges as he is, and joined in the same commission with him: How this authority was, & was not singular therefore S. Paul giveth to Timothy, and (in his person) to Bishops, and such Pastors, a singular authority, in hearing and determining of such matters. Not singular (I grant) as though none might hear them but he alone, or that he might ask no counsel or consent of any other: for such singularity were rather a deharre, than a grant of authority, or were an insolent abuse thereof. Neither so doth any judge, if any assistants be on the bench with him. But the judge only hath the chief authority, and that is, his singular authority, though not absolute. As for the Eldership whereof Saint Paul maketh mention a little before: We have heard also Caluines opinion thereon, that it may be aswell understood in that place, for the office of the Eldership, as for any consistory or company of the Elders. And therefore upon the uncertainty of that word, they can build little certainty for their consistorial Elders. The conclusion which here they make, depending all upon the premises, is no further to be granted, than the premises do infer. The learned disc Pag. 98. & 99 In steed of which, antichrist hath set up a tyrannical jurisdiction of one Bishop to be judge of Excommunication, which is practised neither for causes sufficient, nor by sufficient authority, insomuch as it hath been already testified by the Scripture, that the power of Excommunication is in no one man, no not in an Apostle, but is common to the whole Church, and aught to be executed by lawful delegates of the Church also. The tyrannical jurisdiction that antichrist hath set up, we no more acknowledge, Bridges. than our Brethren. But, that all jurisdiction of one B. to be judge of Excommunication, which is practised for causes sufficient, not only to want sufficient authority, but to be called tyrannical, and set up by antichrist: Is not truly spoken nor Christian like. Except they will make S. Paul antichrist. As for that which they have already testified by the Scripture, doth manifestly confirm, that one man (as the Apostle, and Timothy, and in his person, Slanderous speeches. Bishops and pastors in like manner may execute the power of excommunication. For although this ecclesiastical power be given to the Church, as likewise the civil power is given to the assemblies and congregations of men: How the power of Excommunication is given to the Church. yet is neither of them common to the whole Church (as our Brethren here say) but is proper to those persons, in, or of the Church, and of the assemblies of men, which persons are of God or man lawfully called thereunto. Neither are the persons that have the practice and executing of the power of excommunication, to be so properly calle● the Church's delegates, as God's delegates or Ministers in the same, and represent God therein, not the Church. But, admitting it be common to the whole church, and yet ought only to be executed by lawful delegates of the church: if that whole particular church, The Excommunicator is more properly Gods delegate than the Churches. do make him that is their only Lawful Bishop, to be also their only Lawful delegate, in executing the power of Excommunication, and do not delegate a number of more with him: then, by their own confession, some one man, and that the Bishop may alone execute the authority and power of excommunication. But so much that usurped authority presumeth, that the Bishop as an absolute owner thereof, The learned discourse. Pag 99 committeth it over to his Chancellor or Archdeacon, and the Archdeacon to his Official, and he to his register, and he again to his substitute, and his substitute to his servants man or boy as it happeneth, in so much that a learned Preacher, may be excommunicated by a foolish boy. If this matter seem not to require speedy reformation, God hath blinded our eyes, that we can not see the clear light of the Son shining in our faces. These terms of usurpation, presumption, and to be as an owner, and as an absolute owner of this authority: Bridges are speeches (considering the untruths, and reprochfulnesse of them) little besé●ming learned preachers. And much less, the other, of committing this authorty to Registers, and to substitutes, and to the Substitutes servants, man or boy I verily believe, thad our Brethren, (if they were well opposed) could not prove any such Excommunication to be made. Which indeed if it were done, is no Excommunication at all, Slanderous speeches. if it be not rather their bare surmise. But perchance, at the fourth or fift hand, they heard of such a thing, and they by and by (for the good liking and opinion they have of Bishops, their chauncellers, Archdeacon's and Officials, Charitas non est suspicax,) did believe it. For the tale carried great credit. Some boy told them▪ that some servant told him, that some Substitute told him, that he had heard it told of some Register. But who the Register, Substitute, Servant, man or boy was or is; that we must go look, as the boy saith to his dog, seek out. It is proof enough for our Brethren, that some boy told them, that he heard say so. And therefore, as a matter now out of all doubt, it must in all haste to the press, and be confirmed in print with this exclamation: Insomuch that a learned preacher may be excommunicated by a foolish boy. If a foolish boy had written this, it had been the more tolerable. But should such Learned Preachers in the name of all the faithful Ministers, Our Br. unequal dealing in this slander. that have and do seek for the reformation of the Church of England, in this their Learned Discourse of Ecclesiastical Government, thus solemnly allege such boyish slanders? or if there should by corruption have happened any such like thing, should they thus heighnously burden or challenge the state and authority of the Bishops, for such an abuse, or odd escape stolen out: which our Bishops do no less detest, than do our Brethren their-selves, No likelihood in this slander. and would punish and reform, if they can name the parties, and prove the offence? but that (I think before hand) they can not do. Nay, there is no likelihood of any such matter. We suffer not either Official, or Archdeacon, or Chancellor, to excommunicate any, without a Minister of the word joined with him, do denounce the sentence of Excommunication. And can then a Register, yea the Registers substitute, and the Substitutes man, or the man's boy, Excommunicate (I will not say, Preacher, learned or unlearned,) but any one man or women in all England? I deny not, a boy may write the sentence and form of words, and counterfeit, or clap to the right seal also of the office, and may pack with the sommoner to carry it forth, If such an abuse were, it were no come. and so there might happen by such ill dealing, a show and terror of Excommunication. But, as this is not any Excommunication indeed (and therefore our Brethren say not truly, that the authority is thus committed from one to another, that a learned preacher may be excommunicated by a foolish boy) so when it should come to answering in the court, it would soon be found out, to be a mere false and (saving your reverence) knavish forgery. But if they may discredit lawful authorities for such abuses: The state not to be slandered for the abuses. they may endanger the power and authority of all courts and offices, when any false varlets practise such corruptions: and if there be any such abuses of this high power of excommunication: It is our brethren's duty to make the offenders know, and not to impugn or discredit the authority, by picking such quarrels, & if such speeches may be thus freely cast forth atrandom, on bare surmises, or rather, on mere slanders, till they bring forth the persons: if this slandering seem not unto them to require, as speedy reformation, as any such facts, if any such were committed: what? shall I return their words on their own selves, that God hath blinded their eyes, that they can not see the clear light of the Sun shining in their faces: verily, affection hath so dazzled at the least these our Br. eyes, that they do not (I will not say, they will not) see the difference of the Lawful authority, & of the accidental abuses of the same, being as plain (set affection aside) as the clear Sun shining in their faces. For if we look to banish the tyranny of the Pope out of all men's hearts, The learned disc Pag. 99 we must utterly remove all his detestable enormities out of the realm, as it was wont to be said in the common prayers of the church, in the time of K. Henry and Edward, where as now by retaining still, all the detestable enormities of his prerogative and faculties, and whole course of his Canon law, the papacy is not so much banished in name, as translated indeed from the sea of Rome, to the sea of Canterbury, under the shadow of the Prince's Supremacy, with as heighnous injury and contumely, of the lawful authority and Godly Supremacy of the Prince, as joined with the great dishonour of God, and the miserable disorder of the Church. But we mean not in this place to prosecute our just complaints, nor to inveigh against the abuse of these things, with such vehemency of words as the worthiness of the matters deserveth: but only in setting forth the plain truth, to give a glimpse by the way of the contrary falsehood. Are these our Br. glimpses? what should we look for, Bridges. if they would (as they say) with vehemency prosecute their complaints? What foul & dangerous slanders our Brethren here break forth into. Not only all the Prelates but all the Church of England accused as good as with high treason. that when they give but a glimpse by the way, burden all the state of the Church and Realm of England, to retain still all the detestable enormities of the Pope's prerogative and faculties, and the whole course of his Canon Law. And that the papacy is not so much banished in name, as translated indeed from the Sea of Rome, to the sea of Canterbury. With what conscience can our Brethren affirm these things? is not the Pope's Supremacy a prenrogative of his detestable enormities? which being banished out of the Realm and Church of England: how can it be said, that all the detestable enormities of his prerogative, are still retained? and whereas, to retain the prerogative of the Pope's Supremacy, is high treason: what is this any other, than to accuse all the Church and Realm of Eng. besides themselves, to be high traitors against her Majesty? And what a like slander is this, that we retain his faculties, yea, the whole curse of his Canon Law? If this be true: then doth the Realm and Church of England, as much acknowledge the Supremacy of the Pope, as ever it did. Which if it do not, then is this a most untrue and shameful slander. The verse Papists their selves are able to control them▪ and all the world may see the clean contrary. Yea, Our Br. own convincing themselves of this their slandering of v●. how agreeth this with that which their-selves have confessed, and prefixed in the Preface of this their Learned Discourse, for our acquittance against this slander? that the substance of religion, hath in divers assemblies abroad and at home, been dispatched & resolved, & now publicly maintained, for our true and holy faith. If the whole course of the Canon Law be still maintained, which hath many errors, superstitious, Idolatries, and open blasphemies: how maintain we the true and holy faith? and if papacy be but banished in name and not indeed: how do our Brethren and we agree in the substance of Religion? Do they accuse themselves herein also? Our Br. too undutiful slander of her Majesty. Yea, how do they not accuse withal most unnaturally, the Queen's most excellent Majesty. For, if papacy be but translated from Rome to Canterbury, It is not gone very far from the Court. And who translated it thither? could this translation be made without her majesties authority? or did that most renounced prince King Henry the eight, or that most virtuous Prince his son King Edward the sixth, both of them Kings of most worthy memory, (whom these our Learned Discoursers, so briefly here in their haste, snap up, by the terms only of King Henry and Edward) make this translation of the papacy from Rome to Canterbury, and her Majesty approve only and confirm this translation? Translation of Papacy to Canterbury. But they say, it is translated thither, under the shadow of Princes the supremacy. What mean they by this? hath the Prince translated it to the Sea of Canterbury for a shadow? or doth the prince maintain or retain it? or doth the Prince's supremacy shadow Papacy? These speeches are so dangerous, so reproachful, so spiteful, so undutiful and not subiectlike, so manifest untrue without all shadows, but not without as heighnous injury and contumely of the lawful authority and Godly supremacy of the Prince: as joined with great dishonour of God, and the miserable disorder, of most slanderous speeches cast forth on the Prince, on the Peers; on the Prelates, on the people, on the whole Church and Realm of England: that I much marvel that they would ever let them escape their lips, or conceive them in their hearts: and much more pen them in writing, and publish them in print, and commend them to the world, with the title of a Learned Discourse Surely this a very unlearned, unadvised, ungodly, and disloyal part. Whatsoever they had in the gall of their zeal powered forth on us, would God, they had never attempted, so untruly to deface, both their and our so gracious, godly, loving and most blessed sovereign. Do they think to shadow themselves and to salve up all again, in saying: Our Br. mockery of her majesties supremacy. this is done with as heighnous injury and contumely of the lawful authority and godly supremacy of the Prince? Indeed this is more subiectlike, to be offended that any injury or contumely should be offered, to the Lawful authority and godly supremacy of the Prince. But when they say withal, that all the detestable enormities of the Pope's prerogative and faculties, and whole course of Canon Law, is now still retained: and that, the Papacy is not so much banished in name, as translated in deed, from the sea of Rome. to the sea of Canterbury: and that, all this is done under the shadow of the Prince's Supremacy: what lawful authority, or godly supremacy of the Prince make they this to be? And is not this doing and saying then of theirs, a mere mockery and contradiction, with an heighnous injury and contumelle of the lawful authority and godly supremacy of the Prince? Yes verily, and joined with great dishonour of God, and miserable disorder of the Church, that ever such disordered speeches should be suffered. But we may soon guess, whether for these parts of the Papacy, We maywel see, by these speeches whether for diverse points the papacy would be translated (to wit, soule-mouthed slanders, not sparing to offer injuries and contumelies to their natural and Sovereign Prince,) for making and imposing another Canon Law, and a new kind of Supremacy of pastors and Seniors, should be translated: not from Rome to Canterbury: though neither, we nor they can well tell from whence, but whether: even to every several Parish and Congregation. For, what could all the papists, or the Pope himself have said more, or worse against the Prince, the Church, and the Realm of England; than these out learned Discoursing Brethren have comprehended in these distempered speeches? And now, when they have thus disgorged all this choler, for very anger that they can not have their governing Presbyters and not not preaching Priests, to exercise this power of the keys, and discipline of the Church: they conclude, as it were, slinging away in a chase, from further treatise of their Governors, saying. But we mind not in this place to prosecute our just complaints, nor to inveigh against the abuse of these things, with such vehemency of words, as the worthiness of the matters deserveth: but only in setting forth the plain truth, to give a glimpse by the way of the contrary falsehood. All that our Br say, must be plain truth & just complaints: & all our sayings and doings, are with them contrary falsehoods & abuses; All these foul speeches are but our Br. glimpses by the way. and yet these & all their other so foul speeches, are (forsooth) but their glimpses by the way. What will these fellows do (trow we) when they come directly upon us, with such vehemency of words, as (they say, the worthiness of the matters deserveth? But since they threaten us, & as it were, bid us expect in some other place, where belike they mind to prosecute these complaints & invectives with greater vehemency: Our Br. for warning ● greater ●●●ectiues. we may yet thank them for this courteous, that they give us before hand so fair a warning. Praevisa leviùs feriunt mala. He that is full warned, is half armed. We shall make ourselves ready for the push of their vehemency, so well as God shall give us grace thereto. And thus with this foul blast and threatening sling, they knit up this their Learned Discourse, of their third Tetrarke, these Governors, Presbyters, priests or Elders, that are all in ruling and not teaching. And since they are not hitherto able, to allege better proofs for their Consistory of these Elders: neither yet calvin, Beza, nor Danaeus, (as for other, I account not of them more than these) I hope we shall need to fear the less our brethren's threats, of any greater vehemency to come, that shall be material to the controversy. The argument of the 13 Book. THE 13. Book is of the last tetrarke, called the Deacons, with a Preface, exhorting to relieve the poor: in what sort the Deacons office is perpetual: of the first occasion of ordaining Deacons, for the distribution of temporal goods: of the occasion ceasing, how that part of the office is changeable: how the office had another part remaining to be employed in the attendants on the ministery of the Word and Sacraments: of the examples hereof in the first seven Deacons, namely, Stephen and Philip, with the judgements of Gualther, Aretius, and the Magdeburgenses hereupon: how the part pertaining to distribution of goods, was altered and joined with other functions, and not any peculiar office in many well ordered Churches after the ordaining of Deacons at jerusalem: of our brethren's dividing the office of Deacons in divers parts, and whether the distributers, showers of mercy and helpers, mentioned Rom. 12.1. Cor. 12. were several and distinct offices, with the interpretations of Ambrose, Bullinger, Beza, calvin, and Aretius on the same: of the good politic laws for the poors relief, and the cause that they take not so good effect of the multitude of disordinate walkers and practisers against the State: and whether these devices of Deacons would repress them, or increase them: of the election of Deacons, and of tyranny and confusion: whether the Deacons training up to the ministery, be a profaning of the office, and making the Deacons to be idols, of the divers names and offices of the ancient and holy Churches that Danaeus mentioneth, for the attendance on the poor: of the Collectors for the poor amongst us: of their qualities and difference from Deacons: of the exception of Philip's being an Evangelist, and so a preacher: of Deacons to be as worshipful men as conveniently may be gotten: of the manner of ordaining Deacons: whether the Deacons consisteth only in the ministration to the poor, with the judgements of Beza, calvin, Aretius, and Bullinger for the same: and of the plainer understanding of Ambroses words about the divers kinds of Deacons. The learned discourse. Pa. 100 101. & 102. WE must therefore return to the authority of the Pastor, which he hath joined with the Elders of the Church whereof he is Pastor. The Church hath always had great care of provision for the poor, by which compassion they showed, that they were lively members of the body of Christ, and avoided great reproach of them that were without. For what shame is it, for them that profess, to be all Sons of one Father, and therefore all brethren: yea, they that be members of one body, to suffer their brethren and fellow members to lack necessaries to sustain their temporal life: as though they that communicated in all spiritual graces and blessings, were not worthy to take part of these worldly benefits, at leastwise so farre-foorth as to supply their necessities. Therefore our Saviour Christ, always commendeth brotherly love among his Disciples, to teach us how ready we ought to be to distribute unto the necessities of our brethren, which is a true testimony of our love, declared by his own example. For although he were so poor, that he lived of the alms and liberality of other men: yet of that which was more than served his own necessity, he used to bestow upon the poor, as john. 13.29. to teach them whom he hath blessed with temporal riches, john 13.29. which he refused, to enrich us with heavenly treasures, that they of their superfluity would be content to give to the relief of their poor brethren, which he did not neglect in his extreme poverty: to teach also them that have but mean substance, that they ought not to be excused, but somewhat to contribute unto the necessity of their poor brethren, when he that had nothing at all, but that which was given, even of that bestowed part. WE are now entering into the last office of this our learned brethren's Ecclesiastical tetrarchy, Deacons. Bridges. that is to wit, of their Deacons, Our brethren's exhortation to relieve the poor. with the Discourse of whom, beginning to proceed, they first make an exhortatory preamble, and with milder words, than they left off the treaty of their Governors, more charitably falling to persuasion, to tender and relieve the poor, to the which we may the rather be moved by them, sith of all this that is here set down, there is nothing between us litigious, that might stay us, except we should (by the way) inquire, what Elders here they mean, What Elders here our Brethrens mean. joining in authority with the Pastor, both in the name of Elder, as we have seen, especially by Hyperius and Beza, besides Ambrose among the ancient Fathers, and also joining in assistance (as need or occasion requireth) with the Pastors. As for these governing Ecclesiastical Elders, that are neither teachers nor Deacons, our Brethren have not yet, (in the proper discourse of them) sufficiently proved them, as I take it. But if they mean such Elders, as they term Governors. The order of our brethren's learned Discourse. It makes me somewhat muse at the order of this their Learned Discourse; that beginning to enter into the treaty of the Deacons, they promise to return to the authority of the Pastor, which he hath joined with the Elders of the Church whereof he is a Pastor. Which return being here thus promised, notwithstanding they suddenly make a stop, and leaving that matter, they turn another way. And (the more to stir up men's charity and compassion to relieve the poor) they show what great care the Church hath always had for their provision, with very good persuasions, arguments, and examples, which I greatly commend in them, and wish o●●●s and all men to be accordingly considered, and such as are godly, are so affected to their poor Brethren, and to their abilities do so relieve them: and there are also very good exhortations and provisions by the laws already provided for this purpose. Whereunto, the example (I grant) of Christ, ought most especially to move us, although I dare not say (as here they do) he had nothing at all but that was given, and, that he lived of the alms and liberality of other men, but upon that I will move no controversy. Hereupon, they now descend tó the original institution of the Deacons. Therefore the Apostles in the Primitive Church, The learned disc pa. 102. thought it to be expedient, for the better providing of the poor, that certain men should be appointed of approved godliness and diligence, which should take the special charge of the distribution unto the poor, Acts 6. Act●. 6. These men were called Deacons or Ministers, because they did minister and serve the poor in their necessities, and because the o●●●sion of the ordinance continueth always (as our Saviour Christ hath said) we should always have the poor amongst us, john. 12.8. whereby, john. 12.8. God would exercise our charity. The office of Deacons also is perpetual, therefore the Apostle S. Paul prescribeth what kind of men are meet for that office, 1. Tim. 3.8. and in every well constituted Church, 1. Tim. 3.8. they were ordained accordingly, as Philip. 1.1. Phil. 1.1. True it is, that the Apostles in the Primitive Church thought it to be expedient, Bridges. for the better providing of the poor, that such approved men should be appointed, to take the spiritual charge of the distribution unto them, and that these men for this kind of ministery, were thereupon called Deacons. All this gladly I confess: but when they conclude héereon, that because the occasion of this order continueth always (as our Saviour Christ said) we should always have the poor amongst us, How the office of Deacons is perpetual, & how not. whereby God would exercise our charity, that therefore, the office of the Deacons is perpetual, meaning this office, to distribute unto the poor, in such manner as the Apostles appointed those Deacons to do: that argument of Danaeus, (from whom I think they have it) followeth not, Danaeus in Christ. Isag. part. 3. lib 2. cap. 11. because the having of the poor always, nor the exercise of our charity towards them, was not the only, nor the chiefest occasion, of the original institution of those Deacons. But the chief occasion was this, that whereas the Christians then at jerusalem, in that time of the Primitive Church, The occasion of ordaining Deacons. having all, or the most of them sold their lands or houses, and given them in common to be distributed proportionably, for the greater relief of the poor and needy among them, because the Apostles (at whose feet they laid down the prices of them) could not so well attend to the equal distribution, being so exercised in the ministery of the word, to teach and confirm the people that daily more and more increased, whereby, the widows of the Grecians murmured, that they were neglected in the daily ministering: upon this occasion, saith S. Luke Acts. 6.1. the twelve called the multitude of the Disciples together, Acts 6.1. and said, it is not meet that we should leave the word of God, to minister unto the tables: wherefore (brethren) look ye out among you seven men of honest report, and full of the holy Ghost, and of wisdom, which we may appoint to this business, and we will give ourselves continually to prayer, The first occasion of the Deacons institution ceased: the exercise of their office ceased, and was altered. and to the ministration of the word. So that, this occasion perpetually continuing, this office also of the Deacons is perpetual: but this occasion continuing not, the Christians afterwards retaining the property of their lands and houses, and the poor● being by other godly means provided for, this office of Deaconship, signifying a ministery (especially as they were then in practice) may be employed otherwise, both for the attendance on the Pastors in the ministery of the word and Sacraments, and also to prepare themselves to become fit Pastors afterwards: whereupon, now and then, (as necessity or occasion hath served, and they found to be meet thereto) the ministery also of the word and Sacraments, hath been permitted unto them, in the ancient, yea, in the Primitive Church, and at the very time of their institution, or immediately after, as appeareth both by Stephen and Philip, by whom, we may judge the like of all the residue: for Stephen, so soon as ever he was chosen Deacon, was set upon with divers adversaries in matter of doctrine, who disputed with Stephen, but they were not able to resist the wisdom, and the spirit by the which he spoke, Acts. 6.10. Acts. 6.10. Whereupon, saith Gualther, Gual●●ru● i● Act. 6. Et quamuis de publicis concionibus, etc. And although nothing be spoken of his public Sermons, notwithstanding it is evident by the context of the history, that he had these both often, and effectual, and very serious. Wherefore, by the way and as it were by digression, we may here see, The ofte● preaching of S. Stephen. that the Deacons of the Primitive Church were not altogether estranged from the ministery of the word: but although they were chiefly occupied about the dispensation of the Church's goods, nevertheless, they employed their labour also so far as they might, in the other ministries of the Church, that by this means, according to the sentence of S. Paul, they might get unto themselves a good degree. 1. Tim. 3. what a notable Sermon he made, and what a rare and singular gift of the spirit of God in his preaching he had, the 7. Chapter at large witnesseth. Aretius' upon the 3. verse, Aretius' in Act. 7. ver. 3. of the properties that Peter required in these Deacons, saith: Fourthly, he returneth again to the virtues, to wit, such as are meet for them to have. Full of the holy Ghost: That they should have certain most sure notes of the holy Ghost, The qualities of those Deacons. such as at that time were, to speak with tongs that they had not learned, to work miracles in the name of Christ, to teach boldly, in this teaching to overcome the enemies, and such like. Also, Full of wisdom, that is, that they be provident and wary, lest they cast pearls to any dogs or swine, but teach them that are to be taught, but chiefly, prudence was necessary for the Ecclesiastical dispensation, whereunto they are to be called. And on the 5. verse, Are●ius in Act. 7. ver. 5. of Stephen's disputation with his adversaries, which (saith he) was of the Christian doctrine, he saith: Stephen (no doubt) did execute faithfully and constantly the office of a Deacon, no less than Laurence did afterward under Sextus, and Vincentius under Valerius, who bestowed the treasures of the Church upon the poor. But unto these do come new virtues: first, he is full of faith, that is, of fervency in teaching that faith, etc. The like we read in the eight Chapter following, of Philip, one of the same company of Deacons, whom Aretius calleth the Doctor of the Samaritans: Deacons preached. secondly (saith he) hereunto pertaineth a singular example of Philip, Philip the Deacon call●d the doctor of the Samaritans. who happily instructed the Samaritans. First, here may be considered who that Philip was, for there have been that have thought him to be the Apostle, but two strong arguments are against them in the context: first, that the Apostles were not dispersed, but abode at jerusalem, but Philip was among those that were dispersed, therefore it was not Philip the Apostle. Philip that converted the Samaritans, was not the Apostle, but the Deacon Gual●ier in Act. 8. Moreover, the Apostles only could give the holy Ghost, but Philip could not do it. And hereupon, john & Peter are sent to the Samaritans, wherefore it can not be Philip the Apostle, it is therefore the Deacon, of whom we spoke before, Chap. 6. And Gualther affirming also the same, addeth further. First, he teacheth whose ministry God used in converting Samaria, it was that Philip, not he that was the Apostle, but he that before was reckoned up among the Deacons, as the ancient writers of the Church do testify with one consent, chiefly Epiphanius, writing of Simon and of the Simoniacs: for although the parts of the Deacons were to bear the care of the common goods of the Church, When there waxed less use of dispensing the goods at jerusalem, the Deacons were employed to the ministery of the word. and of the poor, notwithstanding it was withal permitted unto them, to take on them the preaching of the Gospel, if at any time necessity so required, the which we have hitherto seen in Stephen's example. And perhaps, there was not so great use of Deacons at jerusalem, when the Church was dispersed with the tempest of persecution, and therefore they which before dispensed the public goods of the Church, gave themselves wholly to the ministry of the word. Yea, and Paul admonished afterward, that the Deacons by ministering well, should get unto themselves a degree unto a greater function. 1. Tim. 3. The Deacons ministered the Sacram. It pertained to their office of Deaconship. And as the ministration of the Sacraments followeth the preaching of the word, so Philip baptised those whom he had by his preaching converted. Neither is it noted, that they did these things by reason of any other office annexed unto them: but as Gualther noteth very well, that in generally, as they had gifts competent, and occasion convenient, it was not impertinent to their office of Deaconship, so to employ themselves. Whereupon also, the Magdeburgenses note, Centuria 1. lib. 2. cap. 7. pag. 508. saying: Magdeburg. Centuria 1. lib. 2. cap 7. pag. 508. Other were Deacons. The office of these was to minister to the Table at jerusalem, so long as the community of goods was there, The office of the Deac. to teach & minister. Acts. 6. but nevertheless, that they also taught and showed forth signs, appeareth out of Stephen, Acts 6. and Philip, Acts 8.21. and every where in other Churches, it was the office of the Deacons to teach and to minister. And the same Magdeburgenses in the title, Deratione acforma gubernationis, pag. 510. do say: Magdeburg. pag. 510. These were the works in common of the Apostles, and Prophets, Pastors, Doctors, Priests, Deacons. They taught the Church purely and sincerely concerning every of the head points of the christian doctrine, The Deacons order of teaching, excommunicating, and ministering the Sacraments. etc. and that Deacons also taught, appeareth out of the 6. and 8. of the Acts, they interpreted the holy Scriptures, etc. they delivered the Catechism, etc. they did cut the word of truth rightly into the Law and the Gospel, etc. they used the form of sound words in teaching, etc. they used also in teaching a simple kind of speech, etc. they studied to keep the purity of doctrine, etc. they opposed themselves sharply against false teachers and Heretics, and confuted their false opinions. For Stephen, Act. 6. confuted them that were in the synagogue of the Libertines, etc. they preached repentance, that is, they reproved and blamed sinners, for the Apostles, Act. 2.3. and 4. did openly object unto the jews this sin, and for the same reprove them, that they had killed jesus of Nazareth the just and holy one, the son of God, and the Messiah, and Stephen Acts. 7. calleth them murderers, and betrayers of the Messiah, etc. And so they proceed, to Excommunication, to Baptism, to the Supper of the Lord, etc. Whereby it manifestly appeareth, that notwithstanding the foresaid occasion of ordaining the Deacons, to ease the Apostles in the distribution of the Church goods, and attendance on the poor: yet did their office stretch further, and as occasion served, they did also these things, which at that time were proper to the Apostles, & to the Bishops and Pastors that they ordained. And if there had been no other use at all of Deacons, than that aforesaid, upon occasion whereof they were first chosen, except that order of the goods given in common to the Church, to be distributed to every person proportionably, and namely to the poor, had continued, which it did not, that part of the Deacons office might have then ceased, as Gualther noteth well, How that part of the Deacons office that pertained to distributing alms, began to ceas●e. how in the time of the persecution immediately succeeding, it did cease, at what time, they that had the gift thereto, gave themselves to the preaching of the word, & ministering the Sacraments, where Bishops and Pastors wanted: and therefore, where Bishops and Pastors were, it is the more likely, that they ministered in the attendance on them in doing these things: and I see not, but that they may still so do, except our Brethren can persuade the people to such an order for their distribution of their goods in common with themselves unto the poor, as was then used in the Apostles times. And yet even then also, as occasion and fitness of the Deacons may benefit the Church, they may preach and baptise, as Stephen and Philip did: which ministries, The Ecclesiastical offices not so precisely distinguished in the Apostles times. our Brethren make proper only to such, as at the least were Pastors. But in the Apostles times, we see that these ministries were not so precisely distinguished, but that one sometimes might well deal, without note of confusion, even in the function & ministry, that more properly pertained to another. Deacons office altered. 1. Tim. 3.8. Neither is any thing to the contrary, in the testimonies here cited 1. Tim. 3.8. 1. Tim. 3.8. Likewise Deacons must be honest, not double tongued, nor given to much wine, neither to filthy lucre. In which words is nothing to this purpose. But if they had gone but to the very next words in the verse following, they should have found matter sufficient, that Deacons had to do further, then to minister the distribution to the poor, even by Beza his own testimony, as we shall see (God willing) afterward. As for the salutation of S. Paul, Phil. 1.1. to the Bishops and Deacons at Philippos, Phil. 1.1. The Churches in the Apostles time had not all of them Deacons, and yet were well ordered. proveth not that Deacons in every well ordered Church were ordained accordingly. For as in jerusalem itself, the chief and mother Church, there were for a while (until this occasion fell out) no such officers, and yet we can not well say, it was not a well ordered Church during that time: so Act. 14. vers. 23. it is said of Paul and Barnabas, Acts. 14.23. Beza in Act. 14. that Elders are taken for Deacons. when they had ordained with the hand, Elders unto them according to the Church, and had prayed with fastings, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed. Here is no mention at all made of Deacons, except we shall understand the word Elders (as Beza would have it) for Pastors, Deacons, and other Governors of the Church, saying only for proof hereof, for here, as often otherwhere, the name of Presbyter, Priest, or Elder, is generally taken. Neither do we deny, but that it is so taken, and more generally also, in divers places, which showeth, that their understanding of that place of S. Paul, If Elders may be taken for Deacons Act. 14.23. so may they be also taken. 1. Tim. 5.17. the Elders that govern well, 1. Tim. 5.17. are worthy of double honour, especially those that labour in the word and doctrine, which words, if they will needs understand, of two kinds of Elders, distinct in function and office, why may it not be as well there understood for such Deacons, as were ministers of the word and sacraments, as for their imagined governing Elders, that are altogether no teachers? And so doth Hyperius out of Ambrose, (as we have seen before) expound that place, Qui bene praesunt presbyteri. In this place, the term of Presbyter, Priest, or Elder, includeth the reason of office, not of age. But they are called Presbyters, Priests, or Elders, by a general and common name, all they that minister in the Church, the which thing also we have given warning of before. For the Bishop also himself is called a Presbyter, Priest, or Elder, as Ambrose witnesseth. Howbeit, every Presbyter, Priest, or Elder is not a Bishop, of all these therefore his speech is here, that are inferior to the Bishop, whom Ambrose reckoneth up in every City, two Deacons which administer the word and sacraments, and 7. Deacons that minister to the tables, distributing the goods of the Church. Whereby we see all their groundwork faileth, consisting on the expounding that place, for such Governing Elders, that they make to be another distinct and middle function, between Pastors and Deacons. Division of Deacons office. And that these Elders may be well enough understood for Deacons. And also that some Deacons, such as were ●it thereunto, were admitted to the ministery of the word and sacraments: the other were attendants on the Bishop and on the Ministers. Both of whom here Hyperius saith, that S. Ambrose also calleth Deacons. But Elders or Deacons they were all in their sorts attendant chiefly on the ministery of the word: or their selves (as in the end we shall see) the very Ministers and Pastors of it. Now, although in this sense, we may admit here also, Act. 14. Bezaes' interpretation for Elder, to comprehend also those, that properly are called Deacons: yet in this place, I allow rather the judgement of calvin, which we have seen before, that by Elders there are only meant such as were pastoral Elders. Also after the ordaining of the 7. Deacons, this office was divided into divers parts, as necessity showed divers occasions. The learned discourse. Pa. 103 For some were appointed for the collection and distribution of alms, as Rom. 12.8. Rom. 12.8. And some for attending upon the sick & impotent among the poor, as in the same pl●ce, Let him that distributeth, do● it with simplicity; and let him that showeth mercy, do it with cheerfulness. Which kind of deacons, 1. Co. 12.28. are called Helpers: 1. Cor. 12.28. and for the service of this office were appointed divers poor old widows, who as they were maintained by the Church, so they served the Church, attending upon the other poor, who being sick and impotent, had need not only of things necessary, but also of service and attending. 1. Tim. 5.5. 1. Tim. 5.5. This division of the office of Deacons, appeareth not in any of the places here alleged. Our Brethren cited before, Bridges pag. 3.17.33. and 84. thi● testimony Rom. 12.8. for the diversities of divers offices of the ministery. And throughout this their learned Discourse, Our Br. division of the Deacons office. they treat upon them severally, dividing Doctors from Pastors, Pastors from Governors, Governors from Deacons: and so made up their full tetrarchy, by these 4. distinct offices. And still they give one part of this testimony, Rom. 12.8. to every office. To the Doctors, Let him that is a Teacher, attend on his teaching: To the Pastors, Let him that exhorteth, be diligent in his exhortation: To the Governors, Let him that ruleth, do it with diligence. And do they now, when they come to the latter part of the sentence, huddle up these two parts of the sentence remaining, together into one several function of the Deaconship, and make them to be two divers and divided parts of one office: Let him that distributeth, do it with simplicity: & let him that showeth mercy, do it with cheerfulness? divers Interpreters do expound these words generally. He that giveth, in simplicity: He speaketh it (saith Ambrose) unto him that giveth with a good mind, Ambr. in Rom. 12. that he shall ever have helps at hand, the spirit procuring it. Distributers and showers of mercy. So that unto him that giveth simply, there shall be no want: as Solomon saith; He that giveth to the poor, shall not want. He therefore giveth simply, which doth it not in feigning, that men may give him praise: Distributers & showers of mercy taken generally. but that by the same he may obtain to be accepted of God. He that governeth in carefulness: He speaketh of him that taketh the care to rule the Brethren, according to his fidelity, to take watchfulness and authority, that he may do them good in the matter wherein he is careful▪ having fruit in them whom he ruleth. He that hath mercy, in cheerfulness: He saith also, that he which according to his understanding, showeth mercy with a cheerful mind, not as though it were wrong from him against his will, is grounded and strengthened of GOD, so that in this matter he suffereth no weakness, knowing that it is said of Solomon, Do good while thou hast occasion, etc. And in this sort do all the ancient Fathers understand it generally. Bulling. in Rom. 12. In like manner, plainly and simply doth Bullinger expound these words: He now that is set over the works of the poor, or he to whom have happened notable riches, let him do his business simply, that is to say, with greatest diligence & faith without fraud; or else, le him give to them that have need, not for glory, or for subtlety, with hope of obtaining better things: but simply, and without all evil deceit. Furthermore if any, rule or exercise any other ecclesiastical office, or excel in Magistracy: let them administer all things industriously with greatest diligence. Of which thing also, josaphat in the 2. of Paralip. 19 Moses also Exod. 18. & David in his Psalms. But if any be endued with the gift of mercy and pitifulness: let him remember, that a cheerful giver is approved of God. Hereto accordeth the proverb, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. That is, But yet of all gifts, the mind is the best. Again, that excellent saying of Seneca, in his second book De benefic. That is an unthankful good turn, that sticketh long fast between the hands of the giver. Thus saith Bullinger, according with the ancient Fathers. Wherein not only he and they make these 2. to wit, the distribution, & the showing mercy, to general gifts, not distinct offices, & much less, only ecclesiastical: but also the gift of governing, to be a general duty, required of all civil as well as ecclesiastical Governors. And not any such eccl Governors, as our Brethren make the third persons in this their hierarchical tetrarchy. I grant that Beza thinketh otherwise, saying on these words, He that hath mercy: Beza in Ro. 12. This verily seemeth to stretch more largely: but when as Paul treateth of ecclesiastical functions, this cannot fitly enough be taken for the mercy, that all they which have given their name to Christ, are bound to perform. Furthermore, when as he distinguisheth this man from him that distributeth: I assent unto them, divers Interpretations of Ro. 11. which suppose that Paul by a proper kind of speaking, understood by them that have mercy, those that were appointed to care for the poor, such as for the most part were the widows, Act. 6.1. 1. Tim. 5.9. This is but Bezaes' mere supposal, and assent to these or those Interpreters, as he best fancieth, in so indifferent an Interpretation, of different opinions. As for his reason, it is but weak. For though Saint Paul spoke before of some divers functions or offices, or rather of diversities of gifts: The weakness of Bezaes' reason. yet it followeth not of any necessity, that all his words are still to be so understood, either for divers officers, or only for offices and officers ecclesiastical. Notwithstanding, this is clean contrary to these our learned Discoursers, that one office had divers parts of this distribution. Albeit for my part. I like better of these our Discoursers opinion, than of Bezaes', that one ecclesiastical office, might have divers parts thereof. But, that these words are to be only understood of the office of Deacons, and the parts thereof, more than of the other offices: in that point, as these our Brethren agree not with other excellent Writers; so is it again as free for us to dissent here from them. calvin saith on these words, He that giveth, in simplicity: Calvin. in Rom. 12. Out of these latter members we clearly behold, that here is set forth unto us, what is the lawful use of God's gifts. By those that distribute, of whom he speaketh here. He understandeth not them that give of their own, but Deacons, which are over the public goods of the Church to be dispensed. But by those that have mercy; the Widows and other Ministers, that were set to the oversight of tending the sick. For they are 2. divers functions to lay forth things necessary to the poor, and to employ their labour in the handling of them. Peter Martyr saith on these words, He that hath mercy, in cheerfulness: This seemeth to be the office of Widows, & of old men, which were nourished in the Church, to the use, that they might take the care of strangers, and of sick persons. Gualther, calling them Almoners, saith the same: I think that the Apostle speaketh of them, that were peculiarly designed, to exercise the offices of Christian mercy: such were the Widows & the old men, which were nourished in the Church, chief to the end, that they might entertain needy strangers, that they might serve the sick, and be present to any, that had more need of mercy & of others help, than other had. Which place at this day they obtain, that are set over Hospitals, and that serve in them. Olevian also saith on these words: He that hath mercy: It was an other office in the Church distinct from them that administered the Deaconshippe of the poor, which were appointed to serve the poor, the aged and the sick▪ such as for the most part were the widows 1. Tim. 5. Women Deacons. All this, as they herein dissent from the ancient Father's exposition of these words, and from divers of our late no less excellent Writers: so these our learned Brethren herein dissent from them, which make these takers of mercy, to be an other distinct office from the Deacons, and not to be the same office that the Deacons is, being distinguished only in the parts thereof, The Author of the fruitful Ser. upon Rom. 12 pag. 34. Yea, that Brother of ours, which made, (as he termeth it) the fruitful Sermon, upon this very text, doth thus distinguish them: Officers occupied about their other necessary duties, divided into Deacons, rulers, attenders on the poor. And pag. 34. These members are either Doctors to teach, Pastors to exhort, Elders to rule, Deacons to distribute, attenders upon the poor people and the sick: or else, the People and Saints which are taught, exhorted, ruled, and receive alms and relief. These are all, no more, no fewer. These are very resolute speeches: and yet, as clearly as the Author of that Sermon would carry away the matter, he can not resolutely set down, what office these showers of mercy had: but only, that either they were attenders upon the poor people, and the sick; or else, the People and Saints which are taught, exhorted, ruled, and receive alms and relief. What certain office, or officers, are here distinguished: when all the people and Saints which are taught, etc. are comprehended? So that while there is such variety in the judgements, both of the old and new Writers hereupon, & all or the most of them, that our Brethren esteems most, are in this point so clean contrary to this our brethren's learned Discourse: we may the better be borne withal, if we admit not this their division of the Deacons office, into these parts. For then, must we not only have men, but women also to be ordinary and necessary eccl. officers, The eccl. discipline of women Deacons necessary & perpetual by our Brethr. that is to say, Deaconesses, or Deacons. Which term in Greek though Saint Paul use of a woman, Rom. 16.1. saying: I commend unto you Phoebe our Sister, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is a Minister of the Church of Cenchres: yet doth he so little mean that she was a Deacon in that signification, wherein the word Deacon is appropriated to an ecclesiastical office in the Church: that the Geneva translation dare not English it a Deacon, no nor yet a Minister, but a Servant, such as the Widows were, that Saint Paul speaketh of 1. Tim. 5. ver. 9 & 10. But these he calleth widows not Deacons. And he giveth such general rules to Deacons, as are not compatible to Women, and are flat forbidden to those Widows. Let the Deacons (saith he) be the husbands of one wife, and such as can rule their children well, and their own households. 1. Tim. 3.12. But of the Widows he saith: But refuse the younger widows, for when they have begun to wax wanton against Christ, they will marry. 1. Tim. 5.11. To avoid which thing, he said before, ver. 9 Let not a Widow be taken into the number, under 60. year old. But the Deacons have no prescription of their age. Yea, Hospitals. if a young man (as Timothy was) might be an Elder of the word; much more might a Deacon be a young man. The poor and impotent therefore, may be attended upon well enough by other men, as by Almoners, and Masters of Hospitals, and other Widows, and officers, as it is yet in Hospitals and alms-houses, Hospitals & alm● houses although those officers be no ecclesiastical officers, and much less Deacons, in the proper acceptation of the name. But if now this office of Deacon, as here they say, was divided into divers parts, as necessity showed divers occasions: then, the poor, sick & impotent, being otherwise charitably provided for: why may not, (as necessity of occasion likewise serveth) the Deacons be employed unto other parts▪ as the very first Deacons were employed? And as uncertain as we see the exposition is, what gift, or office, or what action, or part of gift or office, What is meant by helpers 1. Cor. 12.28. Aretius' in 1. Cor. 12. is certainly meant by these that showed mercy, in the 12. of the Romans: so is the other testimony, here likewise by our Brethren cited, 1. Cor. 12. ver. 28. as Aretius noteth on the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Helpers: Some interpret it of them that sailed with him, and the loss is only of the ship. But other interpret it of the Church, such as is of Deacons, Widows and Seniors, which either lay out the alms to the poor, or take the care of strangers, & attend on the sick, and the like officers, that take the charge of Hospitals. And as uncertanly saith Bullinger: He said Helpers and Deacons, Bulling. in 1. Cor. 12. to wit, he understood the stewards of the poor, or else all those that help in ecclesiastical businesses. These offices being instituted by the spirit of God, The learned discourse. Pa 104 & 105 for the necessary use of the Church, which use still continueth, ought also to be retained among us. For we see, for want of these offices, what great inconveniences are among us, concerning the poor. For although there be very good politic laws made for the provision of the poor, yet small relief cometh thereby to the poor indeed: at least wise many abuse the relief which they receive, which cometh of this, that there be not in every Church or Congregation, such Deacons as tripoli Ghost hath appointed, which should take a special care, and employ a great diligence, for the provision of the poor: not only some to gather & distribute, but also to see it well employed on the poor, and to employ the poor, that live of the alms of the Church, to the relief of their fellow poor, which are more impotent than ●hey, as it was used in the Primitive Church. And above all things to beware of them that walk disorderly, and labour not, if they be able. Of which kind of people, when there is so great multitude in this land, that they do even overflow the Countries, and have been known to be practisers of great matters against the State: it is marvel, that neither by Politic, nor by Ecclesiastical law, Politic laws for the poor. they are brought into order, and set to labour, or else (as S. Paul prescribeth) so that they should not eat, until they be willing to labour. 2. Thess. 3 10. Bridges. I deny not the retaining still among us the office of Deacons, nor deny that the office was instituted by the spirit of God, for the necessary use of the Church; How some part of the Deacons office ceaseth. either restraining the use to that present state of the Church then, or understanding necessary, for expedient and convenient. But I deny, that that necessary use which then was the occasion thereof, doth in all his parts still continue. Which if it do not, (as we have seen the proof,) or continue but in part: then may this office, if not cease, yet continue but in part. And that use which was necessary then, ceasing afterward, and so not necessary: some part of the office may cease also. The inconveniences concerning the poor. As for the inconveniences among us concerning the poor, they arise not of this, that the Deacons are not employed to the care of them: but on other occasions, which would still fall out, howsoever the Deacons were employed, except there be other helps for it, than the Deacons are able to supply. The good Politic Laws for the provision of the poor. They confess, there be very good Politic Laws made for the provision of the poor. If these Politic laws be very good: then is there no such necessary use, to employ the Deacons thereunto. Neither do these very good Politic laws, commit the disposing of the poors provision unto the Deacons. And how then can they be very good laws, if it were necessary by God's law, that the Deacons should always dispose the provisions for the poor? They must therefore either eat this word, and say, the Laws are not very good: or else, that this provision for the poor, doth not so necessarily appertain unto the Deacons. Yet (say they) small relief cometh thereby to the poor indeed, at least wise many abuse the relief which they receive. Why the laws for the poors provision being good, the poor are smallly relieved by them. And I am of the same opinion. But again, whereof cometh this? Which (say they) cometh of this, that there be not in every Church or Congregation, such Deacons as the holy Ghost hath appointed, which should take a special care, & employ a great diligence for the provision of the poor. It is very true, that where such Deacons are, as the holy Ghost hath appointed, and that they be employed to this care: they would for their parts, use great diligence, and do all that they can to remedy these inconveniences. Nevertheless, sith it hath pleased the holy Ghost also, to give us Christian Princes, under whom we need no such joining of our goods in community, as than they did, but every one enjoy his own in propriety: and, by whose authority, very good laws and provisions for the poor, (as is here confessed) be already, or may be made, and officers appointed in that behalf: as the inconveniences arise and are espied, they may still by the same authority be reform, as well, 〈◊〉 walkers. or better than now by the Deacons, in this alteration of the occasion, to the making of them. For so that the poor be well provided for, if the Deacons be employed to the attendance on more principal things: what hurt is this? And if the good Laws, be well executed, the Deacons attendance shall not need: if they be not well executed, If the good laws he well executed the Deacons attendance shall not need. And if they be not executed, the Deacons attendance will not help it. the Deacons attendance can not help. Let the good provision have good execution, and the Deacons may be better employed: else lay not the fault on the employing the Deacons, but on the not executing of the good Laws. Otherwise, though the Deacons were employed only to the attendance on the poor: yet might these great inconveniences, and greater arise, and increase among us. Neither were all the Deacons very good, among those that were first chosen at jerusalem. Yea, though the Deacons to be chosen, were every one of them never so good: yet must these inconveniences be helped, not only by the officers that should distribute the alms; but as much by the persons that should give the alms, especially by them that are in authority to make good laws and provisions for the matter. And let this be provided, that with the very good Politic Laws, which either be made, or may be made, the people also may be made willing, ready and liberal to contribute; and then, for appointing of fit officers, to be Collectors and Distributers of the contributions, it will not be so great a matter. But where they say, It was used in the Primitive Church, to employ not only the alms on the poor: but also employ the poor, The very maintenance of these deacons, would take up a great part of the pores relief. that live of the alms of the Church, to the relief of their fellow poor, which are more impotent than they: these speeches would have been made more plain, and some proof alleged. In the mean season, were it not better to have these officers, that should take such a special care, & employ so great diligence for the provision of the poor, to be such, as should not be chargeable to the Church themselves: than such, as must make the collecting and distributing, to be their whole and only function, and so must also their selves, (as good reason is) for their labour and reward, be altogether maintained on the charges or alms of the Church: whereby the less remaineth, to be employed on the poors relief. But they (not so much regarding this) give a strait charge unto these their Deacons, Multitudes of walkers disorderly. above all things to beware of them that walk disorderly, and labour not if they able: and withal, they complain of so great multitudes of such kind of people in this land, that they do even ouer-flowe the Countries, and have been known to be practisers of great matters against the State. If they mean, such as are rogues, vagabonds, and idle beggars: we grant the multitude is too great, Practisers against the State. and yet they have been, and are méetelie well weeded out. But, for the Deacons to beware that they bestow not the Church's alms on them; would be a forrie help unto the matter, The Deacons taking heed would little help except they might punish. except the Deacons might also have the Law in their hands to punish them. But the governing Elders permit not this unto the Deacons, but retain it to themselves, as a matter pertaining to government and discipline. Well, yet whosoever shall be the punishers: great reason it is, that such idle beggars, & loitering rogues should be repressed, especially such as shall be found to be practisers against the State, either of great or little matters. But do these our learned discoursing Brethren find fault with the poor rogues, for practising great matters against the State? How can they condemn them of this crime, and their selves blush not? Is not the government of Ecclesiastical matters, matter of State, and great matter too? How our Br. can for shame speak against them that practise great matters against the State. And are not they Practisers and Discoursers against the Bishops and Prelates, against the Ecclesiastical laws established, against the Common book, yea, against the supreme government of her Majesty in the authorizing of these things? And can they for very shame open their mouths against the poor snakes, those loitering beggars; their selves being practisers of so great matters, and so direct against the State? Do they think they may practise these great matters, better than the other; because the other are poorer, and they are greater and richer? I think the more danger to the State, the greater and the richer that they be? And I think, if these Elderships and Deaconries in every Congregation were set up: Greater danger by these devices of more practisers in State matters and not labourers in their callings. for one loiterer that we are now pestered withal, or for one poor man that we now have, or for one practiser against the State: we might fear the breeding of greater multitudes in this land. For State matters we may guess by these Discoursers; as for the loitering poor, that for sook the labour of their vocations, while they have busied themselves overmuch in these State matters, a great many already have felt the experience, of whom myself know divers, that poor zealous souls, have brought a shilling not to nine pence (as they say) but to no pence, and would be full glad now, in place of governing Seniors, to be made Deacons, that they might become Collectors, and distribute some share to themselves of the Church goods, having spent their own in idleness, if not on other as ill unthriftiness. It is marvel (they say) that neither by Politic nor Ecclesiastical law they are brought into order, and set to labour. And is it not as much marvel, that they should think to bring them into order by a new devise, without all Politic & Ecclesiastical Law? Yea, it is as much marvel, that neither by Politic nor by Ecclesiastical Law, these learned Discoursers, neither bring themselves, nor are brought into order, to refrain these their most dangerous practices against the State, Bringing such persons to order. and against all Politic and Ecclesiastical law and order. verily (as Saint Paul prescribeth) that those loiterers should not eat, until they be willing to labour, 2. Thess. 3. So should not these Discoursers, Our Br. marvel that such persons can by no Law be brought into order. for all their vaunt of learning, be suffered to write and speak in this unorderly order, what they list to prescribe, until they could bring better proves for their devices, or be brought to live in better order, under the politic and eccl. laws, according as the law of God prescribeth. But now to return to the election of Deacons. Concerning the form of choosing of Deacons, we may read at large. Act. 6. The learned disc. Pa. 105 106. & 107 That they were chosen by consent of the whole Church, and had the approbation of the Apostles. And because we may not think there was any confusion in that blessed company, we must needs confess, that which hath been heretofore declared, that there were even in that Assembly and first Church at jerusalem, certain Elders appointed, which in the name and by the consent of the rest, had the disposition of such matters: as appeareth by many places of the Acts of the Apostles, where the Elders are named with the Apostles: as Acts. 15.4.12. etc. But especially concerning this matter, of the distribution unto the poor, we read, that when the Church of Antiochia, was so well disposed, as to make a Collection to be sent unto the poor Brethren, that dwelled in jury, they sent unto the Elders, by the hands of Barnabas and Saul, Act. 11.30. Act. 11.30. By which it appeareth, that the Elders had the dispotion and appointing of such, as should distribute it unto the Congregation, which were the Deacons. For it is agreeable to reason, that he that should do any service in the name of all, should be chosen and approved by the consent of all. For the regiment of the Church, as it ought to be farthest off from all tyranny: so ought it to be as far from confusion and disorder. Tyranny is avoided, when no one man (contrary to the ordinance of Christ) shall presume to do any thing in the Church, without the advise and consent of others, that be godly and wise, and authorized by the consent of the Church: confusion is prevented, by the grave counsel and orderly assembly of Elders, unto whom the Church hath committed her authority. Concerning the form of choosing Deacons, we find no rule, Bridges. and but this one example, at the first institution of them, Act. 6. I grant, The form of choosing Deacons. The form that our Br. prescribe different from the form that was first used Act. 6. that those 7. first Deacons, (on the occasion cited in the text) were chosen, not only by the motion of the Apostles, but by the looking out and choosing, not by the consent only of the whole multitude. Howbeit, that none should afterward be chosen, except in that form, to wit, for the Bishops or pastoral Elders succeeding the Apostles, to propound the matter to the whole multitude, and then the whole multitude to look out among themselves sit persons, Election of Deacons. and so to choose them to be Deacons: neither the text hath any such prescription of that form, The reason to suppose the election was made by a Consistory of Elders. nor it seemeth that our Brethren would have them to be so chosen, but only by the Pastors & Consistore of their governing Elders. And what reason moveth them hereunto? Forsooth, because we may not think, there was any confusion in that blessed company. Is not this rather a reason to the contrary, that because the company was so blessed, and that there was no confusion among them: therefore that company even of the whole multitude (as the text plainly saith) might the better look about them, and so choose them? So that there is no necessity, that we must needs confess that (which here they say) hath been before declared, We may with as good reason var●e from our B. fo●m as our Br ●arie from the plain scripture. but hath never yet by them been proved, that there were even in that assembly, and first Church at jerusalem, certain Elders appointed, which in the name and by the consent of the rest, had the disposition of such matters. Although we deny not, but that there were even in that assembly certain Elders among them. Yet for this matter, the text is so plain, that they also must needs confess (except needless they will writhe the text) that the whole multitude themselves, (not certain Elders in the name and by the consent of the rest, did choose those 7. first Deacons. Sith therefore, this election of Deacons to be made by such Seniors as our Brethren urge, is not according to this first example, and they allege none other for this matter: we are so much the easilier acquittted, that if it be lawful for them to vary from this only example of the whole multitudes election: then may we also vary from the election of such governing and not teaching Elders, of which we have no example at all in the Scripture, for Deacons elections. The examples that our Br. allege are nothing for them. As for the example that here they allege, Act. 15. besides that we have proved out of calvin, that it is all for Elders meddling with the word: it is nothing for the election of Deacons. Neither yet that example of the collection for the poor at jerusalem made in Antiochia, and sent unto the Elders, by the hands of Barnabas and Saul. Act. 11. ver. 20. Both Barnabas and Saul were Elders of the Word, and (as we have showed out of calvin) so were the Elders at jerusalem also. Those (saith he) are called Elders, in whose hands the government of the Church was, among whom, the Apostles were chief. Which Elders, that they dealt with the controversies of doctrine, & therein were examples unto all good Pastors, we have seen at large, on this very example that our Brethren here allege, Act. 15. And this, collection for the poor, Act. 11. is so little tied to the Deacons necessary distribution, even where these 7 Deacons were first appointed: that the Elders also might distribute it, to whom it was sent. For, it appeareth not hereby (of any necessity) that the Elders were to read liver it to the Deacons to be distributed unto the Congregation. Yea, Tyranny. it appeareth so little, that Beza is feign here to drive the name of Elders, to Deacons. So that if here the Elders and the Deacons are all one, then do not our Brethren truly say, that the Elders had the disposition and appointing of such, as should distribute it unto the Congregation, which were the Deacons. As concerning the reason that they allege; For, it is agreeable to reason, that he that should do any service in the name of all, The weakness of our Br. 2. reason from doing service in the name of all. should be chosen and approved by the consent of all: I hold well with it, that it is agreeable to reason, but not always, and in every public office, necessary, especially that he should not be chosen otherwise, but by the consent of all, in whose name he should do any service. For although the Deacon, in collecting and distributing, or attending on the poor, or on the Minister, or ministery of the Word and Sacraments, do not service in the name of all, and so is to be acquitted of this reason: yet, imagine he did his service in the name of all, comprehending by all, not the Seniors only, but jointly or severally every one: if it be agreeable to reason, that he that should do any service in the name of all, should be chosen & approved by the consent of all: and why then should he be chosen and approved by the consent of a few Seniors, whereas he should be chosen by the consent of all? If they say, by all, they mean not every one, but the greater or better part, and that the greater or better part must give their consent unto the Seniors: although this be agreeable to reason, that where election is to be made, the party eligible may be elected by the greater and better part, though it be so far from the consent of all, that within one, the one half dissent from his election, and yet it may be called the consent of all, because the greater and better part drowneth the other: nevertheless, why may not all, or the greatest part, The consent of the greater part. for the avoiding of factions in elections, compromit their consents unto some one approved man among them, as well as unto some few men among them, to make these officers in their names, as we see the like is done in many other offices in the Commonweal. But as an exception against this, they say: For, the regiment of the Church, as it ought to be farthest from all tyranny, so it ought to be as far from confusion and disorder. This again I grant them. But do they make this to be tyranny, if any one man being a lawful public officer & Governor, Our Breath. wrong and dangerous definition of tyranny. do any thing himself by virtue of his office, wherein he joineth not all, or a number of other in the name of all, in joint authority of that action with him? If they count this tyranny, they will make all the Apostles tyrants. But they say it is tyranny, when one man contrary to the ordinance of Christ, shall presume to do any thing in the Church, without the advise of others that be godly & wise, & authorized by the consent of the Church. If he do it contrary to the ordinance of Christ, they say somewhat to the purpose. But where prove they this ordinance of Christ, that a Bishop or a Pastor, that a Prince or a Magistrate (for these words of theirs stretch generally, to the doing of any thing in the Church by any one man, though it be not Church matters, nor he an Ecclesiastical person, yet if he do it not only without the advise, but though with the advise, yet without the consent, or though with the consent, yet without the authorizing of the Church, that then it is tyranny:) they have not yet showed any such ordinance of Christ. As for the words of Christ that they have alleged, Math. 18. imply no such ordinance, (as we have seen) and should be much wrested from the matters that he there speaketh of, to all things that should be done in the Church. This therefore is too lavishly cast forth, and would not only overthrow in Ecclesiastical matters all elections and constitutions: but the very preaching and administration of the Sacraments, besides the power and authority of all Christian Princes, in doing many other civil actions, The overthrow not only of the B but of the Prince's state done in the Church, though not Church matters, that if any one man shall presume to do any thing in the Church, if they were not authorized by the people, or did the same without the advise, yea, not authorized by the consent of the Church (understanding by the Church, an assembly of Seniors in the people's name) they were all but tyrants, and all their doings were mere tyranny. Were not all Christian Princes, by these rash words, brought to as hard straits, as the poor Bishops? As for confusion on the other side, is prevented (they say) by the grave counsel and orderly assemblies of Elders, Prevention of confusion. unto whom the Church hath committed her authority. And may it not be prevented as well, & perhaps much better in some estates, parts, and cases of the Church, if the Church (which withal she may as eas●lie do) committed her authority in these things, to some one grave and godly person, as to some few or many persons: as when a whole Realm choose one to do many actions for them, is this tyranny? And may not dissension and confusion arise among an assembly of Elders also? Yea, may not confusion arise in the Church about the committing of this authority unto this assembly, and about the choosing of them? yea, and tyranny also when they are chosen. For tyranny is not always the misgovernment of one: but now and then of more, and of an assembly also. As the 30 Tyrants in Athens, and the 10: at Rome, declared the experience. And the Regiment called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 even the government of a few, though in name distinguished from Tyrannis, yet in effect may be all one, if not far the worse the more Tyrants there be: but the people's confusion worst of all. And verily, The Deacons training to the Ministry. we may as well fear a tyranny in these Seniors governing and not teaching, or a confusion among them, & a ready way to great confusion and division between themselves, or between them and the people, or among the people for them: than we need fear any tyranny in a godly and wise, either Prince or Bishop, or any confusion or disorder in the people, that are obedient to their wise and godly Government. By this it may easily appear, The learned disc. Pa. 107 & 108 what great default there is in our Church, where those that are said to be ordained Deacons, never purpose in their life to execute any part of a Deacons office: neither are chosen for that end: but only that within a short time after, they may be made Priests or Ministers, nothing in the world differing from the superstition of Popery: where the office of Deacons, was conferred only as a step unto Priesthood. As though it were necessary, that every one which is ordained an Elder, should first be a Deacon, and yet when he is made a Deacon, he is but an Idol, yea scarce an Idol of a Deacon, having no resemblance at all unto a Deacon indeed, but that he is a man. This profaning of God's institution, God will not always suffer unpunished, especially when it is not maintained of ignorance or infirmity, but defended against knowledge, and upon wilfulness. Our Brethren complaining of the great default in our Church for Deacons, should not their selves commit so great a fault, Bridges as to burden them all in general, with so apparent an untruth; that those that are said to be ordained Deacons, never purpose in their life to execute any part of a Deacons office▪ neither are chosen for that end. For, although there be not now such use of this office, concerning the distribution of goods to the poor, and attendance on the tables, as was then in use: yet, The purpose of the Deacon to be trained up to the ministery of the word is no praphaning of the office seeing that Stephen can not be said to have gone beyond the bounds of his office in preaching the word, being but a Deacon, (for, other public Ecclesiastical function, we read of none that he had, either before or after:) if he than that is now made a Deacon, have the purpose (as many have) by the grace of God, to become afterward a Preacher or Minister of the word, and in the mean time, purpose withal for a while, to give his attendance on the Ministers, that they may the better employ themselves in the ministery of the word of, and their selves learn to become the readier to be made Pastors: can it be truly said of these, that they never purposed in their life to execute any part of a Deacons office, neither are chosen for that end? But they say, this differeth nothing in the world from the superstition of Popery, where the office of Deacons was conferred only as a step unto Preesthood. Deacons Idols. That this was not Popery (understanding Priesthood, not as the adversaries understand it, for a Sacrificing ministery) although we have seen sufficient proof out of Gualther, Aretius, the Magdeburgenses, and Hyperius out of Ambrose, that teaching and ministering the word and Sacraments, (as the parties were able, and occasion served) was a part also of the Deacons office: notwithstanding, let us here see further, what Kemnitius saith thereon. Kemnitius 2. p●●t. exa i●. trident. Concil. de sacr ordin. super Can. 2. And because (saith he) the Apostles did afterward, take out of the Deacons, into the ministery of teaching, those that were tried, as Stephen & Philip: it is gathered, that this is the use also of these degrees or orders, that they should be prepared and tried before in the lesser, that afterward the more weighty offices of the ministery, might the safelier and with more profit be commended unto them. And this is that which Paul saith, 1. Tim. 3. Let them be first tried, and so minister. And again, They that in the Deaconship have ministered well, shall get unto themselves a good degree. Thus notably saith Kemnitius even in confuting the Popery that was used in the abuse of this office. This therefore can not be called Popery, nor aught to be misliked, to make it one end, and that an excellent end and purpose of making Deacons, to be a step unto the Priesthood or Eldership in the Word and Sacraments. And so (understanding necessary, for convenient or expedient) it may be well avouched, that it is necessary, that every one which is ordained a Priest or pastoral Elder, should first be a Deacon. The words of our Brethren following, And yet when he is made a Deacon, Our Br. calling of Deacons Idols. he is but an Idol, yea scarce an Idol of a Deacon, having no resemblance at all unto a Deacon indeed, but that he is a man: are but words of passion, which the appearance of the truth, yea, the contradiction in the words themselves, do sufficiently confute. For, if he be made a Deacon, than he is a Deacon, or else he is not made a Deacon. And how is he become an Idol? Is there any Idolatry committed unto him? Or, whereof is he an Idol? They say, he is scarce an Idol of a Deacon. Do they mean, by scarce an Idol, that he is not an Idol? For, quod vix fit, non fit. Or, that he is somewhat an Idol of a Deacon? But how is he any part an Idol of a Deacon, if he have not indeed so much as any resemblance at all unto a Deacon, but that he is a man? What, and are all men Idols too? But as though there were herein a great profaning of God's Institution: God's institution of Deacons not profaned. they tell us, how God will not suffer it unpunished, especially when it is not maintained of ignorance or infirmity, but defended against knowledge, and upon wilfulness. They should have first proved, that we profane God's institution of the Deacons office, & then brotherly admonish us of these threats. God be praised, Deacons instirution not profaned. considering the state and times of the Church now, our use of this office is not profane, but holy. If any profane it, it is a personal, not a real profanation. So did judas profane the Apostleship, and Nicholas the Deaconship. We using it no worse, than to the end and purpose, to make it a trial and preparative, or as they term it, a step unto the Priesthood, or Eldership of the Word: for any thing that they allege to the contrary, we need so little fear their threats of God's punishment in this behalf, that we rather hope in God, to continue it with his favour & blessing. Nevertheless, if any error can be showed and proved; for my part, I may err of ignorance and infirmity, but by God's grace, I will defend none against knowledge & upon wilfulness, so it be clearly proved out of the word of God, not of men, be they never so famous. For if they bring men, as calvin, Beza, Danaeus, etc. Whom I confess, in all thankfulness, to be in many and great things, most singular instruments of God's glory, in this our age: yet (as we have seen) we may well oppose them to their own selves, or as easily reject them, as admit them, alleging not the scripture itself, but their only interpretation of it, except they firmly prove their interpretation. Now on these slender premises, our Br. very loosel●e conclude, saying: Therefore, the Collectors are more like to Deacons a great deal, The learned disc. Pa. 108 109.110. than those that the Bishops make Deacons. For, first they have after a sort, election of the Church, whereas the other have but the approbation of one man. And secondly, they gather and distribute the common alms unto the poor, which the other never think of. But yet we may not allow them for lawful Deacons indeed, because they are not always endued with such qualities, as the Apostle requireth 1. Tim. 2. 1. Tim. 2. For they ought to be men of good estimation in the Church, full of the holy Ghost, and of wisdom that should be chosen. Act. 6. For, as it is an office of good credire, so ought the person to be of good reputation. Therefore saith Saint Paul, that those Deacons that Minister well, 1. Tim. 3.13. do get unto themselves a good degree, and great liberty in the faith, which is in Christ jesus. Insomuch, that Saint Paul himself doth salute in special words the Deacons, next to the Bishops or overseers in the Church of Philippi. We read also what worthy men were chosen to be the first Deacons: as Stephen the firs● Martyr, and Philip which afterward was an Evangelist, Philip. 1.1. when the Church was dispersed through the persecution raised about Stephen. So that every ignorant contemptible person, is not to be allowed unto this office: but as godly, wise, and worshipful, as may conveniently be found in the congregation, may not think themselves too good to minister unto Christ, Collectors. in his members, and in the name of the Church. The election also of our Collectors, is too profane for so holy an office. We may read in the History of the Acts, Act. 6. with what gravity, Act. 6. reverence, and religiousness, the Apostles ordained Deacons, with prayer and imposition of hands. For these and such like causes, although the ordinary Collectors have some resemblance, with the Deaconship of the Church: yet we can not in all points allow them for Deacons: whose office truly consisteth only in ministration to the poor, as we have showed, in that they be Deacons. Bridges. If the Collectors be more like to Deacons, and that a great deal, than those that the Bishops make Deacons: then have our Brethren less cause to find fault, The likening the collectors to the Doctors that not only they want Deacons, but they want those also, that are any thing like, but have no resemblance at all unto them. And yet, let them take heed of that they said right now, of Gods punishing the prohaning of his Institution, resembling it thus to a profane office. I speak in comparison of Deacons, though we have no other parts thereof, but these before mentioned. And if that part of the Deacons office, for great and good considerations, according ●s the State of things are now under Christian Princes, & men's disposition in giving alms, be committed to those whom usually we term Collectors & Church wardens: what offence is this? So that, the poor may be the better provided for: and the ministery, and those that should be tried and prepared thereunto, be less troubled and hindered with such collections and distributions: and if we retain the name of Deacons, for those that exercise themselves in the one part, of this attendance, trial, and preparance, to the ministery of the word and Sacraments, and use not the name of Deacon in these Collectors, or the like Officers: is this such a matter? Danaeus in his Christian Introduction, writing of Deacons, telleth how those that were first called Deacons: Danaeus in Christ. Isag. part. lib. 2. cap. 11. were afterward called Proctors of the poor. Sozom. lib. 8. cap. 12. and Stewards. Chalcedon. Council, cap. 25. and 26. But afterwards there were divers sorts of these, according to the divers manner of things, and of the poor, to whom they were deputed. Some therefore were called Nosotrophi, the nourishers of the sick: other, Orphanotrophi, the nourishers of the fatherless: other, Gerontotrophi, the nourishers of the aged: other were called, Oeconomi, Stewards or Bailiffs, The office of Deacons altered by the holy ancient Church. as appeareth, Ex titulo de sac●●sanctu● Ecclesijs, & de Episcopis & Clericis lib. 1. codicis justiniani. If therefore, the holy Churches, Bishops, and Clerks, did in those days, convert these Deacons into those offices, and leaving the name of Deacons, gave them these peculiar names, according to their peculiar charges and offices: what great matter is it now, Alteration of Deacons. if these matters for collecting and distributing the alms for the poor, and the attendants also on the poor, which (as Danaeus saith) were called Parabolani, which were chosen to cure the diseased body of the poor weak ones, be appointed in stead of the Deacons, to such and to the like officers? As for the election of the Deacons, whether it be ●one by all, many, few, or one, it is not of the substance of the office. Howbeit, The election of the Deacons. Collectors not allowed for Deacons. though our Brethren think herein, these Collectors to be more like the first Deacons, yet they allow them not for lawful Deacons in deed. No more do we, although some part of the office and business that was then, the Deacons be now by the foresaid Canons of the holy Churches, the Bishops, and the Clergy, and by the Imperial sanctions, and also by the laws and laudable customs of this our Realm, committed to such persons and officers as we call Collectors, or by other names. But what reason allege our Brethren, for their disallowing of them? because (say they) they are not always endued with such qualities as the Apostle requireth, 1. Tim. 3. Our brethren's reason of disallowing the the Collectors to provide for the poor. This reason is not sufficient from the qualities of the gifts and habits of the mind, to the qualities of the offices, and functions of the persons. F●● though the Apostle require, and they their selves ought to be endued with all such qualities of the mind, as are requisite to the quality of the office: yet, if any be an hypocrite, and deceive them that chose him, rather on hope or appearance, then on knowledge, as the Apostles, and all the Christians were deceived in Nicholas (as it is constantly reported) yet was he (being not so endued) as much a Deacon and officer in the nature of the office, as was Stephen, and Philip, and the rest, that were so endued. Yea, judas was a very Apostle, whom Christ knew to be a Devil, and yet he chose and made him an Apostle: and if such horrible vices be no privation of the offence of these offices, till they be as actually deprived, as they were first interessed: much less may we say, that a man is not a lawful officer, The difference between the essence of the office and duty of the officer. The gifts of the Deacons. if he be not always endued with such qualities, as the Apostle requireth: for, the Apostle requireth those qualities, not so much in respect of the essence of the office, as the duty of the officer. They say, the Deacons ought to be men of good estimation in the Church, full of the holy Ghost, and of wisdom, that should be chosen. Acts 6. for as it is an office of good credit, so ought the person to be of good reputation. To this I agree, understanding these words, Full of the holy Ghost, according to the measure of the holy Ghosts gifts, answerable to our time. As for the wisdom and knowledge that both Peter and Paul require in them, was not only about the dispensation of worldly goods, but much more about the mystery of the faith, that as need and occasion served, The Deacons qualities. they might dispense the same. But our Brethren allege this against the Collectors for the poor, as though they were unwise and contemptible persons, The defaming of the Collectors for the poor. either of none, or of no good estimation, and therefore no Deacons. Though we allow not such persons to be Deacons, nor so much to be Collectors for the poor, yet can we no more allow of these contemptible speeches to be thus generally bestowed on the office of the poor Collectors, if they were not of good credit in the Church, the Church would not, or should not credit them to receive the Collections, neither can we allow of their argument. If ye have judgements saith Saint Paul in matters pertaining to this life, 1. Cor. 6. appoint them that are contemptible persons in the Church, and if contemptible persons may be appointed judges in matters pertaining to this life, when our Brethren limit the Deacons office only to the Collection and distribution of the goods and alms for the poor, How a contemptible person may be a Collector for the poor. and attendance on the sick and impotent persons, which are all matters pertaining to this life, why may not a poor contemptible man, if of honest conversation, though of small reputation or estimation in respect of worshipful calling or wealth, for S. Paul meaneth not by contemptible, a man for unworthiness deserving to be contemned, be as well a Deacon, that is, a minister or servant to collect and distribute these things, as to be a judge of them? And here our Brethren allege that very sentence, 1. Tim. 3.13. which we have seen out of so many Protestant interpreters, 1. Tim. 3.13. how it serveth to prove that the office of Deacons was not only for collection and distribution of alms, or attendance on the poor, but also a trial and preparative to the higher calling of the Pastorship, as God willing, we shall yet further see anon. The other testimony here cited, Phil. 1. vers. 1. insomuch that S. Paul himself doth salute in special words the Deacons, Phil. 1.1. next to the Bishops or overseers in the Church of Philippi, is nothing against us, but much against themselves. Have not they alleged this testimony, pag. 24. for Pastoral Elders? and how chance then that they place their governing Elders, next these Pastoral Elders, that they call Bishops, and not rather the Deacons before them, confessing themselves, that S. Paul doth salute them in special words next to the Bishops? had they rather follow the order of Danaeus in placing the Deacons, than the order of Beza? if they had, how chance they prefer in their tetrarchy, the Governors before them, and place not the Deacons also next the Bishops? What? and will they now recant, and with Beza make their governors Bishops? what constancy, and what order is in these things? The examples also of Stephen and Philip, are both against them, whom we confess to be worthy men, and that none but worthy men are worthy to be chosen Deacons, if it fall out otherwise, Exception of Evangelists. it is in that defect, wherein, if very Apostles themselves were deceived (as it is said of Nicholas the convert, and afterward a pervert) much more may other be deceived, being nothing comparable to the Apostles, and hypocrites being more cunning now, then Nicholas then was, to nicholl and cousin even the most watchful persons. But (as we have showed) Stephen the first Martyr was a preacher of the word, and Philip ministered the sacrament of Baptism. Stephen and Philip preachers and minister's of the Sacraments. Exception of Stephen's evangelistship. But they except against Philip, that he was afterward an Evangelist. And why do they not except it as well for Stephen, as for Philip? I am sure, if they could allege but the like testimony for Stephen, as here they snatch at for Philip, we should be sure to hear of it. But they can not prove that ever Stephen was an Evangelist, understanding the word, for a distinct function or office. But if Stephen might preach, and of consequence, minister the Sacraments, why might not all the residue of the Deacons preach as lawfully as Stephen, though we should except Philip as an Evangelist? and yet it was no more debar in him, then in Stephen, or in the other. For if Stephen might preach, being no Evangelist, but only a Deacon, why might not Philip too, were he Evangelist, or not. So that to make an exception, by reason of his being an Evangelist, were but a sophistical evasion. And yet, if we shall examine the matter better, I think it will be overhard for them to justify these words: Philip, which afterward was an Evangelist, when the Church was dispersed, Whether Philip wer● an Evangelist when he first preached and baptised. through the persecution raised about Stephen. Can they prove that he was an Evangelist then? In deed it appeareth, Acts 21. verse 8. that he was an Evangelist, and entering (saith Luke) into the house of Philip the Evangelist, which was one of the seven, we abode with him, but this was many years after that time, when the Church was dispersed through the persecution raised about Stephen: but this Philips preaching and baptizing, was immediately after that persecution, for so saith Luke, Acts 8. verse 1. etc. And at that day, there was a great persecution raised against the Church, Acts 8. which was at jerusalem, therefore they were all scattered abroad throughout all the Regions of judaea and Samaria, except the Apostles, and religious men dressed Stephen together, and they mourned sore for him: but Saul made havoc of the Church, and entering into houses, and drawing thence men and women, he cast them into prison, and they being dispersed, went about preaching the word of God, and when Philip came into the City of Samaria, he preached Christ unto them. Whereby it is manifest, that upon that Persecution, Philip was one of them that being so dispersed, presently fell to Preaching. Philip Evangelist. And here upon saith calvin, verse 5. Luke said, that they all preached the word of God, now he maketh mention of Philip alone, both because his preaching was more fruitful & effectual, than the preaching of the rest, etc. Who the rest were, (that Luke saith, were all scattered abroad, and being dispersed, went about preaching, except the Apostles:) Luke telleth not, but the name all, comprehendeth (no doubt) besides other that were Elders of the word, the other Deacons also that were Philip's fellows. As for Philip's evangelistship, the text, Acts 21.8. doth not infer any necessity, that he was Deacon and Evangelist both together at one time, which being admitted, notwithstanding is not material, except to confute our Brethren further, that these offices are not so distinct, but that they may be both at once in one man, without confusion. Howbeit, understanding it as calvin noteth thereon: calvin on Act. 8. by this we may easily gather (saith he) that that Deaconship was an office which continued but for a time, because otherwise it had not been lawful for Philip to forsake jerusalem, and to go to Caesarea: and in this place he is sent before us, not as a voluntary forsaker of his office, but as one to whom a greater and more excellent charge was committed. The Evangelists in my judgement, were in the midst between Apostles and Doctors, for it was a function next to the Apostles, Philip promoted from a Deacon to be an Evangelist. to preach the Gospel in all places, and not to have any certain place of abode, only the degree of honour was inferior. For when Paul describeth the order of the Church, he doth so put them after the Apostles, that he showeth that they have more roomth given them where they may teach, than the pastors, who are tied to certain places: therefore Philip did for a certain time exercise the office of a Deacon at jerusalem, whom the Church thought afterward to be a meet man, to whom the treasure of the Gospel should be committed. By which testimony of calvin it should appear, that Philip was not Evangelist while he was Deacon, but that his Deaconship ceased, when he was promoted to be an Evangelist, after his effectual preaching was tried, in that extraordinary occasion of his dispersion, being but yet new made a Deacon, and so (as S. Paul saith, in the testimony that our Brethren before cited, of those Deacons that minister well) he gate himself a good degree, and great liberty in the faith which is in Christ jesus. The consequence that they gather hereupon, for the former part thereof, saying: so that every ignorant contemptible person, is not to be allowed unto this office, is for the truth of the matter, a good part of a good conclusion, but no whit for any part of the matter in question. For, we defend not that every, The qualities of Deacons. or any ignorant contemptible person (understanding contemptible, as they here do, far opposite to men of good estimation, good credit, and good reputation, in virtue of life, Deacons worshipful. or that want all, or any of these qualities, aught to be allowed unto this office. As for the other part of this consequence, but as godly, wise, and worshipful, as may conveniently be found in the congregation, may not think themselves too good, to minister unto Christ in his members, and in the name of the Church. This is too far concluded: not, but that they should be godly, and wise, but, that it is neither necessary nor expedient, that as worshipful as may conveniently be found, should be made Deacons: neither Saint Peter, Acts 6. nor Saint Paul, 1. Tim. 3. among all the qualities of Deacons that they mention, reckon up worshipful. I deem not, but that there are many worshipful, and (as we term them) right worshipful to, both wise and godly, yet were it not fit they should be made Deacons. For, although they say, as godly, wise, It is not necessary that the Deacons should be as worshipful men, as may conveniently be found. and worshipful, as may conveniently be found, yet there is no conveniency in it, to seek out persons of such worship for this Ecclesiastical office. And what mean they hereby, to have as worshipful persons, as conveniently may be found, to be made their Deacons? would they promote our Gentlemen, esquires, and Knights (for these we call worshipful) unto this office? But as worshipful men as they would have to be made Deacons, they must be under those presbyters priests, or Elders, that they call governors. Gentlemen, Knights, & esquires, made Deacons. And what persons should these governing priests, or Elders be, that are no teachers, but only governors? what should they be, as godly, wise, and honourable, as may conveniently be found, when those that must be made the Deacons under them, must be so worshipful. What manner persons the governors should be above these Deacons. But our Brethren said not so much of these governing Elders: but pag. 84. where they described what persons they ought to be, they said: First, that the Elders be elected and chosen by consent of the whole congregation, men of godliness, and wisdom, in whom the whole Church reposeth, etc. Here for these governors qualities, is but godliness and wisdom mentioned. But they will here have the Deacons to be both godly, wise, and worshipful, and in deed, in most congregations, there are some worshipful: so that, for worshipful, in most congregations, we need not want Deacons. But of honourable there is not such store among us, and yet say they in the same pag. 84. There aught to be in every Church a Consistory or signory of Elders or governors, which ought to have the hearing, examining, and determining of all matters, pertaining to discipline and government of that congregation. So that those Seniors in the congregation, being perhaps ne●ther honourable nor worshipful yet must they be the governors, and the worshipful being made the Deacons, The promotion's of these worshipful Deacons. must be governed under them. But in conclusion, be they worshipful, or be they honourable, Deacons, The Collectors office. governors and all, must be under the Pastors, and the Pastors must be all equal with the Bishops, and every one of them a Bishop too, and this should be the promotion of the worshipful Deacons to be made their governing Seniors, and think themselves well promoted too. And why not? should they think themselves to be too good, to minister unto Christ in his members, and in the name of the Church? No in deed, there ought not any to think themselves too good, to minister unto Christ, were it in a mean officer: were it but (as David said) to be a dorekeeper in the house of the lord Howbeit, considering, that God hath vouchsafed to call them either to a higher, or to an other civil ministery under Christ, or to such vocations, as that withal they can not, or it is not so fit they should intend, to the attendance of such contributions and distributions of money, their calling and worshipful estate is not to be embased héereunto, Albeit peradventure some would the gladlier dispense a while with their worship, to be come with all their hearts such Deacons, as to have the collecting, distributing, and dispensing of the Church goods in their fingering. Of which worshipful Deacons, I am afraid, that there be already, some somewhere too many, and somewhat too busy in these devices. The election also of our Collectors, they say, is too profane for so holy an office. The Collectors office to profane. And why then do they so profanely liken it thereunto? only because in this part thereof, concerning collecting and distributing money, there is some likeness: not considering the difference in the other parts, but making them no parts at all of this office, as to be trials and preparatives unto the Pastorship, which S. Paul requireth, even in the testimony that they cite, 1. Tim. 3.13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 1. Tim. 3.13. for they that have ministered (or Deaconed it) well, get unto themselves a good degree: which (as we have seen) is also understood for the degree of the pastoral Elder, though calvin expound it, only for greater honour. As for the gravity, reverence, and religiousness, wherewith the Deacons were ordained of the Apostles, Our manner of ordaining Deacons. was good and goodly. We also use prayer, and imposition of hands at the ordaining of them, with gravity, reverence, and religiousness, which religiousness and imposition of hands, argueth more, (and more holy) uses of this office, tending to religion itself, than the only collecting or distributing of worldly goods reacheth unto. And therefore, we conclude thus far, with these our Brethren, that for these and such like causes, although the ordinary Collectors have some resemblance, The Deacons office consisteth not only in the ministration to the poor. with the Deaconship of the Church, yet we can not in all points allow them for Deacons. Thus far we agree, save that in this resemblance, they presume too far, to enter comparison with our Deacons. But in that which followeth, we flatly descent, when as they say, whose office truly consisteth only in the ministration unto the poor, as we have showed, in that they be Deacons. The part of a Deacons office. This indeed they have said (in effect) before, but showed it they have not by any one necessary proof, testimony, or example thereof, and thereon, I put me again to the indifferent reader's verduit. Neither must they think here to carry away the matter thus by anouching it (for the more persuasive credit of the reader) with this asseveration truly: for, it is not truly said of them, but very untruly (be it spoken with their reverence) that the Deacons office consisteth only in ministration unto the poor, in that they be Deacons, This not truly spoken. for besides the manifest examples not only of Philip, in whom they find a shift, that he preached not, in that he was a Deacon, but in that he was an Evangelist, which shift serveth them not in Stephen, and besides all the most clear testimonies before cited: yet because our Brethren stand more perhaps on the testimony of Beza, let us see also what Beza saith hereto, who upon 1. Tim. 3. verse 8. & 9 saith thus: Beza in 1. Tim. 3.8. Deacons, these are they that have the care of the poor, of whom we have spoken, Philip. 1. and oftentimes in other places, holding the mystery of the faith, that is, the evangelical doctrine, which truly is indeed called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a mystery (or secret) because flesh and blood revealeth it not. For some of the Deacons parts were also in teaching, Some of the Deacons parts consisted in teaching. so often as it was necessary, as appeareth out of Stephen and Philip. If this be true, that Beza here, (with the like asseveration, truly, that our Brethren use) doth thus expressly avouch, that there consisted, or were, nonnullae etiam partes diacon●rum in docendo, some parts also of the Deacons in teaching: and that such teaching, as these examples of Stephen and Philip do infer, Bezaes' testimony conuicte●h these discoursers of untruth. which is plain preaching: then is it not truly here said by these our learned discoursing Brethren, that the Deacons office consisteth only in the ministration unto the poor. Neither doth it any whit avail, to come in with this cautel, saying, in that they be Deacons, as though they might do it in some other respect, but not in respect, that they were Deacons, for, Beza cutteth off that quirk also, and flatly saith, that some of the Deacons parts consisted or were in teaching. And although calvin upon this place, ver. 9 say, calvin on 1. Tim. 3. ve●se 9 that they have not the office of teaching (which we deny not, understanding it for the ordinary office of teaching, as is the Pastors) nevertheless (saith he) it were too absurd, that they should sustain a public person in the Church, If the Deacons should not be trained up to preach so often as need should require, they should not do their parts. and be rude in the Christian faith, especially when as there happeneth oftentimes a necessity of giving warning, & of comforting: nisi pantibus suis deesse velint, except they will fail to do their parts, so that, by calvin also, although they be not ordinary teachers by their office of Deaconship, yet it pertaineth to the parts of their office, to give themselves also to the study of teaching, & knowledge of the mystery of the faith in doctrine, & of public admonishing & comforting, which are principal points & parts in ●uery preacher, that as often as there is need, Two kinds of Deacons. and that (he saith) happeneth oftentimes, so oftentimes may the Deacons teach or preach: yea, if they should not, or coul● not do it, they should fail of their parts: and how then, is not this a part also of the Deacons office? Aretius likewise writing on this place, saith: He giveth precepts of Deacons, Aretius' in 1. Tim. 3.9. The Deacons office under the Bishop. in whom he requireth those virtues which he attributeth to a Bishop, and therein certain virtues specially. Moreover, I understand Deacons after the Bishop, that is, a chief inferior minister of the Church, which is put to the Bishop in teaching and administering the Sacraments, in writing also, and in caring for other things, as to visit the sick, to attend on the alms for the poor, etc. Hear, if he should mean a Pastor, than he maketh a Pastor not to be equal, but to be inferior to a Bishop, if he mean not a Pastor, but simply (as he saith) a Deacon: then he attributeth three other parts, and that principal parts, teaching, ministering the Sacraments, and writing, to the office of a Deacon: beside, visiting the sick, and attendance on the alms for the poor. Aretius' in 1. Tim. 3.12. And on the 12. verse, he saith: In the fift place, he speaketh of another kind of Deacons, that is to wit, which administered the Church goods: these were first ordained of the Apostles, Acts 6. Hereupon it seemeth, that every where in other Churches it was observed, that certain Deacons, chosen out of the Elders, should attend on the Ministers, unto whom, the treasury of the Church was committed: these had the care of the poor, of the strangers, of the widows, of the fatherless, of the sick, and distributed unto them according to the proportion of the goods, Deacons of two kinds, the former kind we have, the other is mere civil. and the counsel of the Elders. Hereupon, Ambrose thinketh, that in every City there ought to be one Bishop, two Deacons of the first kind, which withal should sometimes teach, and 7. of the second order, which should procure or have the care of the Church goods. We have Ministers, and two also of the first kind of Deacons, but of the second kind none, because that part is made civil, & administered of the politic magistrate, thus saith Aretius. Bullinger also upon the same place, 1. Tim. 3.13. writeth thus: Deacons, Bullingerus 1. Tim. 3.13. Ambrose. Two kinds of Deacons. which also Ambrose thinketh are the Ministers of the Bishops, and as it were a member and spring of the Bishops: these verily are found in the Scripture to be two kinds or functions: for some being governors of the Church's treasury, bear the care of the poor, as is to see Acts, Chap. 6. of whom also this place in all points may be expounded. But other, study learning, honest disciplines, and the holy Scripture, and therefore are continually exercised in holy things. So that sometimes being preferred to the Ecclesiastical Offices of the Church of God, they do very much profit: for, of these, some are chosen the Bishops, or the Priests, Ministers of the Churches. It was also received in the time of the Prophets, The Deacons training. to nourish up young men unto the holy mysteries. The history of Samuel is known. Deacons trained up for the Ministry as in the old time were the children of the Prophets It is delivered also that there were schools both in jerico which Helizaeus governed, and also in Ramoth Galaad. The Scholars of these Schools were called both Nazarei, and the Sons of the Prophets. Every where in the Prophets there come to hand, notable shows of these things. And verily, we should not well provide for Religion and study of Godliness, without discipline and such kind of Schools. Forth with therefore, from the infancy of the Christian faith, the Apostles being the Masters and the authors, excellent wits began to be nourished, and men to be brought up, of whom there was hope that being planted of our ancestors, they would in time with doctrine and life adorn the Church a Ad Ma●urä segetem. Hype●ius in 1. Tim. 3. unto a ripe fruit. To the same effect, though somewhat differing, and more at large, writeth Hyperius, alleging likewise S. Ambrose for these two kinds of Deacons: as we have already seen. But (be it spoken in all due reverence of so notable men): they somewhat (me thinks) mistake S. Ambrose in this matter, whose words are these. He that commandeth Deacons to be chosen with so great care, whom it is apparent to be the Ministers of the sacred priests: what would he have the Bishops to be? but (as he saith himself) unreprovable, Ambrose in 1. Tim. 3. not having public traffic, filthy or vile gains. For he knoweth, that men do therefore traffic, that they might get gains. But he saith, that these gains are filthy, if under the Godly profession, they study for gains. For when he maketh show of himself to be pure, he is found out to be filthy. But after a Bishop, he setteth under him the ordination of a Deacon. Wherefore? nisi quia episcopi & Presbyteri una ordinatio est, The B. and the Elder of one order, but ●he B. superior i● dignity. uterque enim sacerdos. But because, the ordination of the Bishop, and of the Presbyter, (Priest or Elder) is one, for either of them is a sacerdotal (or sacred) Priest. But the Bishop is the first, that every Bishop might be a Presbyter (Priest or Elder) but not every presbyter (Priest or Elder) a Bishop. For he is the Bishop, which is the first (or chief) among the Presbyters, (priests or Elders. To conclude, he signifieth that Timothy was ordained a Presbyter, (Priest or Elder): But because he had no other before him, he was a Bishop. Whereupon he showeth also, in what manner he should ordain a Bishop for it was not right or lawful, that the inferior might ordain the greater. For no man giveth that that be hath not received, etc. And anon after, he saith: Let the Deacons be the husbands of one wife, governing well their children and their own houses. For they that have ministered well, get unto themselves a good degree, and great confidence in the faith which is in Christ jesu. Ambr. of the Deacons office. Those things that he spoke of less, in the ordaining of the deaconship, he hath now set them under, and also showeth that they ought their selves to be the Husbands of one Wife, to the end that they may be chosen to the ministery of God▪ The deacons behaviour that they might be chosen in●o the ministery. that have not gone beyond the constitution of God. For God decreed one Wife unto a man with which wife he should be blessed. For none is blessed with the second. Who if they govern their children well and their houses, that is, their servants and domesticalles, they may be made worthy of the sacred preesthood. I set not down these words of Saint Ambrose, that I allow of his opinion against the second marriage, Ambr. error in marriage. or prohibition from the use of the first, in those that are Deacons. But I allege him, to show how he is here misse-understoode, to make two kinds of Deacons: Whereas in very deed here he properly rather acknowledgeth but one kind of Deacon, which he calleth the Minister or attendant on the Priest or Elder. He saith indeed: But now there ought to be seven Deacons, Ambr. declaration of the Elders and Deacons offices. and some few Presbyters (priests or Elders,) that throughout the Churches there may be twain, and but one Bishop in a City. So that, he maketh here but two distinct kinds of Ecclesiastical ordeyninges: the one of the Presbyters, (priests or Elders): the other of the Deacons. As for the Bishops, he maketh them to be of the same ordaining, that are the Presbyters, priests or Elders, but the difference to be in the dignity of them. That the Bishop is the first or chief above all the rest, and but one Bishop in a City: whereas the Elders are more, and all in dignity inferior to the Bishop. And these Elders not to be Governors not meddling with teaching, but sacred or sacerdotal Elders, both teaching and ministering the Sacraments. As for the Deacons, he maketh them all, and always so attendant on the ministery of the Bishops and Sacerdotal Elders, and so continually given to Prayers: that he would have, though to be married, yet altogether to abstain from their wives. Which though it were a great overshooting in so holy a father, and direct contrary to the state of matrimony, and to the law of God, and to the examples of all the holy ancient priests, Prophets and Apostles, and of the Bishops and Pastoral Elders (as we have seen): yet it clearly showeth, how these Deacons were employed, not only in the ministration unto the poor: but also in the attendance on the Bishop and on the Pastoral Elders in the divine service, and upon necessity or occasion, to exercise the same their selue● also. In so much that Hyperius calleth the Pastoral Elders, and all under th● Bishops by the name of Deacons, though he distinguished Deacons into two kinds. All which Testimonies, both of this ancient Father, and other so notable late writers, duly considered: it appeareth, that this here is not truly said of our Brethren, that, truly the Deacons office consisteth only in ministration unto the poor, in that they be Deacons. And this is all, that their Learned Discourse discourseth on these Deacons. From whom they now proceed to another Learned Discourse, concerning Synods. The argument of the 14 Book. After all the four Tretrarches have all their several & joint offices and authorities assigned unto them: our Brethren here enter the treatise of their Synods and assemblies. First of the arising and repressing controversies, and of calling the aid of Synods thereunto. Of the promise of Christ's presence Math. 18. Of the Pastor's authority with the Synod. Of the authority of calling and directing Counsels: and of the authority in determining controversies. Of the example in the assembly of the Apostles and Elders, Acts. 15. And what the multitude did in that assembly. Of what persons a Synod consisteth: of the order in that assembly observed. Of the pre-eminence of one above the residue, and whether this pre-eminence be of order only, and not of authority. Whether james his pre-eminence continued not but for the time only of the Synod. Of the Presidents of Counsels, and of the Prolocutors authority. Of the several and joint-authoritie of Bishops and Archbishops. Of the supremacy of Christian Princes over Counsels. Of Bezaes' grant for this supremacy of the Prince, and for the superiority of Archbishops & metropolitans, and with what conditions. Of the authority of Provincial councils, and that the matters lawfully decided in them, are not to be revoked or controlled by inferior persons. The rules of determining ceremonies. The avoiding offences. The Pastor's knowledge of comeliness, order, and edification. How far the laity may herein inform the Pastors. The Pastors dealing herein toward the Elders that are not teachers. Our Br dealing herein, especially against christian Princes. The christian Princes authority in ceremonial constitutions. How the Prince is under and over the Pastors in these matters. How our Brethren reject the Pince from having authority in making any Eccl. Constitutions with the Synods, because Synods were holden before there were any Christian Emperors, and of the force of that argument. Of the Christian Princes before Christ's coming, and since his coming, but before Constantine the great, of the prefiguring their authority till they came. Of the slander for absolute authority. Of Bezaes' answers to this reason that there were no christian Princess. And of the authority that Beza alloweth to Princes over Synods. The unity of ceremonial constitutions. Of our brethren's reasons against uniformity in ceremonies, as feeding and clothing young and old alike, and as compelling men of ripe age to suck the dug, to were biggins, to carry rattles, and other childish babbles. Of Caluines rules for uniformity in ceremonial constitutions. Of our brethren's reason against it, that the land is not yet wholly converted to Christ. Our brethren's assemblies for new orders to be appointed, and how they should afterward be kept. Of the difference between necessary and not necessary matters. Of the sign of the cross at baptism. Of baptising in the Font. Of kneeling at the communion. And of wearing the Surplice. Whether the recusant ministers be displaced only, or chiefly for these ceremonies. Of those minister's commendation by our brethren. For their most diligent preaching, their most fervent praying▪ and their most reverend Ministration of the Sacraments. Lastly of the pure caeremonies that the council should ordain expedient for the time and persons, and the punishing of the breakers of them. WE have declared before that there is a double authority of the pastor▪ the one joined with the Elders of the Church, The arising of controversies. whereof he is pastor: The learned disc. pa. 111. the other with the synod or holy assembly whereof he is a member. Of the former, we have entreated hitherto. Now it followeth that we speak of the later. WHen our Brethren began to enter into their Learned Discourse of these last Officers in their tetrarchy, to wit, the Deacons: Bridges they said page 100 We must therefore return to the authority of the pastor, which he hath joined with the Elders of the Church, whereof he is pastor. And here now (after their Treatise of Deacons,) telling us of the double authority of the pastor, Our Br. their se●ues, given other parts to the Deacons, than the administration to th● poor. the one joined with the Elders of the Church whereof he is pastor: the other, with the synod or holy assembly, whereof he is a member: of the former we have entreated hitherto, now it followeth that we speak of the later: except their Deacons be pastors, or at least have some part of their office and authority joined with the pastoral Elders of the Church: I would feign learn how these sayings hang together, but to pass over this, let us come now to the later authority of the pastors, that with the synod (they say) followeth. There ariseth oftentimes in the Church divers controversies, The learned disc. Pa. 111 which cannot be otherwise expressed, pertaining to the state of the whole Church, then by a general assembly of the pastors of that Church, which is called a synod, or General counsel. That diverse controversies oftentimes, and to oftentimes, arise in the Church: with hearty grief thereat, and with present experience, Bridges we cannot but confess it and lament it. And if licence be permitted thus, to preach and print what every one please, in Discoursing upon the Ecclesiastical Government: when will controversies cease, if not, increase daily more and more? but what mean they by this? can not these controversies be repressed, nor yet expressed otherwise▪ The arising of controversies and repressing of them. than by a general assembly of the pastors of that church, which is called a synod or general counsel? Can they not be so much as expressed without a synod, nor without a General counsel? How could they have arisen into controversy if they had not been before expressed? Yea, the light and truth of them, by other means also then by a synod, and that a general Counsel, may both be expressed, and the controversies of them repressed too, The Synods aid. as many have been oftentimes, by the Learned Discoursers writings of the Fathers. And what mean they again, by these words: There ariseth oftentimes in the Church diverse controversies, which cannot be otherwise expressed, pertaining to the state of the whole Church, than by a general assembly of all the Pastors of t●at Church, which is called a Synod or general Council? If those controversies pertain to the state of the whole Church, why say they, that they can not be otherwise expressed than by a general assembly of all the Pastors of that Church? Our Br. intricate speeches. Are all the Pastors of that Church, where the controversies pertaining to the whole Church do arise, the whole Church? or do they mean, that a general assembly of all the pastors of that Church, which Church is called a Synod or Council, is the whole Church? and are they also the Pastors of the Synod; or rather Pastors of their particular and several Churches: & as they said better, before, but members only of the Synod or holy assembly? and so do they say, this is a Synod or general Counsel? Every general Counsel may be called a Synod: but every Synod cannot be called a general Counsel. These things, (me thinks, beit spoken under their correction) might have been, if not more Learnedly Discoursed: yet more clearly expressed, that we might have better understood their meaning, and so we might give them (if need be) further answer. Also there be diverse cases, wherein several Churches are driven to pray the aid of the Synod, The learned disc. pa. 111. & 112 where matters cannot be determined among themselves. For this cause the holy Ghost hath ordained these holy assembles, with promise that they being gathered together, in the name of Christ, he himself will be among them. In case this our brethren's platform were in place: we should then have more than good store of these diverse cases, Bridges. in every several Church, and might soon be brought into such a doubtful and pitiful case, that we should be driven to pray the aid not of the Synod so much, as of any body, if any but God alonely, in so divers cases could relieve us. But now, put case, that in divers cases, the several Churches are driven to pray the aid of the Synod, The several Churches driven to pray for aid of the Synod. where matters cannot be determined among themselves: will the several Churches be all of them content, with whatsoever that Synod shall determine, of whom they pray aid? Disagreements of Synods. And what if the Synod can not agree among themselves? and some determine this way, and some that way? or one Synod determine the clean contrary to another? when shall the cases be fully determined among them? and hath it not been so? I speak not against Synods or Counsels, general or Provincial, Christ's presence. of which there is, and hath been in the Church, for determining of divers cases and controversies, very needful, and very excellent use and remedy. The suspicious events of our Br. Synods. How soever Gregory Nazianzene said, that he never saw good effect in any. But I speak only of the state of them, as our Brethren would have them ordered, and for that, when every several Church had set up this Ecclesiastical Government and tetrarchy, that that they have here in this Learned Discourse prescribed, when we should have divers cases, & divers controversies, divers ways still arising: It is not their Synods that could determine, appease or stop them, if they made them not more divers and contentious then before, or raised not divers controversies and cases more among them. The holy Ghost (I grant,) ordained holy assemblies. And the promise, that they being gathered together in the name of Christ▪ he himself will be among them: The promise of Christ, Mat. 18. He descendeth to particular assemblies. stretcheth also unto the holy assemblies of Godly Synods and Councils. But did not our Brethren here apply this sentence of our Saviour Christ, Mat. 18. Pag. 81. Unto the several assemblies & consistories of the Governing Elders? Yea, that place descendeth down even to two or three, and that also wheresoever. And yet may two or three, yea their consistory in their several Churches or assemblies, by this their own confession, have divers cases among them, that (I perceive) all they may be so cumbered withal, that they may be driven to pray the aid of the Synod, and may not a Synod, yea, a general counsel disagree, or agree, and not conclude in diverse cases: and grant they be gathered together in the name of Christ, and that he is among them too: Howbeit, according to such measure of his grace and knowledge, that perhaps they may not have all cases revealed unto them, or not agree upon them. And yet are Synods and Counsels a very excellent good means, if they be gathered together in his name indeed, and that it please God to open also those cases unto them▪ But now to let us understand further, of whom this Synod shall consist, and who shall determine these cases and govern the same: they proceed and say. With the Synod, the Pastor hath authority to determine, concerning the regiment of the Church. Wherefore we have to inquire, The learned disc. pa. 112. & 113. of what persons a Synod doth consist: for which intent we find in the history of Acts. 15.6. That when a great controversy arose concerning the ceremonies of the Law, whether they were to be used, by those Christians that were converted of the Gentiles: the Apostles and Elders came together to consider of this matter: and that the people was not excluded, appeareth by the twelfth verse, the whole multitude, being persuaded by the arguments alleged by Peter, held their peace and quietly heard Paul and Barnabas, Authority in Synods. declare what signs and wonders, God had wrought by them amongst the Gentiles. And least ye should understand the multitude in that place, for the multitude of the Apostles, it followeth in the 22. verse. Then it pleased the Apostles and Elders, with the whole Church to choose certain men etc. By which scripture we learn, that the Synod● consisteth principally of pastors, Elders, Teachers, and men of Wisdom, judgement, and gravity, as it were of necessary regents. For, although the whole multitude came together, yet the Apostles & Elders came together to inquire, and consider of the matter in controversy, the multitude heard, and for their better instruction and modesty, submitted their consent, unto the determination of the Apostles and Elders. All men's reasons were heard. For there was great disputation, but the authority of God's word prevailed, good order was observed. So, after the matter was thoroughly discussed, by the godly arguments, alleged by Peter and Barnabas and Paul, the controversy was concluded, by the sentence of james, to whom that prerogative was granted, not of singular authority, but for order's sake. Hear are three points touched by our Brethren. First, for the Pastor's authority. Bridges secondly, of what persons the Synod consists, and thirdly, who hath the prerogative therein above all the residue. And first, for authority of the Pastor, they say: with the Synod, the Pastor hath authority to determine, The Pastor's authority with the Synod. concerning regiment of the Church. They begin here (me thinks, under correction) very preposterously, with the authority to determine in the Synod. Whereas more orderly, they might have begun, with the beginning of the Synod, and who hath authority to summon or call the same. By authority of which summons, they ought to assemble and meet together at time and place assigned, The superior authority of calling Councils. and to direct them an order to proceed by. For, if the several Churches and Bishops thereof, be (as our Brethren say) all alike equal in the authority of these things: then hath no one among them any authority to prescribe these things to any other, and much less to many other, or to all the several Churches and Bishops in a kingdom. The godly and ancient Emperors and Kings, had the chief parts of this authority in their Dominions, over all Bishops and Churches, in the old time. The ancient Emperor's authority herein. All the four general Councils were summoned, and assigned both time and place, yea and the reverend manner of their proceeding void of frivolous contentions, by the godly Emperors, Constantinus, Theodosius, Martianus, etc. Besides divers provincial counsels. All which, is here not expressed, but suppressed by our Brethren. And I marvel what they mean hereby. Determining in Synods. Is it to put the Christian Prince out of this authority, and to take and part it among these tetrarkes, or to give it to some one or few among them, besides the Prince, the Prince having so fair precedents to show for it, in the foresaid examples, yea, in the pattern of the old Testament, by Moses, joshua, Samuel, David, Solomon, josaphat, josias, etc. But of this we shall (God willing) anon see further, what they give or leave to the Prince, when we shall come thereto. And since that here, we must skip over all the beginning and process of the synod or council, and come to the determining or ending of it, and the controversies in it: Let us see, upon whom our Brethren will now bestow this authority. The Pastor (say they) hath authority to determine. Whom mean they here by the pastor, any one pastor alone: for that they say the pastor, not the pastors, or have the pastors only this authority? No (say they) but with the synod. And hath the synod then, the authority of determining with the pastor? To whom the authority ●o determine doth belong. they said before, that in their several consistories, the Elders or Governors had both the hearing, examining and determining of all matters pertaining to discipline and government of the congregation, pag. 84. and the matter here in hand is also of the authority to determine concerning regiment of the Church. But what if the doubtful and diverse cases be of doctrine, and not only of the Regiment of the church? shall the Elders or Governors that are no Teachers nor pastors determine then those cases (as they say here) with the synod the pastor hath authority to determine? whom mean they by this word synod, which here they do thus distinguish from the pastor, though in this authority they join the one with the other? Wherefore (say they) we have to inquire, of what persons a synod doth consist. This indeed is the second point here touched, and it is necessary to be considered. For if the synod should consist of such persons as be pastors: then they cannot say, the pastor hath authority with the synod, the pastors themselves being the synod, for that were as much as to say, a man hath joint authority with himself. And did not they their selves confess before, even on the other side of the leaf, that a general assembly of all the pastors, is called a synod or general council? is it called so? and is not so? and if it be so, How is not the assembly of the pastors themselves the synod itself? But of whom now (if not of the pastors,) do they make a synod to consist? For which intent (say they) we find 〈◊〉 Acts. 15. That when a controversy arose concerning the ceremonies of the Law, whether they were to be used, by those Christians that were converted of the Gentiles: the apostles and the Elders came together to consider of this matter. The assembly of the Elders. Acts. 15. Although this coming together of the Apostles and Elders, were not such an assembly as usually we call a Synod or Council, and as our Brethren also use the same term, for the assembly or coming together of the Elders of diverse several Churches: but is spoken of the coming together of the Elders of the church of jerusalem: yet I accept of this example, and it is very fit for the office of the persons, of whom not only the assemblies of several churches, among themselves, but also of Synods and Counsels doth consist. Wherein besides the Apostles, is mentioned the coming together of the Elders. And although in this example, there be a great diversity of the case, between matter in controversy concerning the regiment of the church and concerning the use of the Law, Matter of doctrine & of discipline which is no small point of Doctrine: yet sith they bring this controversy arising for Doctrine, to be an example, for the like determining of the church regiment: I am content also to admit it. The Elders Act. 15 were Pastoral. The Apostles (say they) and Elders came together to consider of this matter. True it is. But these Elders (as we have seen by Caluines own collection on the same) were pastoral Elders: and therefore the considering of this matter did properly belong unto them. But, had the people any joint authority with them in the consideration thereof? And that the people (say they) was not excluded, appeareth by the twelve verse, What the multitude did at the assembly. the whole multitude, being persuaded by the arguments alleged by Peter, held their peace and quietly heard Paul and Barnabas declare what signs and wonders God had wrought by them amongst the Gentiles. Hear appeareth as yet nothing to the present purpose: either to prove of what persons the Synod consisteth, or that the synod & the Pastor have joint authority in determining of the controversy. Who are meant by the multitude. And least (say they) ye should understand the multitude in that place, for the multitude of the Apostles, it followeth in the 22. verse. Then it pleased the Apostles and Elders, with the whole Church to choose certain men etc. This caveat, that we should not understand the multitude in that place, for the multitude of the Apostles: is not material. For, although by the name of the multitude in many places may well be understood the people, and not the Apostles: yet in that place, why may not both the Elders and the Apostles be comprehended. Yea, Peter also, that spoke before, and james that spoke after, The multitudes dealing. Acts. 15. and all that were there in presence, except only Paul and Barnabas that declared those signs and wonders. When as the text saith after Peter's oration: Then all the multitude kept silence, and heard Barnabas and Paul declare what signs and wonders God had wrought by them among the Gentiles. Acts. 15.12. What is here, but hearing and keeping silence while the other speak? upon which words saith Beza: But understand by the name of the multitude, not the whole Church, which as yet was not wholly joined to them: Beza in Act. 15.12. but the whole assembly of the Apostles and of the Elders, as appeareth above out of the sixth verse. Whom he distinguisheth from the Church, Our Br. flat contrary to Beza. verse 4. and annone after verse. 22. So flat contrary herein, these our Brethren are to Beza. He saith, that by the name of the multitude in that place, the Apostles are comprehended, and not the whole Church or people: and he commandeth the reader so to understand the word Multitude, for the Apostles and Elders: and they say, least ye should understand the multitude in that place, for the multitude of the Apostles it followeth in the 22. verse, etc. Which very verse also Beza citeth to his understanding, and so, they imply two or three plain contradictions all at once, against Bezaes' assertion and his reasons. But since Bezaes' authority can prevail no further, let it go as our Brethren here will have it, and let us understand the word Multitude, in that place, not for the Apostles, but for the people. ●hat of this? have the people joint authority with the Pastors in determining of controversies? they say, it followeth in the 22. verse. Then it pleased the Apostles & Elders, with the whole Church, to choose certain men. etc. What is this to the purpose, for the authority of determining the controversy? Can they gather hereupon, that because afterwards, The people dealt not i● the determining of the controversy. the whole Church liked well of the determination, and agreed that those Letters should be sent, wherein the matter before determined was comprehended and that to this writing, and sending, & choosing of the me●sengers, they also gave their assent: that therefore they had joint authority or any interest in determining of the controversy? If our Brethren think they had, because not only the Letter is written in all their names, verse 23. The Apostles, the Elders, and Brethren, unto the Brethren that are at Antiochia, etc. But also that the decree itself runneth jointly in all their names, verse, 28. It s●e●eth good to the holy Ghost and to us, that we should not lay any more burden upon you, besides these necessary things: To this Beza answereth in 23. verse: On these words, and Brethren: saying: The vulgar translation omitteth the copulative conjunction, Beza in Act. 15.23. and that naughtily. For the Apostles and Elder● are here man fest distinguished, from the r●st of the assemblee, when as notwithstanding the Epistle is written in the common sentence and name of all, that is to wit, the whole matter is holden for ratified in the common assembly of the whole church, after that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the decree or determination of Apostles and Elders was passed before. Calu. in Act. 15.22 & 23. calvin likewise upon these 22. & 23, verses, saith: The modesty also of the common people is gathered by this, because, after they had referred the matter to the judgement of the Apostles and the rest of the Doctors and Teachers: they do now also subscribe to their decree. Here calvin saith, the Apostles and the rest of the Doctors or Teachers, speaking of them whom the text calleth the Elders. So that, here the Elders are not governors which are no teachers, No such Elders governors & not Teachers as our Br. conceive Acts. 15. but teaching governors, which had the judging, decreeing, and determining of this case in controversy, in which autho●itie the people did not intermeddle, but only did modestly subscribe thereunto. And on the other side (saith calvin) the Apostles did show some token of their equity, in that they set down nothing concerning the common cause of all the godly, without admitting the people. For assuredly, this tyranny did spring from the pride of the Pastors, that those things which appertain to the whole Church, are subject (the people being excluded) to the will (I will not say, to the lust) of a few. Hear he worthily reproveth the pride and tyranny of the Popish Pastors in utterly debarring of the people, and yet imposing on the●● what decrees they pleased. Which thing (God be praised) it is evident, that we do not, but so far as this example warranteth, do in like manner admit the people to understand: our proceeding and decrees in the Synod or Council; The people's consent and obedience to the Pastor's decrees. whom also it becometh not to disobey, (except they find the decrees to be against the word of God) but to submit themselves in all modesty unto the authority of the decrees, that th● Pastors (for so again he calleth the Elders, whom before he called Doctors or teachers) shall have determined about any controversies, so far as concerneth the common cause of all the Godly. But what do our Brethren gather hereupon? By which Scripture (say they) we learn, that the synod consisteth principally of Pastors, Elders, teachers, and men of wisdom, judgement and gravity, Of whom our Br. make the Synod to consist Four kind of persons, Pastors, Elders, Teachers, men of wisdom. etc. as it were of necessity regents. They are now come to the point, whereof they said before, that they had to inquire, of what persons a synod doth consist. And here they make it to consist of four kinds of persons, Pastors, Elders, Teachers, and men of Wisdom, judgement and gravity. By Pastors, we have seen already what they mean, and also by Teachers. But what mean they here by these Elder● ●hat are placed after Pastors and before teachers? Whether the Elders not teaching, Necessary Regent's. whom they called Governors, are placed in he third place of the tetrarchy; that, they tell not. But if they mean them by the name of Elders, Whom they mean here by Elders. whereas calvin by Elders understandeth Pastors and teachers: then are they very pregnant Scholars, that by this Scripture can learn that, which this scripture (even by Caluines teaching) doth not teach them. But where are our Deacons here become? what are they shrunk in the wetting? or are they excluded out of the Synod, Deacons mentioned in the Synod. which before made up the full tetrarchy? or are they included in this last indefinite sort, men of wisdom, judgement and gravity? But these are not named as any officers at all, but generally they are called men: and therefore, more likely, that by this name of men, they mean the people or the whole multitude, which (they said before,) was not excluded. But though these men have no special office: yet are they here adorned with three excellent qualities, Wisdom, judgement, and gravity, Who are meant by the men of Wisdom, judgement, and gravity wherein commonly the common people of the whole multitude doth not excel, except some rare and odd persons among them, namely, in the diverse cases and controversies of doctrine: or be-it but in these controversies of Ecclesiastical Regiment, and such like. Yea, would to God the Pastors, Elders and Teachers, not only such as are for the most part, but also (besides that I wish unto myself) wo●ld God that even such as these our Brethren, that have compiled this Learned discourse of Ecclesiastical Government, were so well furnished in these three points, as they, and we all should be. For (I hope) when they say thus in general, and even of wisdom, judgement and gravity, that they do not so mean the people, that they separate these three virtues, from the Pastors and teachers. But how now shall the synod consist of all these four sorts of persons, whether they exclude Deacons or include them? forsooth say they, Necessary Regent's in the Synod. the Synod shall consist of these, as it were of necessary regentes. What, and shall all these four sorts be Regent's? and necessary regents, the whole multitude, people and all? And that in the authority of determining the diverse cases of the Church's regiment, and the diverse controversies of religion? For, such matters were handled in the assembly holden at jerusalem. Acts 15. But both calvin and Beza have debarred them of this: yea, our Brethren (when it cometh to the pinch,) eat this word again, and conclude clean contrary, saying: For although the whole multitude came together, yet the apostles & Elders came together, The order of the Synod. to inquire and consider of the matter in controversy. A ha, (Brethren) go to then, they came not together all, but here are two kinds & ends of their coming together. Wherefore the Pastors, wherefore the whole multitude came together. The apostles and Elders came together to inquire, and consider of the matter in controversy. What, and no further? Yes, and to give the determination of the same. Yea forsooth, this is indeed a Councel-like and authentical coming together, whereupon a Synod doth consist. But wherefore then came the multitude together? The multitude heard, and for their better instruction and modesty, submitted their consent unto the determination of the Apostles and Elders. And was this then all that the multitude had to do herein? what is this to the authority of determining? nay it reacheth not here so far by this their limitaiion, as to the authority of enquiring or considering of the controversies. But, since it is said before, that, with the Synod, the Pastor hath authority to determine concerning regiment of the Church: How our Br. confute themselves. and the people or multitude have nothing to do herein, being not Pastors, Elders nor teachers: it plainly followeth, that the people or multitude are none of those persons, of whom a Synod doth consist. Which is the thing that our Brethren here would prove, and yet in discussing the matter, clean confute itself. But they say, all men's reasons are heard. The ●earing of all men's reasons. And good reason too, (say I) that all their reasons should be heard, that spoke and reasoned. But who were they? any that came, not to determine, nor yet to consider, nor so much as to inquire of the matter; but only to hear to submit their consent? is their necessary regency come down to this submission? Well say they, there was great disputation. And who (say I) disputed? calvin, on these words: and when there was great disputation, The disputation. calvin. answereth▪ though there were choice made of grave men, and such as were teachers of the Church, yet could they not by and by agree. God's word prevailed Good order observed. The controversy concluded by james his sentence. But (say they) the authority of God's word prevailed. And we grant, so it ought always to do. Good order (say they) was observed. So would it not (I fear) if the orders that our Brethren would have, were in practice. So (say they) after the matter was thoroughly discussed, by the Godly arguments, alleged by Peter, and Barnabas and Paul, the controversy was concluded, by the sentence of james. The authority of determining. And were any of these discussers of the matter, such Elders as withal were not teachers? but how was this done, that they conclude here, the controversy was concluded by the sentence of james? They said before, with the Synod the Pastor hath authority to determine. For, although it be good reason, that the Pastor should not determine without the Synod, yet, by their proving hereof by this example, james is made the Pastor in this Cou●sell, How the Synod joineth with the Bishop or chief Pastor in the determining. and so by their own consequence, that a Pastor and a Bishop are all o●e. james is also made the Bishop, and the controversy being concluded, after all their discussing, by his sentence, the sentence being the final, resolute, and judicial, determination, he hath authority therein above them all, and then of consequence, though the Synod join with him in the consent of the matter, yet joineth it not with him in the authority of determining, or judicial denouncing the final determination of it. But to stop this, they say, to whom that prerogative was granted, The bishop's prerogative and singular authority in determining. not of singular authority, but for order sake. Ergo, he had herein a prerogative, and if a prerogative, than it was above all the residue, and if above all the residue, than was it singular in him. But not (say they) of singular authority. If of any authority at all (as they confessed before, the Pastor hath authority) then of singular authority, else, no prerogative. Yea, but (say they) that prerogative was granted to him. And I grant that also, for had it not been granted him, How the Bishop hath his prerogative. it had not been authority, but usurpation, and therefore the grant confirms the authority. Yea, but (say they) it was granted but for order's sake. All the better (say I) that it is for order's sake, and even therefore, How the prerogative was granted. and go no further, for all the Pastors to be equal in authority, is to bring all Synods and Counsels, and all cases and controversies arising in them, or to be determined by them, both in matter of Doctrine, and in the regiment of the Church, into all disorder and confusion, The good order and disorder of Synods. which our Brethren beginning now a little better to perceive, and to yield yet somewhat at least hereunto, they are driven at length to confess and say: The learned disc. pa. 113.114. & 115. And this place doth admonish us to entreat somewhat of the pre-eminence of one Elder or Pastor above the rest. We confess, that in every assembly or company, some one of necessity must have this prerogative, to order and dispose the same with reason, or else great confusion is like to follow. But this government is only of order, and not of authority, as to propound matters to be decided, to gather the reasons and consent of the rest, and so to conclude, etc. as we see in this place james did, of whom also we read, that he had this pre-eminence, The preeminance of one. Acts 21.18. etc. and we may gather the same, Galath. 2.9.12. not that james had greater authority in his Apostleship, than Peter, or Paul, or john, or any other of the Apostles, but because he was chosen of the rest to have prerogative of order, which some one must have in every assembly, and such was the prerogative at the first, which was granted sometime to the Bishop of Rome, and sometime to some other Bishops, to be Precedent or Prolocutor in the general Counsels, being chosen thereto for the time, by consent of the rest, as the Prolocutor is chosen in our Convocations, that are called with Parliaments. Therefore, as it were an absurd thing for our Prolocutor in our Convocation, to take upon him to be a controller of the whole Synod, and to challenge that office to him and to his heirs for ever: so unreasonable is the authority that the Pope claimeth over general Counsels. One therefore is to be chosen by consent, to be as it were the Prolocutor or moderator of order, but not authority in every assembly, whose prerogative must so be tempered, that in all things tyranny be avoided, which we see by experience easily creepeth in upon proud natures, to whom, if you grant an inch, they will be ready to take an ell, according to the proverb. Bridges Concerning the pre-eminence of one Elder or Pastor above the rest, we have sufficiently seen already at large the proof thereof, against the proves that our brethren have before alleged, Our brethren's confession of one Pastor's pre-eminence above the rest. for Pastors to have no superiority over their fellow Pastors, but be all of equal dignitienitie and authority, Pag. 23. etc. Yet hée●e now at length in their treatise of the Synod, they say this place, meaning Acts 15. doth admonish them to entreat somewhat of one Elder or Pastor above the rest. Thanks be to God, that they will yet acknowledge, be it but this place, only, to admonish them of it. And yet, if they search the Scripture somewhat further, they shall find more places than this, to admonish them of this pre-eminence, if they will take admonishment by them, as, not only that (which theirselves have here noted) in Peter and john, besides james, Galath. 2. but also in the authority above other Pastors, that Saint Paul giveth to Timothy and to Titus, and Saint john to the Angels of the seven Asian Churches. But to leave these and other places, being before touched: since now they are content to take admonition only of this place, Acts 15. to entreat (as they term it) somewhat of the pre-eminence of one Elder or Pastor above the rest: let us hear what this somewhat amounteth unto. We confess (say they) that in every assembly or company, some one of necessity must have this prerogative, What pre-eminence it was. to order and dispose the same with reason, or else great confusion is like to follow. This is a good confession and a pretty somewhat to begin withal: first, that among all the other assembled, The points contained in our brethren's confession of pre-eminence. a prerogative above the rest, belongeth not to some many, or to some few, but alonely to some one. Secondly, that this prerogative of some one above the rest, is not to be in some assemblies, as in the assemblies of Synods and Counsels only, but in every assembly or company. 1 One over the rest. 2 In every assembly. 3 It must be so of necessity. 4 To order and to dispose the company. Thirdly, that it is not voluntary in every assembly or company, neither yet of decency or conveniency only, but it must be so, and that of plain necessity. Fourthly, that this pre-eminence and prerogative of some one in every assembly or company, stretcheth not only to declare, to move, to persuade, to examine, to discuss and to determine, but also to order and dispose the assembly or company, that is, not only to set them in their places, but to direct and appoint unto them, how to demean themselves in all their actions. Yea, but (say they) to order and dispose the same with reason. God forbidden else (say I) for it were unreasonable to overrule in any thing against reason, Reason, the limitation of the disposing. which were with more reason to be called disordering and dissolving, then ordering and disposing, if without reason. Well then (say they) all this must needs be confessed, or else great confusion is like to follow. Confusion if it be not thus. And is this then our brethren's free confession? though in very good reason, (if they will confess the truth) they mu●t of necessity confess no less, though they will confess no more: and how then did they say before (speaking of the name of Bishops) that it is never used in the Scriptures, for such Bishops, as claim and exercise dominion over whole regions, and all the Pastors of the same, but only for those that be Pastors of every several Congregation, How contrary this confession is to our brethren's former assertions. having no superiority over their fellow Pastors, but be all of equal dignity and authority? pag. 22, 23. for (to remit the defence of their superiority over whole regions, to the proves before alleged) how have not our Brethren abused so many places in the Scripture, as they cite hereto in this their Learned Discourse, from the foresaid 23. page, till the 29. concluding thus: these testimonies of Scripture directly condemn the authority of one Pastor above another? likewise, page. 80. that the Ministers are equal among themselves. May they not be assembled and joined in a company among themselves? and is there no assemblies or companies of Pastors, The pre-eminence restrained. but only Synods or Counsels? Is there not some daily standing and continual assemblies and companies of Pastors, as in Colleges, and in Cathedral and collegiate Churches? or are these no longer to be called a company, than they company in one place together? The consequence of our brethren's confession. And how then is there not a daily, standing, and continuing dignity and superiority of this pre-eminence and prerogative, in some one Pastor over all the rest of his fellow Pastors, and so, not all of equal dignity and authority? yea, his continuing this prerogative (as our Brethren here confess) must needs be, or else take away this standing and continuing prerogative or pre-eminence of some one, from among those companies of the Pastors, such as are, (besides the Provosts, Wardens, Precedents, and masters of Colleges) the Bishops in their Cathedral Churches, and the Deans in their Chapters: and quite disorder, yea, clean dissolve all those companies, whereby great confusion is like to follow (as they say) or rather, to use their former words, it must needs follow of necessity: and who are the authors of this so great confusion? Now, when they have made this free confession, for a good beginning, Our Brethren beginning to revoke their former confession. and that we should look for their like proceeding, and so might hope that we should soon come, (for effect of matter, though we differed in terms) to some more effectual agreement in these controversies: they suddenly start back after their former manner, and as though they were afraid, that they had already confessed somewhat too much, they begin (with restraints and limitations) to pinch, and in effect to deny that, which they have before confessed. But this pre-eminence (say they) is only of order, What they mean by pre-eminence of order. and not of authority. What mean they here by this, that it is of order, and only of order? for, we would not have it, though they would offer it, to be a pre-eminence of disorder. They said before, that it was to order and dispose the same, to wit, the assembly or company. Is this, only to set them in their seats, rows and forms, one before or above, another behind or beneath, and themselves highest? or do they mean, by this pre-eminence of order, that he hath a dignity above all other in the company? for, How there is no pre-eminence of order in the pastoral ministery. The superiority of jurisdiction in the authority of dignity. I think not, that they mean here, the common distinction, of the power of order, and power of jurisdiction, which were to give them more than we strive for, or then we grant to any Bishop or Archbishop, who are distinguished by no pre-eminence of order, but are all of one and the same order of the presbytery, priesthood or pastoral Eldership, even with the poorest and simplest Pastor in the Church. Howbeit, in the authority of dignity, even in the same order of the Pastorship, they have not equal jurisdiction. And therefore, except that warily we understand these words, our Brethren in seeking this starting-hole, to shun the Bishop's lawful pre-eminence of authority, Preminence of order. do unawares give more indeed, in giving some one above the rest a pre-eminence of order, than if they said in plain words, How our Brethren denying the less, contesse the greater. that they gave him a pre-eminence of authority: and so, straining a gnat, swallow a camel. And yet, how hath not this some one above the rest, pre-eminence of authority: if his pre-eminence be authorized? yea, what lawful pre-eminence can it be, if it be not of authority, and of good authority too? But now, to specify these their doubtful speeches, they add these instances: as to propound matters to be decided, to gather the reasons and consent of the rest, and so to conclude, and is this all? or is the ordering and disposing of the assembly before mentioned, either to be added unto these, or contained in these? but take these, or any other, wherein this some one Pastor hath pre-eminence above the rest, do not these argue a greater authority to do these things, than any other in the company have? if we should consider but these three things, as first, to propound matters to be decided, if it pertaineth, and that of necessity, to the prerogative of some one, and so, it be not lawful to every one, although he be one of the Synod, assembly or company: how then can any other orderly besides him, or without his leave or assignment thereunto, propound any cases or controversies, either of the doubts of doctrine, or regiment of the Church, to be decided? is not this a very great authority? neither is it a mean authority, to gather the reasons and consent of the rest, which some Emperors themselves have done in general Counsels. Albeit, Bezaes' words in his Confess. cap. 5. artic. 29. seem to give more, not only in gathering the company together, so that he must have authority before the Synod begin, but also in that he saith, Collegas mittat in suffragia, he should send his colleagues, to the giving or taking of the voices, and not himself to do it, as the scrutators do. But specially this third point, that his pre-eminence reacheth also to conclude, which comprehendeth the determining, judging, and ending of the matter. And all this authority, or as they call it, pre-eminence and prerogative, they confirm by this present example: as we see (say they) in this place james did. The example of james. And not only in this place but they confirm it further, saying: of whom also we read, that he had this preeminene, Acts 21.18. etc. and we may gather the same Galath. 2.9.12. All this is very true (as we have seen before) and withal, Our brethren's proo● of a continuing pre-eminence. it clearly proveth, that james having still this pre-eminence, at all the times mentioned in all these places, his pre-eminence endured not only the time of a Synod, and so ceased, but was permanent in him, whether they had any Synod, james his continuing pre-eminence or had none. For, what mention of any Synod at jerusalem is there at that time, when as Saint Paul saith, Gal. 2. ver. 9 james with Cephas and john gave him their hands? which (as calvin upon the 1. verse of the same Chapter, Gal. 2. saith) was at Paul's second coming to jerusalem, mentioned Acts 11. verse 30. rather than at the assembly. At the time when Paul acknowledged james his pre-eminence, there was no Synod called. calvinus in Gal. 1. Acts 15. Scarcely can any man avouch for certainty (saith he) whether he understandeth that voyage whereof Luke maketh mention, Acts 15.2. yea rather, the context of the history leadeth us unto the contrary part: for, it is there recorded, that Paul came to jerusalem four times: of his first coming, we have already spoken, (he meaneth Gal. 1. verse 18. & 19 where calvin also said of him, Qui Ecclesiae Hierosolymitanae praefuerit, which governed the Church at jerusalem.) His second coming was, when as he with Barnabas carried the alms collected in the Greek and Asian Churches, according as is contained in the end of the twelfth Chapter (where Luke speaketh of Barnabas and Paul's return from jerusalem to Antiochia) whereof, that I should understand this present place, many reasons move me, for otherwise, it would of necessity be, that either the one or the other, (he meaneth Luke or Paul) should allege a falsehood, No Synod holden at jerusalem, when james notwithstanding continued his pre-eminence. etc. So that, at neither of these two times, there was any Synod holden at jerusalem, and yet at both those times, james continued in this pre-eminence, who still so continuing till this assembly, Acts 15. and after also, till the time here mentioned, Acts 21. verse 18. where saith Saint Luke (speaking of Paul's coming to jerusalem the fourth time,) And on the morrow, Paul went with us unto james, and all the Elders were present. Here was an assembly also, or company of Elders, albeit, not any synodal assembly, but he speaketh of the Elders only of the Church of jerusalem, The definition of a Synod. D●naeus in Christ. Isagog. part. 3. lib. 3. cap. 35. whereas, a Synod (as Danaeus defineth it, lib. 3. christ. Isag. cap. 35.) is a lawful and holy assembly of christian men, coming together from out of divers churches and regions, etc. Whereby it is manifest, that this assembly, or company of these Elders at jerusalem, thus still continuing, and Saint james all the while, being the Ruler and Ecclesiastical Governor of that Church: this is but a mere fancy of our Brethren, wherewith they beguile themselves and others, that james had, and some one likewise must of necessity have this pre-eminence, during only the time of a Synod: and the Synod dissolved, The argument following on these examples. the pre-eminence ceaseth: whereas, clean contrary, they should rather reason thus: the assembly or company of the Pastors in jerusalem, did still continue: but there must be some one of necessity that must have the prerogative or pre-eminence above the rest in every assembly or company of Pastors: therefore, there was some one at jerusalem, whose pre-eminence and prerogative above the rest, did still continue, which being well considered, Continuing pre-eminence. doth clean overthrew all that our Brethren have said before, and do say here, for the equality, and against the superiority, among the Pastors. When they have now confessed this pre-eminence of some one Pastor, and this example of james for proof of the same, they make exception yet again, and say: Not that james had greater authority in his Apostleship, than Peter, or Paul, or john, or any other of the Apostles: The superiority of one among the apostles, was not in respect of the Apostleship. and we also do readily yield hereto, in this respect of their office or function of the Apostleship. But because (say they) he was chosen of the rest, to have prerogative of order, which some one must have in every assembly. And this we accept also: but this prerogative of order, could not, but be a superior dignity in the same order: and also, there was an ordinary assembly, or company of pastoral Elders abiding at jerusalem, The prerogative of order, containeth a superiority of dignity. as (besides the places that we have seen already) appeareth further, Acts 1. verse 14. Acts 2. verse 46. Acts 4. verse 23. & 32. Acts 5. vers. 12. & 13. Acts 6. verse 2. Acts 8. verse 14. Acts 9 verse 26.27. and 28. Acts 11. verse 12.18. and 22. Acts 12. verse 17. The ordinary assembly in jerusalem. As for the 13. and 14. Chapters following, Luke showeth, that the like standing assembly of Elders, whom he calleth Prophets and Teachers, was also at Antiochia, The like standing assembly at Antiochia. Acts 13. verse 1. and Acts 14. verse 27. and 28, and so be descendeth to the 15. Chapter, expressing the assembly at jerusalem, which our Brethren call a Synod, neither do we disallow their so calling of it. Now then, if this prerogative of some one above the rest, must be in every assembly: and every congregation is an assembly, besides a Synod, and some Congregations may be of more Pastors than one, as our Brethren would have the most to be at least of two, The ordinary assembly or company of many Pastors in some churches. and many are already of many, as Cathedral Churches and Colleges. And our Brethren allege for the example of many Pastors in one Church, Saint Paul's calling for the Elders of Ephesus to Miletum, which (they say) were the Pastors of Ephesus, pag. 23. and thereto, pag. 24. they allege also Saint Paul's salutation, Philip. 1. verse 1. how then followeth it not, that either we must dissolve and disperse all these standing assemblies and companies of more Pastors than one, in one Church or Congregation, except only in Synods, The consequence of our brethren's grant or else that we must of necessity admit (by admitting that one must ha●e the pre-eminence and prerogative of order above the rest, in every assembly of Pastors) a standing and continuing inequality of dignity in the Pastors? And such (say they) was the prerogative at the first, which was granted sometime to the Bishop of Rome, & sometime to other Bishops, to be precedent or prolocutor in the general Counsels, being chosen thereunto for the time, by consent of the rest, as the Prolocutor is chosen in our Convocations, The Precedents and Prolocutors. that are called with Parliaments. This also (be it spoken with their reverence) is not altogether true, concerning synodal assemblies, or general or provincial Counsels. For although there be an other standing and continuing pre-eminence of order (understanding order for dignity and authority) of some one Pastor in a Church, The Precedents of the Counsels. City, Diocese, or Province, above other Pastors, which pre-eminence is Episcopal, or archiepiscopal, as we have before at large most clearly proved, and which is in deed our far greater controversy: yet notwithstanding, to speak now only of Synods and Counsels, where Bishops and Pastors of divers Churches are assembled to determine controversies, he that was Precedent of the Counsel, was not such an one, as was chosen thereunto for the time, by consent of the rest, as the Prolocutor is chosen in our Convocations, The Prolocutor calleth not the Counsel. that are called with Parliaments, sith our Prolocutor, or chief speaker in our name, (for so the word importeth) both he and all the residue, are called together by an higher Ecclesiastical ordinary, as by our Bishops in their Dioceses, and they by our Archbishop in his province: and he is appointed so to summon and call us all together, at time and place assigned by our Sovereign, who being thus assembled, then indeed we chose our Prolocutor, as the laity chose their speaker, to moderate our actions in our synodal assemblies, and to do (as is aforesaid) in the Counsel, etc. Howbeit, this debarreth not, but that any one man in the Synod or Counsel, as he hath an other peculiar charge, so he may have an other peculiar prerogative and pre-eminence, The several superiorities of Bishops and Archbyshops. in his several Church, City, Diocese, or province, by virtue whereof, the Bishop may assemble a Synod of the several Pastors in his Diocese, and an Archbishop, of the several Bishops and Pastors in his province, as it was before the Emperors (having many Christian Provinces under them) became the open professors of Christianity. The superiority to call the assemblies, was before the assemblies were made. For, how were the Synods and Counsels then called, but by some one among them, that had a continuing and standing pre-eminence above the rest, before the calling of those Synods and Counsels, and much more before the assembling of them. But now, when as there was one Sovereign Prince or Emperor Christian, over all, or the most of these Christian Provinces, the which was publicly professed first in so high an estate, by Constantine the great, The supremacy of the Christian Princes over Counsels. by whom, Counsels began to be more general: then the Prince having a general charge, and highest sovereignty over all his Provinces, both summoneth the General, and sometimes the Provincial, to designing the time and place of their assembly, and appointeth them such a Precedent, as he thought meet, if we may call the Precedent and the Prolocutor, all one. The Prince's supremacy. Upon which point I will not stand, although, I think herein also, might be a great difference. Even as we see in the Parliament, the Speaker in the Lower house, and the Lord Chance● our in the Higher, Difference of Precedent & Prolocutor. neither of them may so properly, as may the Prince, he called the Precedent. Although (I grant) we may well call them Precedents under the Prince. And so, in the first general Nicene Council, Constantinus sat himself, How the Emperors sat in the Councils. though not as taking upon him any Ecclesiastical authority, in the debating or determining; yet as chief Ruler, Moderator and Precedent, to oversee and govern their actions, to ratify and establish their Decrees. The Emperors grant of the Presidentship in the Councils. And thus (I grant) this prerogative was granted sometimes to the Bishops to be Precedent, or (if our Brethren will have it to be all one) to be Prolocutor in the general Councils: but this was granted not by the Council, but by the Emperor, which he granted of his own prerogative and pre-eminence, whether the rest of the Bishops & Pastors consented yea or no, thereunto: or choose some one among themselves and in their names, whom they might more properly call their Prolocutor. And for the proof hereof, both for general Councils & Synods provincial; to satisfy our Brethren: Beza in his Confession cap 5. art. 12. saith; Beza in cons. Christ. cap. 5. art. 12. All things ought to be done well and orderly in the Church of God, and therefore Councils ought also to be called lawfully. The chief office of th● Christian Magistrate. But it is evident, that it is the chief office of the Magistrate, to preserve the tranquility of the Church. If therefore, there be any Christian Monarch, this burden lieth on him, so often as present necessity doth require, even as also in the ancient Church, it was done without any controversy, until the ambitious patriarchs, and chiefly the Patriarch of Rome and Constantinople, disturbed all the Policy. But if (as we now see it) there be many Prince's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that have government within themselves, or of their own, it is their office to join themselves together, with their chiefest endeavour unto this matter, being so godly and so holy. And again in the 15. Article: As in the old time, the universal Synods were gathered together, Beza ibid. art. 15. by the commandment of the Emperor alone, before the Bishop of Rome cast down the very Crown of the Empire under his feet: so likewise no man doubteth, The ancient authority of the Emperor over the Council. but that either the Emperors themselves, or else they whom it pleased them to choose, had the government of demanding & collecting the Suffragies (or vows), as it may appear out of the Acts of the old Synods. For what doth so much become the fosterers of the Church, as to interpose their authority, that God may be worshipped in peace and tranquility. Bezaes' grant to Chr. Princess more than our Br. 〈◊〉. Whereby we see, that Beza granteth not this, where godly Christian Princes are, unto the Synod or Council, to choose by their consent a Precedent, Archb. superiority to have the pre-eminence of ordering & disposing of the same: but saith it pertaineth either to the Prince himself, or to such as it shall please him to choose and set over them. And as he saith thus for general Councils, so in the 22. Article he saith also, for national or Provincial. What in the old time was ordained concerning the gathering together Provincial Synods of (or by) the metropolitans, Bezaes' grant to metropolitans over Provincial & national counsel's. doth abundantly appear out of the old Canons. Neither yet are we those, which if the ruins of the Church were repaired, would think either this, or any other not unlike order to be refused. But here we require two things in principal, that is to say, that no tyranny be again brought into the Church, as though the holy Ghost were tied to any certain Seat or Person; and than that all things be referred to edifying, the old Canons being revoked (or called again) unto this end. These words of Beza are worth the weighing, which not only show that the provincial Synods were in the old time called together by the metropolitans or Archbishops: Bezaes' allowance of Archbishops: and the conditions thereof to be revoked or retai●ed. which implieth, that then there were such metropolitans or Archbishops, in the Church, in that old time thereof; and that by the old Churches Canons, they had Canonical authority hereunto: and so, there was both a standing and continuing pre-eminence of authority in some one Bishop above the pastors in a Diocese, and also of some one Archbishop above the Bishops in a province, (which is all clean contrary to these our Learned brethren's premises:) but also, and that which is more to be marked of our Brethren, than all this cometh unto: that Beza himself (upon certain conditions) both alloweth of all this, and of the bringing the same again into the Church, and then much more of retaining it. Yea, his conditions being granted, he speaketh not only in his own name, but in all ours, (and I hope in all our brethren's too) that we are not the men, that would or should so much as think, If Archb. were simply forbid, no conditions would help. those old orders and Canons, for the metropolitans or Archbishops authority, to call provincial Synods to be refused. In which words he doth plainly allow their authority to be in itself good and lawful. Which if it were not, but simply, unlawful, all the conditions in the world could not make it lawful: there is no agreement betwixt light and darkness, Archb. lawful by Bezaes' confession. Christ and belial, no convention, no conditioning nor indenting, and therefore, in admitting the metropolitans authority upon condition, it is as much (before the conditions be propounded,) as to grant, that in the own nature thereof, (and but upon the contrary to those conditions) it is not unlawful. Bezaes' conditions of allowing Archb. Let us see therefore what are Bezaes' conditions. If the ruins of the Church (saith he) may be repaired (or renewed.) This (being rightly understood) is a very fair condition, Conditions to the Archb. and we gladly accept thereof. Hoping that all the substantial parts of the ruins, either are repaired among us, or might have been long ere this (with the good pleasure of God) if our Brethren themselves had not more hindered the repairing of the ruins thereof, than our adversaries that decayed it, 1 Condition of repairing the Church's ruins. were able to do. Yea, let our Brethren join with us on this condition, and then we trust in God, it shall the sooner and easilier be performed. Howbeit, because the condition is yet so uncertain, How this condition is no sufficient debar against the office of Archb. that a good & lawful thing should not be refused upon such general words, as the repairing the ruins of the Church: for so, they might still pretend, that one thing or another were in decay, and thereupon still refuse to retain this old order, which were a mere mockery: nor one good & lawful thing is to be refused, for the decay of an other, except the same also be decayed, and so be refused till it be repaired: Beza therefore (seeing the invalidity of this, as yet too general a condition) draweth nearer to the special points, that he requireth in this condition, for the admittance of this old order and Canons, for the authority of metropolitans. But here (saith he) we require chiefly two things, that is to wit, that no tyranny be again brought into the Church, etc. 2 Condition that no tyranny be brought into the Church. This condition with all our hearts we again like of, and detest all tyranny both in metropolitans, and in all other: but as Beza in this condition, doth again acquit the metropolitans dignity in itself, to be no tyranny, for else, to say he thinketh it not to be refused, so that no tyranny be brought in, The accepting Archb. with this condition proveth that the office is not tyrannical. if he think the dignity itself to be tyranny, is but again another mockery and elusion: and then, thinking that of itself it is no tyranny; it is again no sufficient stoppage against the interest of a right, for the encroaching of a wrong. Some will abuse the Pastors, Presbyters, or priests, office, yea, it hath been most blasphemously abused by the Papists. ●nd the Prince's office also by turning it into tyranny. And yet we must not thereupon, except simply against the princes and the priests offices and lawful authorities. The tyrannical abuse of the Pastor's officė. And although the metropolitans dignity and office were but an order of men: yet since Beza approves it in itself, for a lawful dignity and office in the Church: yea, we have the practice of it approved, even from and in the Apostles times: therefore the ground of the argument is all one in all lawful vocations, authorities, The ground of the metropolitans is of God. powers and dignities, omnis potestas est a Deo. And therefore, remove or debar the tyranny a God's name, but do not under pretence of tyranny, remove or debar the office. But yet Beza very well therein, lest he should again seem to give us the slip, with exception of the general name in the word tyranny: doth particularise this tyranny unto us. metropolitans allowed: As though (saith he) the holy Ghost were tied to any certain Senate or person. The tyranny in metropolitans that Beza excepteth against. Indeed this was a foul and most dangerous tyranny, not only oppressing the body, but entangling the conscience, and an injury to the holy Ghost. Under which pretence the Pope abused all Princes and Churches. But the Bishops and metropolitans authority in our Church (God be praised) neither claimeth, The tying of the holy Ghost to a or person. nor useth, nor admitteth, any such tyranny, nor any other tyranny, that any can prove to be indeed tyranny. As for this foul and erroneous tyranny, we utterly with Beza and our Brethren, renounce and accurse it. And therefore, for any thing in this exception, we may retain our metropolitans with good conscience. Bezaes' 3. condition of all things referred to edification. But there is yet another condition behind: And then (saith Beza) that all things be referred to edifying. If he mean all things that can by reason of this dignity, he saith well. For it is not meet to burden this dignity and the officers therein, with other things, and much less with all things, and therefore to refuse them, if all things be not referred to edifying. This again proveth that metropolitans & edification may be joined. But then as before, we may hereby also see, that this office or dignity itself, is no hindrance to edification. So that, if there be any hindrance to edification, it cometh rather of this fault, that all things be not referred thereunto. But what is this to the office or dignity itself of the Metropolitan? For, if it can by no means be referred to edification, then how can Beza say, he is not the man that doth refuse it, so it be referred to edification? Is not this plain, that he meaneth, there is a good use of it, which may very well be referred to edification? Our Br. are not the me● tha● Beza saith, he and his are in acknowledging Met●opolitanes. And so do we accept it, and not otherwise. And if our Brethren will be the men, that Beza here saith he and his are; let them then acknowledge with him at length, that they are not the men that (on these conditions) do think the old Canons, for gathering Synods together by metropolitans, is an order to be refused. If now they dare say thus with Beza, for their parts; we for ours, will join with them, in these conditions. Danaeus in Christ. Isag 3. part. lib. 3. cap. ●8. And to continue them the more, in this opinion of Beza; let them turn also to that, which Danaeus likewise hath on the same matter, in the third part, and 3. book of his Christian Introduction, the 38. chapter. Wherein (after he hath spoken of the calling of general Councils, The calling of Provincial Councils pertained to Metropolitan B. principally appertaining unto Princes, descending to Provincial, he saith. But if a Provincial Council only be to be called together: in the old time that matter and care pertained only unto Bishops, that were metropolitans, & not unto the Magistrates themselves, although they were godly. The cause why the Fr. reform Churches kept not the old order. At this day, because in the reformed Churches, there are no metropolitans, especially in the French Churches: that cure pertaineth to all the Ministers of the word of God, in every of the Provinces, who 〈◊〉 letter● ought to admonish and stir up one an other; The tempering this authority. except that by the consent of the brethren, that care of calling together a synod, be specially committed to any man of the Church of that region or province. Here he again telleth, what was the ancient authority o● metropolitans or Archbishops. And although he do set down another order among the Pastors (howbeit, not to be allowed neither, but by the godly Magistrate, if there be any such 〈…〉:) How Danaeus alloweth or disalloweth herein either the civil Magistrate or Metropolitan. yet the reason that he alloweth this unto the Pastors 〈…〉, is not that he difalloweth the authority herein of a Metropolitan Bishop over them: but that (he saith) there are none such in the reformed Churches (meaning in their countries) and therefore he restraineth his words, especially to France where they are all popish Bishops and as yet adversaries to the Gospel. And in such case, he refuseth also even the chief Magistrate, being (as he saith) unfaithful, a wolf and persecutor of the Church, that his commandment is not to be expected, no nor yet their purpose made known unto him, of a general Counsel to be holden among them, lest he séel●e to destroy them. So that, he refuseth neither the Princes, nor the Metropolitan Bishop's authority, if the persons be faithful. Yea, in ●●eede and for want of them, he saith, that this pre-eminence of one may be committed to some other person. The conclusion that our Brethren infer: Therefore as it were an absurd thing for our prolocutor in our convocation, Our Brethr. conclusions. to take upon him to be a controller of the whole Synod, and to challenge that office to him and to his heirs for ever: so unreasonable is the authority that the Pope claimeth over general Counsels: All this conclusion we freely confess, and also in part the other conclusion that followeth. One therefore is to be chosen by consent, to be as it were the prolocutor or Moderator of order, but not of authority in every assembly, whose prerogative must so be tempered, that in all things tyranny be avoided. This pre-eminence and prerogative which they call of order, can not be but of authority: The pre-eminence & prerogative of order is also of autho●itie. is the preheminenence and prerogative of the prolocutor in the convocation, or of the speaker or L. Chancellor in the parliament, of no authority? This therefore is but mere dalliance of nice terms, to say he hath pre-eminence and prerogative of order not of authority. For what authority so ever it be, or how far so ever it stretcheth, or is abbridged; yet, such as it is, authority it is. As for the tempering of this prerogative, that in all things tyranny be avoided: we like well of it. The tempering of this authority. And it is the thing that Beza before excepted. But what mean they hereby? Should it by and by be tyranny, if it be authority? The Synods authority. Is there no difference with our Brethren i● this pre-eminence, between authority and tyranny? Yea rather if it be of authority: it is not of tyranny. Which (say they, meaning tyranny) we see by experience easily creepeth in upon proud natures, to whom if you grant an inch, they will be ready to take an ell, according to the proverb. The encroaching of our brethren in ●hese things This proverb indeed is so true, that we smartly abye the experience thereof. At the first, our Brethren strived for apparel, and when some favourable forbearance of them, was for quietness sake, winked at herein; did they stay there? No. But from thence they have proceeded so far; as that now not only the authority of the Bishops; but the whole Communion book must be turned out. Not only the exection of Consistory Governors in every congregation, must be brought in, but the Prince's supremacy must now give place unto them. Yea, of an inch that they desired before; what a number of else do they now challenge and shall we conclude (as they do) that this is the tyranny which easily creepeth in, upon proud natures? No, I will not conclude so peremptorily for charity and reverence sake, against our Brethren, The danger of this incrocking. but I conclude thus far, that this their encroaching from one matter to another, and to so important and dangerous matters, is not good, nor indeed sufferable. And it is more than high time, that it were (by all godly and Christian means) repressed. The learned discourse. pa. 115. & 116. But let us return to the authority of the Synod, which consisteth in deciding and determining such matters as can not otherwise in particular Churches be concluded, either because they concern the common state of all Churches, or because they lack sufficient authority in some one Church. First therefore the lawful Synod hath to consider, if any controversy of doctrine do arise, that it be determined by the word of GOD: For in the controversy of binding the Gentiles, to the observation of the ceremonial law, was a matter of faith and doctrine. For the authority of the Synod, (understanding the same to be a synodal assembly of pastoral Elders) we grant, Bridges. it consisteth especially in deciding and determining such Ecclesiastical matters, The Synods authority in deciding controversies as can not otherwise in particular Churches, be concluded. And (among other) we allow also of these reasons, either because they concern the common state of all Churches; or of all Churches of that Diocese, Province or Realm: or because they lack sufficient authority, and perhaps sufficient knowledge in some one Church to decide and determine them. And thereupon we also conclude, that when the Synod hath in such godly manner, 〈◊〉 is aforesai●●, decided, determined, Renocation by inferiors and concluded such matters: Matters lawfully decided in counsels provincial, not to be revoked by inferior persons. that then it is not lawful for ●●y particular Church of that Diocese, Province or Realm; and much less, to any particular Ministers or Pastors; and least of all, to any of the people and lay men: to call those matters so decided, determined, and concluded, a fresh in question. Of which thing if our Brethren shall well bethink them; it will (I hope) dissuade them▪ from the renewing of ●any of those self same controversies, that in our lawful Synods (having had sufficient authority thereunto) have been already after the foresaid godly manner, decided, determined and concluded. Or if any of these controversies have not yet so expressly been proceeded upon, they may at all times (by God's grace) be so decided and determined, to the trial whereof, we are always as ready as our Brethren, if they w●uld then h●ld themselves sufficiently contented, with the sufficient authority of the lawful Synods deciding, determing, and concluding of them. And hereupon, we join again with them, The determination by God's word. in condition of this their own conclusion. That, first therefore, the lawful Synod hath to consider, if any controversy of doctrine do a●se, that it be determined by the word of God. I● this most willingly we subscribe. But where they add▪ For, The observations of the ceremonial law, were not properly matters of ●aith & doctrine. in the controversy of binding the Gentiles to the observation of the ceremoniell law, was a matter of faith and doctrine: as we also grant this, that in that controversy was a matter of faith and doctrine: and a doctrine is also to be learned in all the ceremonies: so with all, we may not grant, that all the observations of the ceremonial law, were properly matters of faith and doctrine: except we should confound ceremonies and faith, shadows and substance, things transitory and permanent altogether. Secondly, it hath to determine of the use of the ceremony, not of will without reason or ground of scripture, The learned disc. pa. 116. & 117. but upon necessary causes of avoiding offence and similitude of superstition, of bearing with the weak, of order, and comeliness, and edification. So did the synod of the Apostles and Elders, command for a time abstinency from meat offered to Idols, otherwise lawful in itself, for offences sake, and for avoiding of all pollution of Idolatry, Act. 6.20.29. And forbearing the weakness of the jews in abstinency, from eating of blood and of strangled, which was forbidden by God before Moses time, to teach that childish age of God's people to abstain from cruelty, as in Gen. 9.4. such ceremonial constitutions are but temporal, and so long are to be retained, as the cause continueth, for which they were made. So that if the weakness cease, or be turned to obstinacy, Determination of ceremonies. they are no lo●ger to be retained. For this second point of the Synods authority, we likewise grant as much, Bridges. that it hath to determine of the use of ceremonies, not of will without reason or ground of scripture. The Synods authority in determining ceremonies. Neither have done, or do our Synods determine any use of ceremonies, to be used among us, of will without reason, or without ground of scripture: but either they have good ground of scripture, or good reason, or both for them. Necessary causes. But (say they) it must also be, upon necessary causes of avoiding offence and similitude of superstition. So far as the causes shall be found indeed to be necessary causes, they say well, Taking offence and mistaking superstition. I contesse. But here again, we may not debar the authority of Synods determination of the use of ceremonies, for the avoiding of every particular persons taking offence, or mistaking the similitude of superstition. Bearing with the weak. They add also, of bearing with the weak. And this likewise (I grant, that no small consideration is to be had in the Synods determination, of bearing with the weak.) Howbeit, we must understand wherein, and in what manner they be weak, and how far forth they are to be borne withal. For otherwise, they may still pretend weakness, to cover wilfulness. May not the Synod determine, that it is lawful to eat so much as an egg on Friday, because some will take offence and pretend weakness? But it is a good hearing, that our Brethren are become so careful, to have offences avoided, and the weak borne withal. Would God they would not give so great offence as herein they do, both to ●he weak and strong, Our Brethr. offence that herein they have given. with their unnecessary striving for ceremonial matters, against those things which our lawful synods, with the corroboration of the Prince and of the whole Realm, have already determined and concluded. Wherein our Brethren do not only offend the synod, the realm, the Prince, in rejecting their lawful authorities herein: but even for the weak (the special consideration of whom they here pretend) they have been through these contentions the greatest occasion, that many which were before but weak amongst us, have now not doubted any more of our ceremonies, but of our faith and doctrine. Yea, where many were more than half won and meetly well come on: they are now clean lost, and utterly revolted from us, when they see that we will not stand to the determination no not of our own Churches synods, nor to the authority and decrees of our own Prince. Is this our brethren's consideration of avoiding offences, and of bearing with the infirmity of the weak. Order comeliness and edification. As for consideration of order, and comeliness, and edification: it is neither orderly, nor comely (in my opinion) for any private & particular Ministers, to control and preindicate the determination, The Synods authority. of a whole godly Synod (such as I hope ours are) that hath already determined and concluded, what is order, comeliness & edification in these things. Paphnutius indeed did gainsay in priests marriages, and prevailed against all, or the most part, of the famous Nicene Council. But that was done in the Council, and in the debating of the matter, Paphnutius his gainsaying the whole council. before any decree determined and concluded. And also, though they had never so fully determined and concluded it, with all the authority that they had, since it was flat against the word of God, and an error in Doctrine: he might and ought, to have spoken against it. In which case, not only we, but the Papists themselves, as Gerson, Panormitane, and others do grant that we must more believe one man never so simple, yea, a lay man, more than the Pope, or than a general council, where he brings the manifest Scripture against them. If our Br. can do so against us, and not wrest the Scripture: we yield presently. But in those ceremonial matters, that are neither of faith and Doctrine, nor are this way or that way commanded in the Scripture, but left to the Church of Christ to use, with these three cautions of order, and comeliness, and edification: Particular persons or congregations not to control herein the Synods decree● when a godly Synod hath already debated, determined and concluded, what use of them tendeth best to these three ends, and wherein the state of that Church may be best ordered, adorned and edified: it is not then and in ●hose matters, sitting with the duty of any such lay or ecclesiastical persons, to control that conclusion of the Synod. If our Brethren said so late before on the other side of the lease, that it were an absurd thing for our prolocutor in our convocation, to take upon him to be a controller of the whole Synod: How much more is it an absurd thing, out of the Synod, and after the Synod, for a meaner person than our Prolocutor, to take upon him not only to be a controller, but a defacer and oppugner of the whole Synod, and a canceller of all their authority and determination? Our Br. former conclusion. Pag. 76 against themselves. How much better shall it be for our Br. to call to their remembrance their own conclusion, where before they speak also of ceremonies, page 76. saying there: But to conclude, it is the duty of every true pastor, to observe those things, that are concluded by the lawful authority of the Church, concerning ceremonial matters for order and comeliness sake and for edification, and not to control public order by his private judgement, except upon great and weighty causes. Although in deed, while they be but such ceremonial matters, and they are concluded (as they say) by the lawful authority of the Church (and if lawful, The Churches lawful authority not to be impugned. then have they not gone beyond their bounds) there can no causes be so great and weighty, that should make any true pastor to set up himself, against this lawful authority of the Church. For if he do, he doth it unlawfully and not like a true Pastor. When the assembly or Synod of the Apostles and Elders at jerusalem (which our Brethren here allege for an example) did command for a time abstinency from meat offered to Idols, (otherwise lawful in itself) for offences sake, and for avoiding of all pollution and Idolatry, Our Br. own example. Acts. 15. against themselves. (which the Evangelist noteth, Acts 6. Luke 15. ver. 20.29. Had it then been lawful for any particular Minister or Ministers, to have rejected the authority of this decree, or to have kept it and broken it at his or their pleasure? and if this be an example to follow, though not to compare in like authority, with this most holy assembly and decree of the holy ghost, but as all good Synods may take example from hence: Now then is it now lawful for any private ministers, to reject the authority of a lawful Synod, and the caeremonies, rites and orders therein decreed, & by the Princes and the realm's authority already established? They say, the Apostles and Elders commandment was but for a time. The Synods commandment for a time. But could their authority have reached to the forbidding that meat for any time, which was otherwise lawful in itself, during all the time of the Christian liberty? and can the authority of no Synod now, restrain our Br. for any time to forbear that, which otherwise is lawful in itself, but that they will needs use still their liberty in caeremoniall matters? or will they be the prescribers of the time for their continuance? But they say that decree was made, for offences sake, and for avoiding of all pollution of Idolatry. The avoiding offences and pollutions. So it was, I grant. But that pollution of Idolatry was not in the meat itself, nor the offence so much in the strong as in the weak. And yet the strong obeyed this decree, only to avoid the weaks offence. The stronger's forbearance for the weakers offence. And to this end that the strong in faith should not abuse their liberty, by offending the consciences of the weak. Saint Paul hath a notable treatise at large thereof, 1. Cor. 10. 1. Cor. 10. Admit therefore, that any of those caeremonies being in themselves otherwise lawful, because they have been offensively abused, and idolatrously polluted: yet, the abuse and pollution being expressly abolished, and only a good purpose and use of them decreed: the same are as much (besides, for the goodness of the purpose and use) for the very authority of the decree, to be for the time as far forth received, as the other meats being otherwise lawful in themselves, yet being for good purposes and uses of them, by the authority of the decree for the time forbidden, were then and for that time to be refused. But that was done also, say they, for the forbearing the weakness of the jews in abstinency, from eating blood and strangled, which was forbidden by God before Moses time, to teach that childish age of god's people to abstain from cruelty. As in Genes. 9.4. The Pastor's knowledge. Although the time before the coming of Christ, be called of the Apostle, Gal. 4. ver. 3. a childish age▪ Gal. 4.3. when we were Children (saith he) we were in bondage under the rudiments of the world: yet, when the fullness of time was come, and Christ revealed, received and the Gospel established: Our Br. calling of the Apostles times, the Churches childish age in calling still that primitive age, a childish age, we must take good heed that the Papists and other Heretics take not advantage by these speeches, that say, the Church of Christ in the Apostles times, was but as weak as a Child or baby, and afterward grew to ripe perfection. And albeit (I grant) these temporary degrees were made chiefly in respect of some such persons among them, that were but weak, and as it were of childish age, in the knowledge of Christ and the Christian liberty: notwithstanding, even for these weak children's sake, the strongest and all (for the time that those decrees were in force) were bound to obey them. And that private person which publicly had broken or controlled these degrees of the Church in these caeremoniall matters, (which only for this expediency were decreed, though the matters otherwise in themselves were such, as might lawfully have been broken or controlled,) had greatly offended: even so, whatsoever these caeremoniall matters (that we and our Br. do now strive for,) are otherwise in their own nature free and indifferent, and so might be received or refused) or have otherwise in the use of them been abused: yet being now by the Church of God, decreed to be well used, and that, with express cautions against all the former abuses of them, and that with full freedom of conscience, wherein the Christian liberty most consisteth: what private person soever should attempt, publicly to break or control them, should offer manifest injury to God's Church. If we be the Church of God (as I hope we be) that thus have decreed them. They say, such caeremoniall Constitutions are but temporal. Neither do we go about to make them perpetual. And yet herein, we must note also a difference, Difference of temporal constitutions. from those Constitutions that were no longer in force, then for a certain time, as the abstaining from blood and strangled: and those that may perpetually be kept, if there be perpetual causes of them. And this their selves confess, that they are so long to be retained, as the cause continueth for which they were made. And they say true herein. But, since the cause of the making of our caeremoniall constitutions doth continue: how are they not then to be still retained, until the cause shall cease, or that by the same authority, whereby they were ordained, they be also altered or removed? But (say they) so that if weakness cease, or be turned to obstinacy, they are no longer to be retained. If the weakness (say I) cease generally, or generally be turned to obstinacy: The weakness ceasing or turned to obstinacy. that were indeed another matter. But if weakness cease in some and remain in other, or in some but not generally, or in the most part, nor generally be turned to obstinacy, but in some: then, the cause of the Law (respecting not particulars) doth not cease, and therefore, the caeremoniall constitutions decreed by the lawful Synod, are still (as before) to be retained. Also for order an comelisse, and best edification, the Synod hath to determine, what shall be observed in particular charges: as of time, place, The learned disc. pa. 117. and form of preaching and praying, and administering of the Sacraments. For who should be able to know what order, comeliness and edification requireth according to God's word, but they that be teachers and preachers of the same unto all others? For it is absurd, that they should be taught by such these smaller things, as aught to learn the truth of them in all matters. Understanding the Synod in his proper sense, for the orderly and lawful assembly, not of this or that particular City, Shire or Diocese, but of the whole Province, Bridges Realm, or state: and withal, not prejudicating the supreme authority of the Christian Magistrate: The Provincial Counsels authority to determine. I grant, that the Synod hath to determine for order, comeliness, and best edification, what shall be observed both in particular things, and through out the whole state. As, not only of the time, place, and form, of preaching and praying, and administering of the Sacrament: but also of Discipline, and of Ecclesiastical Regiment, to the ends aforesaid. As for the reason here alleged, For who should be able to know, what order, comeliness, and edification requireth according to God's word, The knowledge of the teachers and Preachers in order, comeliness and edification. but they that be teachers and preachers of the same unto all others: I allow the same no further, than by comparison, that they which are the Teachers and Preachers of the same unto all others, have better cause to know in general, what order, comeliness, and edification requireth, (according to the word of God;) then any other have. But to say simply, as here our Brethren do, who should be able, so much as to know it, but they that be Teachers and preachers, etc. is a great deal (me thinketh, under their correction) too presumptuous a question. The knowledge of many that are not public teachers & Preachers. May not a man be able (by God's grace) to know thus much, as, what order, comeliness and edification requireth according to God's word, except he be his self a Teacher and Preacher of the same unto all others? Yes verily, and to know much more, even in the greatest controversies of Doctrine, as (God be praised) there are many godly learned, both men and women among us, that are not unfurnished with such knowledge. Yea, what were the teachers and Preachers at first themselves. Did they take upon them to teach and preach the same unto all others, before they had the knowledge hereof? or did they teach and preach immediately upon their getting knowledge? or was the knowledge suddenly by inspiration given them, with their entering into this function? as S. Paul's words to Timothy may be understood. Despise not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophesy with the laying on of hands of the Eldership. 1. Tim. 14. And yet Timothy was able to know these things before, insomuch that S. Paul saith to him, 2. Tim. 3.15. And that thou haste known the holy Scriptures of a child. And some men can excellently declare their knowledge also of these things before. The Synod, preaching with more eloquence and knowledge too, than many of these our Learned Discourses; and yet be no Preachers of the same unto all others. But what is their reason, that they imagine, The reason that makes our Br. think none can know these things but teachers & preachers none is able to know these things, but teachers and Preachers of the same unto all all others? For (say they) it is absurd, that they should be taught by such in these small things, as aught to learn the truth of them in all matters. To an humble minded man and glad to learn, this is no absurdity. A godly and learned Preacher may either be as ignorant, or not so skilful, expert, or provident in some things, (yea, The Pastors may be to seek in some small things. now and then in some of these small things) as some other may be, that are no Preachers. And if controversies of them be moved in the Synod, consisting of Pastors, it is a sign, that all the Preachers have not such knowledge of them, but that they also may be to seek and learn. Yea, the smaller things they be, the Preachers may perhaps have less employed themselves, in the study or search of of such small things, or not remember themselves so well, as an other less learned, which is no preacher, may. And a lowly spirit will not disdain to learn great matters of his inferior in learning, though he be no Preacher. Moses learned of jethro, how to dispose his judgements more orderly, both in small matters and in great. Neither is there indeed (if the Preacher set aside all haughty conceits, of his own singular doings and devices) any absurdity at all or shame herein, but that it may beseem him well enough, and he were better than he is, sometimes to take notice and to be taught of some godly, wise learned and experient men, that are no Preachers, yea, and of some women too now and then, not only in some such small things, but also in matters of great importance: as judith taught the Elders and Pastors of Bethulia. Although (I grant) they again ought to learn of the Preachers the truth (of God's word) in all matters. Neither in these divers kinds of teaching is any absurdity, so long as their manner of teaching is not opposite nor that these la● persons be take upon them, How the laiety may teach the Clergy. as an ordinary office, nor do it of arrogancy, and controlment, nor do it as public teachers & preachers unto the public preachers and teachers of them, nor do it to defaceand blemish the estimation or authority of their teachers and preachers, nor do it in all things, but in these things. Which here their selves confess, are but small things: being done in this order, they ought to take no scorn to be reveuerently remembered, or to be taught of them: were it never so true: that they which are no teachers and preachers, aught to learn the truth of them that are teachers and preachers, in all matters: which notwithstanding thus again generally to avouch, is a great over overshot. For there are many, and those good matters besides religion and Eccl. matters, and there is also a truth of them, and yet men are not bound to learn the truth of them, only at the mouth of the preacher: no, nor the preacher is bound to know them; or can, or if he could, aught to teach them And therefore, this again, is too largely spoken for all matters, and seemeth to proceed of too great a reach, and too high a liking of themselves, and too much encroaching upon others. But what now is their conclusion hereupon? This authority therefore cannot be granted unto any civil Christian Magistrate, The learned disc. pa. 117. & 118 that without consent of the Learned Pastors and Elders: yea against their consent (of whom, as in some respect he is a feeling member) he may lawfully make caeremoniall Constitutions, whereby the Church must be governed in mere Ecclesiastical matters. Bridges Is there no mean, but the drift of this conclusion must needs he directed against the Civil Christian Magistrate? how chance our Brethren did not look a little nearer among themselves? All the drift of our Br. conclusion is beer against the Christian Princes authority. and than they should have seen how they had thoroughly paid, and clean overthrown their Governors, that are not teaching Elders, whom they make to be a great part of the Synod, in examining and determining Ecclesiastical causes and Ecclesiastical regiment, and that the pastors can do nothing without them. But when this question cometh blustering in: Our Br. words directly overthrew their own governors. Who should be able to know what order, comeliness, and edification requireth, according to God's word, but they that be teachers and Preachers of the same unto all others? Dare these Seniors now peep out their heads, and say like Governors indeed: who should? we should. You? what are you? we? wit ye well, we are the Governors of all the Ecclesiastical Discipline and regiment. Tush, tush, are ye teachers & preachers of the same unto all others? No indeed, that we be not, we can not preach nor teach? but we can rule the matter, with you that be teachers and Preachers. The Prince excluded. No, no, go seek your rule and Government in other matters. If ye be no Teachers and preachers, ye meddle not here. No, wit ye well again, ye● are not able, and much less worthy, so much as to know, what order, comeliness, & edification requireth according to God's word, and so, lest of all, to examine, decide and determine the same. What, ought not you, (though ye be Seniors and governors) to learn of v● that are your teachers and preachers? we tell you plainly and roundly at a word, It is absurd, that they that are (teachers and preachers) should be taught by such, in these small things (and it were much more absurd in greater things) as ought to hear and learn the truth of them in all matters. Lo, How these big and lofty words have utterly blanked, and given check mate, to these our governing Elders that we not teachers and preachers. But whust, we pray you, no more of this, for we meant not this, against our governing Elders, though they be neither Preachers nor teachers, but we direct it altogether against the Civil Christian Magistrate. Yea forsooth (my learned Brethren) macte virtu●e, now ye show yourselves indeed. Yerk at the civil Christian Magistrate, Our Br. dealing against the civil Christian Magistrate. and ever (so far as ye may do it with safety) spare not, but still come in with one byous ●ling or another at the prince. For, this is plau●●ble to the people, as though ye were no accepters of persons, in daring to speak almost any thing, against the civil Christian Magistrate. And doth your teaching and preaching tend to this, that for fear the civil Christian Magistrate should teach you, (though he preach not to you) another lesson, you would have it thought absurd that they should teach you, that should be taught by you (as here you say) in all matters: yea, that they are not able to know what order, comeliness and ediffcation requireth according to God's word, except they themselves were teachers and preachers? I looked all this while, when yet now at the length, our Br. would begin, to enter (in this their Learned Discourse) into the proper treatise of the Civil Christian Magistrate. Which treatise before, page 8.9. & 10. they put back and would not speak of, till they had fully made all this their Learned Discourse of Ecclesiastical government, for their whole tetrarchy, first, of Doctors, then of pastors, after that of Governors, meaning Seniors, and lastly of Deacons. And now when they have thus at large, (as they themselves tell us) Learned●e Discoursed on all these their four tetrarchs: they begin a new treatise here of Synods, but with the civil Christian Magistrate they yet deal not, except in certain odd gléekes. Howbeit now, there is good hope, that they will remember them, and begin a little to bestow some part of their Learned Discourse on that authority, which they will leave to them. And a good beginning (as they say) maketh a good ending. But, do they begin with them after this fashions well then, in the name of God, let us yet go on with them in considering, what here they now begin to grant unto them. How our Br. here begin to draw to the treatise of the Prince's authority. This authority therefore (say they) cannot be granted unto any civil Christian Magistrate, that without consent of the learned pastors and Elders, yea against their consent (of whom, as in some respect, he is a feeling member) he may lawfully make ceremonial constitutions, whereby the Church may be governed, in mere Ecclesiastical matters. What is here toward the setting forth of the Civil Christian Magistrates authority in Ecclesiastical matters? so much as it is, this is rather against it, than any thing for it. We have long expected, what yet at last or at least, (after every of the tetrarchs, had his several and joint authority portioned out unto him) they would leave in remainder to the authority, of the civil Christian Magistrate. And they begin now to tell us on the negative part, what cannot be granted to him: not on the affirmative, what can or should be granted. And wherefore do they begin with this negative? When God declared the 10, commandments of the two Tables, Exod. 20. He delivered both the first precept, and the most of the rest, negalively, because (as all the interpreters note) we are so faulty in the contrary. Do our Br. begin their treatise of the Prince with this negative, for any such cause? doth the Civil Christian Magistrate, whom God hath placed over us, Her Majesty slandered by these suspicious negatives. (which is principal over all the Churches of the realms of England and Ireland, is now, God be blessed for it, and long may be, our most gracious Sovereign Queen Elizabeth) taken upon her, without the consent of the Learned Pastors and Elders), yea against their consent, to make any ceremonial constitutions, whereby the Church must be governed in mere Ecclesiastical matters? Let our Brethren take heed, that they do not in their Learned Discourse cast forth before her subjects and all the world, any such slanders on her Majesty, which they are never able to prove. Can they show but one such caeremoniall constitution? And yet, what the civil Christian Magistrate can do, (and that not De facto but De iure, can rightly do) is another question. Dare they stand to this, that the Civil Christian Magistrate can make no ceremonial constitution, The Prince's authority in ceremonial Constitutions. neither for time, place, nor form of preaching nor praying, nor administering the sacraments, nor for order, comeliness, nor edification, without the consent of the Learned Pastors, and Elders: yea, if they would not consent, against their consent also? If they should be urged with this questi●●▪ The pastors consent. I think it would say sore unto our Learned Br. for all their Learning. Did Moses make all his caeremoni●ll Constitutions with their consent that were Pastor● & Elders? And what consent can they show of the pastors and Elders, for all the caeremoniall constitutions that David made, or Solomon after him? indeed I think they did not dissent, but that the making or efficacy of them relied upon the confirmation of any their consent given thereto by their suffrages or voices: how can they prove it? And likewise since the coming of Christ, how will they prove that all the good imperial Constitutions and sanctions, of the ancient godly Emperors in Ecclesiastical matters, and about the state of the Church, had the express consent of the Bishops and pastoral Elders, in the very enacting and making of th●m▪ but howsoever all they were made, let them name if they can but one, that hath been made in her majesties time, either against or without the consent of the Learned pastors and Elders of our Church. I deny not, but that they have been made, both without and against the consent of some Pastors and Elders, and those Learned too, for, Against what pastors consent or Constitutions have been made. we grant Learning to the adversaries, though their Learning be blinded with erroneous affection. And they pleaded on the self same negative string against the Prince, which our Br. here do, that this authority can not be granted to any civil Christian Magistrate, without and against their consents, being then (such as they were, for fault of better) the Pastors & Elders of the church, and that had the greatest stroke al●● (as they took upon them) in these matters. And yet for all their reclaiming to the contrary, the civil Christian magistrate (God be praised) did it, and did well too, maugre all the dissents, and against the consents of them all. But our Brethren mean not here, the Popish Pastors and Elders, but the protestants. And can they prove that her Majesty made any caeremoniall Constitutions, whereby the Church must be governed in mere Ecclesiastical matters, without and against the consent of the protestant Pastors and Elders of the Church? Whom our Br. mean by learned Pastors and Elders. but yet all this will not reach home, to serve their turn. And why? because, by these pastors and Elders, they chiefly mean indeed themselves, whom in the first front of this their Learned Discourse, they call the faithful Ministers: and here the Learned pastors and Elders. For, as for those Elders that are governors, and yet not Teachers and preachers: we have heard how in their last words, they have handled them, for having any authority in the Synod. But where were these our Br. then, when her Majesty with the consent of the protestant pastors and Elders then living, did make at her first coming to the supreme government of this our Church, these caeremoniall Constitutions? for perhaps the most of them that are most busy now, were then but in the shell (as they say) or but young batched. And must all these Constitutions, The constitutions depend not on the consent of the Pastors to come. that these Pastors (which are since come, in the places of some of the Pastors then,) do not now consent unto, be all of them unlawful constitutions? and must the very Prince's authority also be called now in question, and so flat denied, that it cannot be granted, because it was without or against these Pastors and Elders consenting that now are, and that then were not Pastors and Elders? were those Constitutions no longer good, than those Pastors lived that consented to the making of them? And what should we think now, if any other were made a new, by the Queen's Majesty (if at least, they would grant her thus much authority, that thee might make such caeremoni●●● constitutions as should not be against them, but with the consent of these Pastors, and Elders now) would this how, and these new Constitutions be firm and unviolable? Yea, if it should please the Pastors that shall come after these, to give their consent also unto them. And so we must run on in infinitum, while the world lasteth continual changing, or at least, continual dependence on the Pastors and Elders consent: or else, all former constitutions are cut clean off. For, if those that our Brethren shall now consent unto, be good against those that shall be Pastors to come hereafter: then may these caeremoniall constitutions which have been made by her Majesty heretofore, with the consent of her Learned Pastors and Elders, that were them, good and strong against these our Brethren, that pretend to be the Learned Pastors and Elders now. Her majesties authority now, is as great as it was before. And why cannot her Majesty do as much now, as she could then? And can she not maintain those now, that so lawfully she could and did make them? And what hath she made since, or of late, but that wherein she had, and hath the consent of the Learned pastors and Elders of the Church? And if our Brethren do not consent unto her Majesty, and to the other Learned pastors and Elders of the realm consenting. This (no doubt) cannot be but a grief unto her Majesty, & to all us (with consent herein to her auth.) that any true & loving subjects unto her, & dear Br. unto should thus dissent both from her and us. Notwithstanding, this is no sufficient debar, against her Majesty, but that she had and hath full authority under God, with consent both of other civil Christian Magistrates under her, and with the consent of the chief and most part of the Learned pastors and Elders of the Churches, whereof they have the several charges Ecclesiastical: and she (God contive it) the Civil, general, and supreme Government over all them, and in all causes aswell ecclesiastical as political, to make lawful ceremonial constitutions, whereby the Church both may and must be governed. Synods before Christian Princes What our Brethren mean by these terms, that they knit up this section withal: whereby the Church must be governed▪ in mere Ecclesiastical matters: Mere Ecclesiastical matters. is somewhat a doubtful and captious speech. But if they mean by mere Ecclesiastical matters, such matters as they speak of before, that is to say, time, place, and form of preaching, and praying, and administering the Sacraments: I see no reason to th● contrary, if it were lawful for Constantine, & other godly ancient Princes too design both time, place, and form of proceeding, unto the general Counsels, and most famous assemblies of Bishops and Pastors in their Dominions, though the Bishops and Pastors did not first give their consent hereto, The designing of time, place, & form of proceeding to general Councils and other ceremonial constitutions but afterward obeyed it, and so consented, when the Emperors had before designed it: but that, with as good reason, the Princes having the consent and that beforehande, of all or the most part of those Bishops and Pastors: they may lawfully with their consent, appoint both times, and places and forms also even of preaching and praying, and administering the Sacraments. Yea, many of the sanctions that the Emperors have made (and the making of them is good and authentical) are of matters a great deal more mere Ecclesiastical, as we shallbe ready (God willing) to show a great number of them, if our Brethren shall desire to see them. As for the reason that our Brethren here include in this Parenthesis (of whom, as in some respect he is a feeling member. The Prince termed a feeling member of the Pastors. This is but a weak reason, to debar the authority of the Civil Christian Magistrate, in making caeremoniall Constitutions. For though in some respect, the Prince is but a feeling member (as they term him) yet is he under Christ (in some respect) the principal member, and representing (in some respect) a far higher estate, than any, or than all the Pastor's do●else, let them deny with the Papists, that the Prince is next under Christ the supreme governor in Ecclesiastical and temporal matters, which they cannot say of any, or all their Pastors. Pastors and B. & all are in some respect under the Prince. If they shall recommend the pastor in this respect, that he representeth Christ in his Ecclesiastical ministery, (which the Prince though he also do in his ciuil● ministery, yet in that respect is the inferior) notwithstanding, in that some respect, of the Princes supreme government, both Bishops and pastors and all (as chrysostom saith) are under the Prince. And what then (when men shall read this) will they think of these high and lofty speeches, that our Brethren here make the Christian Sovereign prince, a feeling member of the pastors and Elders? If they had said thus, that the Christian prince is a feeling member of the Church, not meaning as the Papists do, by the Church, only the Pastor● but the whole corporation of it; or actively to feel and sound the Pastors by governing of them, than had their meaning been plain and good, but their argument had been never the better. But, that the Prince is made (as a part subjecteth to them) a member of the Pastors and Elders, is too far to advance themselves above the Prince, & above the church and all. For if the Prince be a member of the Pastors and Elders: then much more all those are so, that are under the Prince. And if in joining here the Pastors and Elders, The Prince brought under these Pastors and Eccl. governors. they mean by these Elders their Eccl. governors that are not teachers: then in saying Pastors & Elders, of whom the civil christian Magistrate is a member, they bring the Prince under those Governors also, and they being 2. several functions; we shall have 2. heads, like a spread-eagle, whereof all the people are the body, and the civil Christian Magistrate is in some respect but a feeling member. But what respect he can be a member to them both: that let them expound it. in I have but little feeling of it. And yet is this also as darkly spoken, as the other is presumptuous, to call the Prince their feeling member. What feeling part they make the Prince to be. For though it be somewhat, that in the word feeling, they give him life and sense at least: yet, whether they compare the Prince unto the hand, wherein the sense of feeling is most sensible, or to any other inferior part or member, that must also be referred to their further exposition. In the mean season, these speeches being so offensive, to any that have any feeling in them, I marvel that they which cry out so much of the titles of Lord and Archbishop do under pretence of these titles, Pastors and Elders, thus exalt themselves, and in respect of themselves, thus debase the high authority of the civil Christian Magistrate, that they make him their feeling member. But to confirm this, they proceed, saying: It is out of all controversy, that before there were any Christian Magistrates (for we will not speak of Sergius Paulus Proconsul of Cyprus, The learned disc. pa. 118. because he was but a Lieutenant of the Roman Emperor) this authority was proper unto the Synod. If donatists, Anabaptistes, or Papists had repeated this reason, I would less have marveled. Bridges For this argument is the common refuge of all these three most pernicious Heretics, and enemies to the authority of the civil Christian Magistrate. When the Emperors made laws against the Donatists, and they used this reason against the Emperors, Saint Augustine answereth them thus, Non invenitur, etc. 23. Q. 4. Non invenitur. There is not found an example in the evangelical and Apostolical writings, that any thing was craved of the Kings of the earth, for the Church, against the enemies of the Church, who denieth that it is not found? But as yet, August. in Epist. 48. ad vincentium. that prophecy was not fulfilled▪ And now ye kings understand, and be ye learned that judge the earth, serve the Lord in fear. For as yet, that was fulfilled, Christian Princes prefigured. which is said a little before in the same psalm, Wherefore did the Gentiles fret and the people imagine vain things? The Kings of the earth and the Princes came together in one, against the Lord and against his Christ, (or his anointed). Nevertheless, if the facts forepast in the prophetical books, were figures of things to come: in that King which is called Nabuchodonozor, Nabuchod. figured the states of the Kings after Christ. either of the times was figured, both that which the Church had under the Apostles, and that it now hath. In the time therefore of the Apostles and martyrs, that was fulfilled which was figured, when the King whom we have mentioned, did compel the Godly and the just to worship Images, and commanded them that refused, to be cas● into the flames. But now is that fulfilled, which a little after was figured in the same King, The times figured of Kings persecuting. when as he (being converted to honour the true God) decreed in his kingdom, that whosoever blasphemed the God of Sydrak, Misak, and Abednago, should suffer due punishments. The former time therefore of that King, did signify the former times of the infidel Kings, which the Christians suffered for the wicked. But the later time of that king, The times figured of faithful setting forth godly constitutions. did signify the times of the later Kings, that are now faithful, which the wicked suffer for the Christians. Thus saith S. Augustine against the Donatists, that used this argument against the Laws and decrees of the Emperors, that in the Apostles times there were no Christian Princes, that Christ appointed not Princes, but Preachers to meddle in matters of Religion: and at this day the Papists and anabaptists furbish over a fresh the same arguments, and will our Brethren now gather up once again, the offscouring of these their rotten reasons, to furnish their Learned Discourse of their Pastors and Elders, in their assemblies and Synods, against the lawful authority in Ecclesiastical matters, of the civil Christian Magistrate? But we have seen this reason before sufficiently confuted by Gellius Snecanus, a principal favourite of our Brethren, to whose further confutations I remit them. Who confuteth also this exception of Paulus Sergius, which namely here our Brethren put back▪ and will not admit. But their reason is over weak, Because he was but a lieutenant of the Roman Emperor. Paulus Sergius the emperors lieutenant. For, if he were the Emperor's Lieutenant: he represented to them where he was lieutenant, the chief authority of the Emperor himself, even as much as Pilato, Festus or Felix did in jury. And if the people did obey him before he was a Christian, did his Christianity among those people that were conuer●ed likewise, over whom he still governed, diminish his authority? but what mean they hereby? do they reject all arguments for proof of the authority of the civil Christian Magistrate, if they be not as mere monarch as was the Emperor? Our Br. argument from mere monarch. what an advantage were this given to the Anabaptists, and what a number of Snecanus examples were hereby defeated? And yet doth not this argument hold, that because this authority was proper to the Synod, before there were any Christian Magistrates, and ●o, The arg. from the Synods auth. then without the Prince, to the same now is a false & most dangerous argument. the Synod then decreed all such caeremonial constitutions without, yea against the consent of the civil magistrate, because (as they say) there were not then any Christian Magistrates, that yet it so remaineth still proper to the Synod, to decree all such caeremonial constitutions, without, yea, against the Civil Magistrate, being now become a Christian Magistrate. But they cannot do so now, the state of the Prince being the principal party over them, and agreeing in faith with them, as they could do them, or rather could do them otherwise. So that, all the case is clean altered, by this so great an alteration. And now, if they will not have the civil Christian Magistrate to decree any such caeremonial constitutions without and against the Pastor's consent: is it meet the Pastors should on the other side decree any such constitutions, without and against the consent of the civil Christian Magistrate? what an arrogancy were this in them, and what an injury offered to the civil Christian Magistrate? But as they can show no such Caeremoniall Constitution in force among us, made by our gracious sovereign, against or without the consent of sufficient store of our Learned Bishops and Pastors: so, they can show none made by our Learned Bishops and Pastors, (whereby the Church of England must be governed) without the consent of our most Christian sovereign and chief Magistrate. No, God forbidden, that ever we should contend with so godly a Prince. And would God, our Brethren would not so far presume herein, having such a blessed Prince of her Majesty as they and we have, to contend thus to get unto themselves the only or chief authority to call Synods, to decree caeremoniall constitutions, to prescribe laws, to frame modilles, and to lay plot-fourmes of Ecclesiastical regiment and Christian Discipline: to set forth new books of Common Prayer, of the divine service and administering Sacraments, of ordaining Ministers, of making new manners of marrying, of Excommunicating the offenders by new governors▪ of burying the dead without all accustomed orders: of altering parishes: of deposing B. of making all Past. to be equal: of bringing in new officers: of disposing all the Clergies livings: yea of limiting the authority of the civil Christian magistrate: and commending all these things unto the subjects, in the title of Learned Discourses, and faithful ministers, and to do all this and many things more, (besides those that yet we see not so plainly opened) both without and against the consent and authority of their most dread and Christian Sovereign: yea verily, Constantius Caesar. to her great grief and no small danger, both of her royal estate and person. But as though all were clear and safe, our Brethren still go on, against the civil Christian Magistrates authority, saying. Which authority we know to be granted to the Church by our Saviour Christ, practised by his Apostles, The learned disc. pa. 118. & 119. continued by their successors three hundred years, before there was any Christian Emperors (for we receive not Philip for a Christian Emperor, and long time after there were Christian Emperors, even as long as any purity continued in Religion, until both Emperors and Synods were thrust out of all lawful authority, which they ought to have in the Church, by the tyranny of antichrist. I grant the synodal authority to be granted to the church by our Saviour Christ, to be practised by his Apostles, and to be continued by their successors three hundred years, Bridges not before there were any Christian Emperors: but before there were any such Christian Emperors as only proclaimed the maintenance and profession of the Christian faith, as Constantine & his successors did. For, Constantius Chlorus the Father of this Constantine the great, is commended by Eusebius lib. 8. cap. 14. in these words: Not long after, Constantius Chlorus a Christian Emperor. Euseb. lib 8. Eccl. hist. cap. 14. Constantius the Emperor (passing all others throughout his life, in clemency and goodness towards his subjects singularly affected towards God's word) ended according to the Law of nature, the common race of his mortal life. Leaving behind him his natural son Constantinus, Emperor and Caesar, to supply his room. And was first related of them (meaning the Heathen) into the number of the Gods. Enjoying after his death, all imperial honour and dignity due to his person. In his life he was most benign, and of most bountiful sovereignty among all the Emperors, who alone of all the Emperors in our time, governed most graciously and honourably, during the whole term of his reign, showing humanity and bountifulness unto all men, no partaker by any means with any presumptuous sedition raised against us, he guarded the Godly about him in security without sentence of gilt and without all contumely, he destroyed no Churches, he practised no impiety that might be prejudicial to our Religion. He obtained a blessed life, and an end thrice happy. He being Emperor alone ended this life both gloriously and peaceably, in the presence of his natural son and successor, who also was most prudent and Religious. His Son Constantinus being proclaimed full Emperor and Caesar by the army, (and long before by God himself the universal King, became a follower of his Father's piety in Christian religion. All this his commendation writeth Eusebius who was also living in his days. And to confirm this he telleth also lib. 1. De vita Constantini cap. 11 How he feigned that he would, put all the Christians, which would profess their religion, out of their offices and prefer the Pagans. But when they which were Godly Christians gave up their offices, and chose rather to leave their honours, then to leave their profession of the Christian faith: he embraced them, and those which offered to deny Christ to keep their dignities, he utterly removed from his person, affirming that they would never be faithful to the Prince, which were unfaithful to God. Whereby it appeareth that he was a true and Godly Christian Emperor. Whereupon Eusebius concludeth, that not only he himself, but his subjects also, did enjoy by him a pleasant conversation in holiness, and devotion towards God. He banished out of his Court Idolaters and dissemblers in religion, and he received and judged those most worthy to be about an Emperor, which confessed God's truth, commanding such to have the guard, both of his person and Dominion. He served and worshipped the only true God. He condemned the multitude of the Gods that the wicked had. He fortified his house with the prayers of holy and faithful men, and he did so consecrate his palace to the service of God, that his household was a congregation within his palace, having Gods Ministers, and whatsoever is requisite for a Christian Congregation. And although our Brethren peremptorily do say, we receive not Philip for a Christian Emperor: yet we have heard how Eusebius, telleth, that though at the first he was not of the Church of Christ so received by reason of his notorious sins: nevertheless on his repentance and confession, he was at length received into the assembly of the Christians at Rome, even as a Christian, and of consequent as a Christian Emperor, Philip a Christian Emperor. except the Christians would have denied him to be Emperor, because he was become a Christian. Indeed he could not (such was the iniquity of the time then) make open profession of his Christianity, or if he began it, he was too soon cut off. But this impediment was no debar unto his right, if he had had such time and occasion as had Constantine. But had there been no Christian Emperors before Constantine the great: yet were there in other Countries more Christian Princes, besides those that were the Emperors of Rome: yea, to go no further, than this our own Country, was not here King Lucius a Christian, besides other Christian Princes after him? Lucius, To which Lucius also (as we find in ancient records thereof) a letter was written by Eleutherius Bishop of Rome, The letter of Lucius a Christian king in this Island a 100 year before Constantine anno. Dom. 202. in these words following: You required that we should send you the Roman and Imperial laws, that you might use them in your kingdom of Brytannie. But those laws we may disprove, and not the laws of God. You have of late through the goodness of GOD, received in your kingdom, the faith and law of Christ: you have there in your kingdom both the Testaments, out of them by the grace of God, and the advice of your Realm, take you a law, and thereby Govern patiently your kingdom. You are in your kingdom the Vicar of God, The Christian king is God's vicar according to the saying of the kingly Prophet, The earth is the Lords and his fullness is the whole world, and all the dwellers therein. And again, thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity, wherefore GOD (even thy God) hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. They are the kings children, The king's pre-eminence, authority and charge. Christian Nations and people of your kingdom, that live and consist under your protection, peace, and kingdom; according to the scripture, eu●n as the Hen gathereth her chickensunder her wings. The people and Nations of the kingdom of Brytannie is yours. Such as are divided, you should gather them together unto the laws of Christ, unto his holy church, unto peace and concord. And you should cherish, maintain, protect, govern and defend them from the injurious, from the malicious, and from the enemies of them. Woe to that kingdom whose king as a child, and the Princes ea●e early in the mourning. I do not call the king a child, for his youth and minority: but for his folly, iniquity and madness, according to the kingly Prophet: the bloodthirsty and deceitful men shall not live out half their days. By eating we shall understand, gluttony: by gluttony, luxury: by luxury, all silth, wickedness, and mischief, as saith king Solomon: wisdom will not enter into a malicious soul, nor inhabit in a body thrall to sin. A King hath his name of governing and not of his kingdom. So long shall you be a King as you rule well. Otherwise, you shall not so be named, but lose that name, which God forbidden. God grant that you may so rule your Realm of Brytannie, that with him (whose Vicar you are) you may reign everlastingly. Whereby it appeareth both that there were civil Christian Magistrates before Constantine, and also what authority in making Ecclesiastical laws and constitutions, with the consent of the Pastors, was then attributed unto them, in so much that Socrates saith in his Preface to his first book of the Ecclesiastical Histories: that, after the Emperors began to embrace the Christian religion: the Ecclesiastical matters depended much on them: 〈…〉 Prince's authority. yea, the chiefest counsels have been, and are called together & appointed by them. But now, had there been no Christian Prince all that time of three hundred years: had this been any debar to their authority, if there had been any? Nay rather, how do not our brethren's own words confute themselves. And long time (say they) after there were Christian Emperors, even as long as any purity continued in religion, until both Emperors and Synods were thrust out of all lawful authority, which they ought to have in the Church, by the tyranny of Antichrist. Ah ha, go to then, after the Emperors were become Christians they had authority, and it was a lawful authority, and they ought to have it in the Church. The authority that the Christian Princes had. And how were they thrust out of it, if they had it not? If they mean not this, of their authority in Church matters: how then do they say: they were by the tyranny of Antichrist, thrust out of all lawful authority which they ought to have in the Church? Sith they are not yet, by the tyranny of Antichrist thrust out of all lawful authority, but chiefly of that which they ought with the synod (and in some things above the synod) to have in Church matters? And if their authority had continued (in possession and practice) so long (as here they say) any purity had continued in religion: then had not the Emperors and other Christian Princes, been yet thrust out. For, (thanks be to God) among so many pollutions, errors, Idolatries, superstitions, ignorances, and other infinite abominations of Antichrist; yet still some purity continued in religion, and ever shall do, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail. Or else, neither the Church of God and kingdom of Christ, nor the invincible truth of his Gospel, were eternal. All these speeches therefore are too inconsiderate, for so Learned a discourse as is pretended. The learned disc. pa. 119. But we find not in the scripture, this authority granted by Christ to civil Magistrates, which in his, and his Apostles time were not, nor any promise that when they were, the Synod should resign it unto them. We find in the scripture, so much authority granted to civil Magistrates, as we ascribe unto them; Bridges. or as her Majesty claimeth. Example, Moses, joshua, Samuel, David, Solomon, Asa, josaphat, josias, Ezechias, The examples of the Prince's supremacy in the scripture etc. But they except, it was not granted by Christ. I answer, this is the common exception of the adversaries, and also of the Anabaptistes, both of them drawing it from the Donatists, as we have seen. But it is most untrue. For, understand by the name of Christ, the eternal Deity of the son of God, and his regiment in the Church, before he joined our human nature to his divine nature; as Saint Paul saith, 1. Cor. 10.4. The Chr. Princes before Christ's coming. They drank of the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ: so was this authority even then granted by Christ, unto those Christian civil Magistrates in his Church. They reply again, as they did before, against the christian Magistrates, that yet they were not in his and his Apostles time. And I answer again, they were in his time, that is, in the time of that regiment of his Church, before that fullness of time, Christian Magistrates before Christ's coming. wherein God sent his son made of woman, as Saint Paul speaketh, Gal. 4. ver. 4. Christ had his day (and a day is a time) even in the time of Abraham, and in all times. And yet, if at any time there were not in his Church civil Christian Magistrates, as at many times (we grant) there were not, both before the time of his coming in the flesh, The want of such persons at some times, is no bar to the right at all times. and after; yet is this right of so strong interest, that time can not plead prescription against it. And sith we can prove, that the civil Magistrate in the Church of Christ, had, and had lawfully this authority in Ecclesiastical matters, before the time of Christ's taking our nature on him: let them show, that it ceased utterly, or was lost, or is abridged by Christ's coming: and then they shall say some what to the purpose. Which if they can not do: then the want of furnishing the place for a time disannulleth not the right for ever. And therefore this is but a mere babbling (saving Brotherly reverence) and loss of time, if it be not much worse, to use, and thus still to beat upon, these cavilling, false and sophistical arguments of the old schismatical Donatists, of the new libertine anabaptists, Our Brethr. still renewing of the Donatists, Anabapt. and Papists arguments against christian Princes. and of the Roman Antichristian adversaries, which they make in their treacherous books, against the supreme government of Christian Princes. And yet, we have sufficiently showed before, especially out of Gellius, that there were civil christian Magistrates even in the Apostles times. Yea, how those also whom our Brethren misconceive, to have been Eccl. Governing and not teaching Elders; Gualther thinketh them to have been (in those times of persecutions) their civil christian Magistrates, judges and Governors, that they chose among themselves, till the higher Magistrates, Princes & monarch, received the public profession and maintenance of Christianity. But they say beside, there is not any promise made in the scripture, that when they were (become) christians, the Synod should resign it unto them. What talk they of the Synods resigning to the civil christian Magistrate, The Christian Princes have not their authority by the Synods resignation. the authority that in the right of his office is due unto him? As though the Magistrate had it by their resignation, or as though they before had usurped the Magistrate's authority? No doubt, but that those persons in the synod, which exercised (in defect of the Magistrates any part of that authority that is competent unto them; 〈◊〉 of Christian Princes. when their higher powers, and sovereign Magistrates became Christians; yielded all due authority unto them, without the synod resigning from themselves that authority, which properly appertaineth to the synod. The promise of the Christian Princes authority. And for this authority that we acknowledge to belong to the civil Christian Magistrate: there was and is extant in the scripture, fair record even of promise for it. Which as we have seen before out of S. Augustine; so, because they press still on the same argument that the Donatists did: it may suffice to repress them with Saint Augustine's answer, and his proves of the promise for the same out of the scripture, who saith, Aug. in Epist. 50. ad Bonif. Epist. 50. ad B●nif. quod enim dicunt, 23 Q. 4 si Eccl. etc. For when as they that would not have just laws to be constituted against their impieties, do say, that the Apostles desired not such things of the kings of the earth: they consider not, that then it was another time, and that all things are to be done in their times. All things to be done in their times. For what Emperor did then believe in Christ, that might serve him in making laws for piety against impiety? where as yet that prophetical saying was fulfilled; Psal. 2. why did the Gentiles fret, and the people imagine vain things? the kings of the earth stood up, and the Princes came together against the Lord, and against his Christ. But as yet, that was not done ●hich in the same Psalm is said a little after, and now ye kings understand, be ye wise that judge the earth, serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice unto him with trembling. How then do kings serve the Lord with fear? How kings serve the L. in fear. but in forbidding with a religious severity, and in punishing those things, that are done contrary to the commandments of the Lord? For he serveth otherwise, for that he is a man: and otherwise, for that he is a king. The kings service of God as he is a man, and as he is a king. Ezechias. For that he is a man, he serveth in living faithfully. But, for that he is also a king; he serveth in enacting (with a convenient vigour) laws that command just things, and forbidden the contrary. Even as Ezechias served in destroying the groves and temples of the Idols, and those high places that were builded, contrary to the commandments of God. Even as josias served, josias. he also doing the same things. Even as the king of the Ninivits served, The king of the Ninivites. in compelling the whole City to pacify God. Even as Darius served, Darius. in giving it unto Daniel into his power, to break the Idol; and in casting his enemies to the Lions. Even as Nabuchodonozer served, Nabuchodonozer. of whom we have alreadi spoken, in forbidding by a terrible law, all that were placed in his kingdom from blaspheming God. In this therefore kings do serve the Lord, so far forth as they be kings, when they do those things to serve him, that none but kings can do. Sith kings therefore did not as yet serve the L. in the Apostles times, but as yet did imagine vain things against God, Christian Princes care. and against his Christ▪ that all the foretellings of the Prophets, should be fulfilled, impieties could not then indeed be forbidden by laws, but rather be exercised. For so was the order of the times rolled about, The time of persecution. joh. 16. that both the jews killed the preachers of Christ, thinking they did a duty to God, as Christ foretold, and the Gentiles fretted against Christ, and the Martyr's patience overcame them all. But when tha● began to be fulfilled, Psa. 71. which was written, and all the kings of the earth shall worship him and all Nations shall serve him: what man (that is sober in his wit) can say to kings? Have not you care in your kingdom, The king ought not to think the care of the first table pertaineth not to him, less than the second. of whom the Church of your Lord is holden, or is oppugned. It pertaineth not in your kingdom unto you, who will be either religious, or sacrilegious: unto whom it cannot be said, it pertaineth not unto you in your kingdom, who will be shamefast, who will be unshamefast. For, when free choice is given of God unto a man; why should adulteries be punished by laws, and sacrileges be suffered? Is it a lighter matter, for the soul not to keep her faith to God; than for a woman not to keep her faith to her husband? Thus doth Augustine prove that this authority of the Christian Magistrates and monarch, in making constitutions & laws for Eccl. matters as well as for temporal, though it were not accomplished in the Apostles time, yet it was prefigured, prophesied, and promised that it should be afterward fulfilled: and in convenient time it was performed. Therefore it remaineth, The learned disc. pa. 119. that it be showed by them that defend that this absolute authority is in the civil Magistrate, by what spirit, or revelation, or scripture (if there be any that we know not:) for we would be glad to learn, how this authority was translated from the Church (in which it was once, lawfully vested) unto the civil Christian Magistrate. I know none of us that defendeth that an absolute authority is in the civil Magistrate. Bridges And therefore it remaineth not in us to show any thing for that, which we defend not. If we defend it, Our brethr. slander of absolute authority. let them name the man, and show the place, and let the party defend himself as he can. And I would learn of them also, by what spirit, or revelation, or scripture (if there be any that we know not) they can so untruely burden their so gracious Sovereign, to take upon her an absolute authority? Or to slander us their Brethren, that we defend that this absolute authority is in the civil Magistrate. They say they would be glad to learn, how this authority was translated from the Church (in which it was lawfully vested) unto the civil Christian Magistrate. And can they prove then, that the Church was ever lawfully vested with this absolute authority? For my part, I am of contrary opinion, 〈◊〉 authority. nor ever yet learned (for all the Papists harp much upon some what the like string) that the Church of God ever had, or took upon her, any absolute authority, in any Eccl. matters whatsoever, and much less do I learn, that it was translated from the Church, unto the civil Christian Magistrates. Howbeit (I trust) they will give us leave to learn thus much, The authority over synods that Beza alloweth to Christian Princes. as even Beza himself out of the word of God, shall teach us to be a lawful authority and a needful, of the civil Christian Magistrate, joined with the Synod in these matters. Beza in the 5. Chapter of his christian confession in the 15. article, afore cited, for the Princes calling the general counsels or synods, & for making the Precedents or Governors of the same; first he alle●geth some objections to the contrary, The objections in Beza to the contrary. that the Prince's government is different from the Ministers of the word. And that it is for many causes a most perilous thing to throw the counsels under the authority of Princes. For that thereby the ambition of them that would gratify Princes is so kindled; and on the contrary the simplicity of many terrified, with the unwonted presence of the Princes; not to speak of that which would God were not true, that there have always been but few Princes, that have been endued, with so much both learning and godliness, as is necessarily required, for the moderating of such actions, or that think they ought seriously to consider of these matters. When as rather (by a certain calamity of the world, as it were fatal) they use to be intentive either to every body, or to hearken rather to the evil than to the good. Notwithstanding all these objections to the contrary, Beza saith: but it seemeth not very difficult to answer these arguments. Princes not to be so separated from the ministers as though they were profane. First I judge, that heed must be taken, that we so discern not the Princes of this world, from the ministers of the word, that we should also separate them, as though they were profane. Which was the first st●ppe, whereby the papistical tyranny mounted up into this top, from whence it can now scarcely be thrown down. But when as no man can deny that Princes ought principally to care, that the ministery of the word should proceed on his course without offence, unto whom (I pray you) should it rather appertain, in the greatest tempests which oftentimes are stirred up of the Ministers themselves, to call the Churches together, and to oversee that in their assembly, all things be done well and orderly, Bez●es answer to our Brethr. obiec●i●● that there were no P●●nce● in t●e Apost●es time. and that even with their presence to conform the good and terrify the evil? But there were no politic Magistrates that governed the assembly of the Apostles, and of the first Churches: I grant it. For whom would they have called? Neither do I think, that the Church dependeth on their edicts or authority: but this I say, that me thinketh he deserveth worse of the Church, that would deprive the Church of the help of the present Magistrates so often as it is granted of God. Bezaes' grant to Christian Prince.. For (I confess) that indeed the office of the civil Magistrates is one thing, and of the Ministers, another: if ye regard that that is the proper office of every one of them. But I say, The office in several and in common of the Prince and of the synod. that this is a common office of them both that they should study for the Church's peace, and indeed so, that they (so often as it pleased God to furnish the Churches with this benefit, that they may have a godly Magistrate) should be the chiefest keepers of good order: and that these out of the pure word of God should freely and holily, as it were the mouth of the Lord of which the godly Magistrate asketh counsel, should constitute all things, The Prince's confirming of the counsels decree●. whereunto the Princes should afterward so subscribe, that they should also by their authority confirm among their people, that which shall be ordained out of the word of God, and that they command it to be straightly observed. If any require examples whereby it may be confirmed. I will answer, it seemeth to me that David, Solomon, Ezechias, josias, did not otherwise with the Elders of the Church of Israel. And it clearly appeareth, that all those that were the faithful ancients even every one of them, did not think otherwise concerning the governing of the bounds of the civil power and of the Ecclesiastical ministery. I think therefore it must be looked unto, not that the presence of godly Princes be excluded, but be circumscribed in their bounds, Bezaes' circumscribing the Prince's bounds in the Council that here they should remember they must do far otherwise, than if they sat in their throne, either in hearing civil controversies, or in enacting laws. When as they be in the synod, not that they should reign, but that they should serve. Not that they should enact laws, but the same being expounded out of the word of God, by the mouth of his ministers, they should set them forth to be observed, both of themselves and others. But if so be any shall say, it is danger, Bezaes' objections against the ancient synods as flattering the Prince's. more offences in the counsels by the Prince's absence, than by his presence. lest any entry by this means should be made open to ambitious wits: I answer that is true indeed. As it appeareth by those foul & flattering synodal acclamations, such as were fit for the theatres plays, than for a synod: but I answer, (besides that it cannot be, that all discommodities can be provided for:) experience itself doth show, that an entry is opened to far greater offences by the Prince's absence, than by his presence. For, what will not ambitious, light and rash men dare to do; (of which sort too many have always been found among the ministers themselves) except that they be kept in awe in their office, with some reverence of the Magistrate being present, so often as that is granted of the Lord. 〈…〉 in counsels. And how truly this is said of me, appeareth not only out of the Acts of the Seleucian and Lampsacen Synods, and that h●uokons synod of Ephesus: but also out of the Acts of the first Nicenesynode itself. Briefly therefore to conclude, if a general synod were to be gathered together, sith that neither all the Churches do now obey one Prince; nor the greatest part of Princes (be it spoken by their leave) seem fit enough to govern all this action, Bezaes' devise what he would have all Princes do in ordaining and governing a general council. in so great controversies & discords also of minds; neither yet in the multitude of Presidents any thing could be freely enough and quietly ordained: it should seem necessary, that all they which are chief Governors, or Princes, or Magistrates of free Cities, setting aside all ambition on either party, should by a common consent in the fear of the Lord, determine of the number of those that should be the collocutors, and also of the time and place of the synod, and chiefly also of him that should be the Moderator thereof, yea and of all the form of the action, on those conditions, that both be agreeable to the word of God, & are most fit for restoring the concord of the Churches. This is the authority that Beza alloweth to the civil Christian Magistrates and Princes concerning Synods. Wherein although he speak indeed some what too cont●meliouslie of Christian Princes, and of the godly ancient Counsels, and restrain too much on the other side the Prince's authority beyond his examples: yet for our parts, what hath there ever been established by any national Synod in this Realm, The authority that Beza alloweth to the prince in the council, confu●eth our brethren. wherein her Majesty hath taken further authority, for Eccl. constitution, although the matters were but mere ceremonial, than is here set down and circumscribed by Beza? If our Brethren will but grant thus much to the Prince; then, as her Majesty may make laws to confirm those things that in this order have with us been decreed, & determined, and to command that they be straightly observed: so would I (for my poor skill) be glad to learn, by what spiritie, revelation or scripture, (if there be any that I know not,) both this authority of the Prince as well before the synod is called, as jointly with the synod assembled, and afterward in confirming the synods acts, & also the synods authority itself, How our brethren canimpugne the things already decreed in the Synods, and by the prince confirmed. and the decrees that they have in this manner, and in these matters, already decided, determined, and concluded; may be still by our Brethr. (being but private Ministers of the same national Church) called again into new question, canceled, contemned, condemned, & written against; and that without any authority either of the Prince, or synod of that Nation? How our Brethr. can warrant this, I would be glad to know for my learning, and it would satisfy many more, if our Brethren shallbe able to show it. But they harping on an other string, cry upon us to show that the Prince hath an absolute authority, and to this purpose they proceed, saying: No absollute authority Therefore, until this may be showed by sufficient warrant of God's holy word, we hold that the Synod of every Province, The learned disc. pa. 119. hath authority to decree concerning ceremonial orders of the Church, whereof some may be general to all congregations, some particular to certain Churches. If our Brethren stan● upon our showing by sufficient warrant of God's holy word, this absolute authority, wherewith (by their leave, Bridges. both uncivilly and neither so christianlike nor subiectlike as should beseem them) they burden the civil christian Magistrate, which is (God be praised) over us, her most excellent Majesty: we shall then never reclaim them from their opinion, nor let them to hold still what they please. For we profess before hand▪ at least, I for my part, that I can show none, nor I know of any such absolute authority, that either we yield to the Prince, or that the Prince claimeth in ●his our Church: but, set absolute aside, and then, that the civil christian Magistrate hath had, and aught to have some authority, and that in the bounds thereof, a supreme authority also, we have showed by sufficient warrant of God's holy word, and even here not only by the ancient Father Augustine, but also even by Bezaes' own approbation and proves thereof, where he minceth it most: neither can they, nor all the wo●ld elude this that we have showed thereon, and this is it that we hold also, of the Prince's authority, concerning the calling and governing of the Synods, what we hold further, we shall come to it orderly afterwards: but here they tell us what they hold. We hold (say they) that the Synod of every Province, hath authority to decree, concerning ceremonial orders of the Church. Before, of absolute authority, they said, they would be glad to learn, how this authority was translated from the Church (in which it was once lawfully vested) unto the civil christian Magistrate. These were too high words, nor they can ever be able to show it by sufficient warrant out of God's holy word, that the true Church of Christ was ever vested with absolute authority, but always reserved that vesture, to her Lord and husband jesus Christ. The Pope indeed, and his Popish Church, he like a proud Prelate, and she like a malapert Ma●ame, strived which of them should revest themselves with absolute authority, a more royal rob, than became them or any creature to be vested with: The Queen saith David, Psal. 45.10. did stand on thy right hand in a vesture of the gold of Ophir. But, lest she should think herself vested with absolute authority, he saith unto her: Harken O daughter, and consider, and bow down thine ●are, forget also thine own people, and thy father's house, so shall the King have pleasure in thy beauty, for he is thy Lord, and reverence thou him: so that she is still vested with obedience, and though with authority, not with absolute. 〈…〉 authority excluded. But it seemeth, that our Brethren a● better advised, will now let go their former hold, that they said the Church did hold, for the vesting her with this vesture. For here they leave out the word absolute, and say only, The Church's authority not absolute. that the Church hath authority, which is a great deal more truly and warily spoken than before. And yet herein also (me thinks) in another point they greatly over shoot themselves: for where they say, that the Synod of every Province hath authority to decree concerning ceremonial orders of the Church, leaving out quite and clean the Prince, whom they include not in the name of Synod, O●r Brethren excluding of the Prince's authority from provincial Synods. but making the Prince another party besides the Synod, move the question, what is due to the Prince, what to the Synod. This is very much, if I might not rather say, this is very little, or nought at all, to make now the Christian Magistrate to have no authority at all, but be clean excluded. And that is more, if the Christian Magistrate have divers Provinces in his Dominions, the Synod of every Province hath authority to decree concerning ceremonial orders of the Church, he or his authority, neither in all nor in any of those his Provinces, being once so much as mentioned. But what they mean by these speeches following, whereof some may be general to all congregations, The Decrees of every or any Province, not general to all congregations. some particular to certain Churches, let themselves (a God's name) make their meaning plainer: for as yet, I perceive not, (such is my bulnesse) how all congregations are bound to observe the Decrees, concerning ceremonial orders of the Church, that are decreed in the Synod of every Province, or, that every Province, consisting but of certain particular Churches, hath authority to make Decrees, whereof some may be general to all congregations. What they intent herein, I can scarce guess, except they would have all Churches and congregations be bound to receive the Decrees of the Synods holden in Geneva, or in some other Province that they like better, and say, they were of the number of those Decrees, which they made to be general to all congregations. But, as our Synods provincial, cannot make any such ceremonial order to bind them, or to bind generally the congregations or Churches of any other Prince's Provinces: so have they no more authority to make ceremonial orders, The learned disc. pa. 120. to bind our congregations and Churches thereunto. For, as it were to be wished, that all places might be brought to one perfection, so is it not always necessary, that they be like in all things. Bridge's Perfection of unity in all places concerning doctrine to be wished for. This wish for perfection of unity in all places (if the matter might go by wishing) is to be liked, so farre-foorth as perfection may be wished, though hardly hoped for in the imperfection of this life, in the Church militant, and in the great variety of ceremonial orders, in the sundry parts and Provinces of the same: howbeit, in doctrine, especially in the grounds and principles thereof, it is to be wished for even as necessary: Unity 〈◊〉 Ceremonies. and although it be not always necessary, that all places be like in all things, meaning ceremonial orders and constitutions, How farr● it were requisite all ceremonial constitutions in one province were alike. whereof before they spoke: yet for all places that be of one country, state, realm, dominion or province, it is far better that all places were alike. For, although variety in those things, may stand with the unity of the faith, and with the substance of our community in the corporation of the mystical body of Christ, which is his true and holy Catholic Church, the communion of the Saints: yet if they be knit together in one order of these ceremonial things also, The unity of ceremonial matters helpeth the unity in substantial matters. where they live together under one Christian Magistrate, it doth more confirm them in the other substantial unity. And the variety is dangerous in one Church or kingdom, even in these more free and inferior matters, as with grief we see in England at this day, what destructions and contentions have risen, and daily do rise in our Churches, that otherwise in doctrine are united, and yet the variety of these ceremonial orders, The hurt of variety in one Province. hath with some called in suspicion the unity of religion, and with many hath disturbed, if not broken the unity of our christian peace and concord. And therefore excellently well are these two knit together, Cor unum, via una, one hart, one way. Zanchius noting the difference of these unities, in his Confession of Christian Religion, Cap. 24. de Eccl. militant aphoris. 14. & 15. writeth thus: Zanchius in confess. Christ. rel. cap. ●4. Aphoris. 14. & 15. For with what things divers peoples are gathered together into one body, with the same things also (we believe) that they are conserved, being united, and do more and more grow together. Wherein the unity of the Church consisteth for the substance thereof. Sith therefore the gathering together of the Church, is not made nor conserved properly by ceremonies, but by the holy Ghost, but by the word, but by faith, but by charity, but by observance of the commandments of God: we doubt not, but that also by the same things, the unity thereof is to be retained and cherished. When as the Apostle also to the Ephesians, where he treateth of the unity of the Church, teacheth that it consisteth in these things, no mention being made of ceremonies. In the mean season we deny not, but that unity even in ceremonies themselves, and in the rites of every Church, Unity of ceremonies how far requisite. so farre-foorth as by conscience it may be done, is to be retained and to be reverenced. For, there are two kinds of things, wherein the unity of the Church may be: the things that are delivered in the word of God, and the things that are not expressed in the word, such as are, many external rites and ceremonies Ecclesiastical. Unity of things in the word, & of things not expressed in the word. In those things (delivered in the word) we believe that unity every where and always is very necessary: but in these things, although by itself it be not necessary, but that according to the diversity of places, and according to the divers consideration of the time, it is profitable to have divers rites: 〈…〉 notwithstanding, where any thing concerning these matters is ordained and received for the edification of the Church, Why unity of things not expressed in the word, is to be kept. 1. Cor. 14.10. there (we think) that unity also in such kind of rites, is of every body to be retained, and the orders Ecclesiastical are not to be disturbed. According to the Apostles rule, all things in the Church ought to be done in order decently, and to edification, of which matters, we do very greatly allow and embrace the two Epistles of Augustine written to januarius. The learned disc. pa. 120. The wisdom of the Synod therefore, aught to have such regard of all Churches, that they have special respect to every one. Here is all of the wisdom of the Synod, but nothing of the authority of the Magistrate: Bridges of the Synods such regard of all Churches, and special respect to every one, Our Brethren here all for the Synod, nothing for the Magistrate. that to the Christian Magistrate, there is here neither any regard, nor respect had or mentioned, either general or special, is this the wisdom and equal dealing of our Brethren between the Magistrate and the Synod for this authority? Howbeit, this also is not true, that for the special respect to every one, If Ceremonies should be made by respecting every one either person or Church in a Province, there should be no uniformity at all. the Decree of the Synod in one Province, may not run in general alike to all the Churches in that one Province. For, if every one (Church) in one Province, may vary from another, the same may be said by as good reason, of every person in every one Church. Also, that the Synod should have a special respect of every one of them, and so in deed our brethren's words may be understood, saying, not to every one Church, but to every one? so that every one differing from another, it were best to make no Decree at all, but let every man do as he best liked, hand over head, without any order of uniformity in ceremonies at all, and so, to make short, and to be partial to neither party, to cut off all authority quite and clean both from Magistrate and Synod in these matters, The learned disc. pa. 120. and let all be fans caeremonies as the French saith. Wherein we of long time in England, have been carried away with an untrue principle, that uniformity must be in all places, and things alike, as though we would feed old men and sucking infants all with one kind of meats, or as though we would clothe all ages in a rob of one assize: and that which is more absurd, compel men of ripe age to suck the dug, to wear their biggins, and to carry rattles and other childish babbles. Our church prescribeth not uniformity to any places or Churches in other Prince's dominions. If our Brethren by this long time in England, mean the time, since we have (God be praised for it) received the light and liberty of the Gospel: then is not this true that here they say, we have been carried away with an untrue principle, that uniformity must be in all places and things alike: for we prescribe not to all places, nor prejudicate any other Churches, that are not in nor off the state of the Churches in England and Ireland: neither yet all of them, Uniformity. but that in some things also according to their customs and privileges, If particular Churches might alt●r ceremonies, than were the Synods constitutions of no authority. they may differ concerning these ceremonial constitutions, from the general uniformity of our Churches. But, were it lawful for every particular Church in England, to alter the ceremonies decreed in our national Synods according to their pleasure or opinion, to what purpose need any Synod at all to be troubled about these? or what authority at all hath a Synod to make any ceremonial constitutions, if the particular Churches of that nation be not bound uniformally to keep them? They say, that the uniformity of these things, is, The similitude of feeding old men and s●cking infants with one meat. The unfitness of this similitude. Our Brother's similitude is against themselves. as though we would feed old men and sucking infants, all with one kind of meat. Although this similitude fits not their purpose, sith it is against, or above nature, for sucking infants to feed on all such kind of meat, as old men can do: neither are these ceremonial constitutions fet forth, for the souls of the weak and simple people to feed upon, in stead of God's word, or that they should receive them as any part or substance of their soul's nourishment and substance, as the meat is that the infants feed upon: yet notwithstanding in the very point indeed, wherein our Brethren should apply it, (if they will apply it at all any thing aptly to the purpose) it makes clean against them. For although sucking infants can not feed on all kind of meat that old men can, yet old men can feed well enough on all such kind of meat, as sucking infants can, for all they can feed on other stronger meats beside. And therefore, if our Brethren will needs compare these Ceremonies unto the meat of the weak, (although they be ordained to far other uses, both for the weak, and for the strong also) yet, why may not the strong feed on them in their kinds, so well as the weak may, for all they can digest stronger meat? for, though the old men feed thereon in another manner, and not in sucking the dug, as sucking infants do, yet, for the meat itself, Milk ●ay b● eaten both of old and young. which is the milk, they may be fed both of them wellenough with one kind of meat: and many a good old man, and young too, will not think himself ill dealt withal, to have every morning for his breakfast as good a mess of milk, as even a sucking infant also, for the proportion of his strength, may feed upon. Saint Paul writing to the Corinthians, saith, 1. Cor. ●. ver. 1. I could not speak unto you (Brethren) as unto spiritual men, 1. Cor. 3.1. but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. I gave you milk to drink, S. Paul prescribeth uniformity to the Cor. for all some were as babe● among them. and not meat: for ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able: and yet for all this, Saint Paul setteth down among them an uniformity in divers ceremonial orders and constitutions, to the observation whereof all of them were alike bounden, albeit that all were not alike in knowledge among them, for, some of them were Prophets, some had of them more and greater gifts than other had, some of them were stronger in faith and grace than other were. Although therefore this similitude may be well applied, to the divers manner of teaching the doctrine of the word, as S. Paul likewise applieth it, Hebr. 5. vers. 12.13. and 14. and S. Peter, 1. Peter 2. verse 2. yet neither serveth it to prove any diversity in the unity of doctrine, nor to infer any such diversity of any lawful ceremonial constitutions, as should in any Church impeach the uniform observation of them. As this similitude therefore, of one kind of meat for old men and sucking infants, serveth not their turn, so much less doth this comparison in their other similitude. Or as though (say they) we would clothe all ages in a robe of one assize. The similitude of clothing all ages in a robe of one assize. And why also do they not apply this resemblance against all the civil and temporal laws of the realm? for, whereas there is an uniformity prescribed in them, and that the due obedience of all the subjects in the Realm, The overthrow of all the political orders. little and great, young and old, according to their degrees and estates, is alike required of them all, might they not say, this were even as though we would clothe all ages in a robe of one assize? And if we may thus jest out the matter with such unfit similitudes, the unity even of doctrine, and the universal obedience unto it, of all alike, may with a light mock be shaken off also. The overthrow of all unity in life & doctrine. Are we not all bidden to cast off the cloaks of unrighteousness, to put off the old man, and put on the new, and to be clothed with the white reins and righteousness of jesus Christ? and shall we thus scorn out these general precepts, and say: how, this is as though we would clothe all ages in a robe of one assize: yea verily would we as near as we could, even cloth all ages of them in the one assize of such a dutiful obedience as is both requisite to the kinds of these robes, and answerable for their age and calling worthy: although indeed, this be not one assize, but one livery, one cloth, one colour, one cognizance, prescribed to all alike, of the which every one hath his portion severed, according to the measure of his scantling. And that which is more absurd (say they) compel men of ripe age to suck the dug, Sucking the dug. to wear their bigging, and to carry rattles, and other childish babbles. If their ripe age be but only of the bodily age, and not the ripe age of the new man in the knowledge and growth of jesus Christ, they may yet be such, as not only well enough may suck the dug at the breast of the Church their Mother: The ripeness or infancy of the inner or new man's age. or, as may feed on milk again, as the Apostle speaketh: but howsoever they think scorn, or count it absurd or impossible, as did Nichodemus, yet, as Christ said, (if they be not already) they must even be borne again, and may be such, as of whom S. Paul saith, Galath. 4. ver. 19 my little children, of whom I travel in birth again, until Christ be form in you. But if they be of ripe age in the inner man, they are not compelled, either to suck the dug, or to wear biggins, or to carry rattles, and other childish babbles, by any their due obedience, to the uniform conformity of such rites, ceremonies, unreverent comparisons. and constitutions, as a lawful and godly Synod, with the confirmation of the civil christian Magistrates authority, shall think convenient and fit to prescribe unto them: for, neither are such ordinances to be thus unreverently (being not superstitiously prescribed) compared to such base things, neither are they set forth, to foade or dally the people like babies, or babbles, but for edifying of them in order and comeliness. And although there be also some use of them, for helping the weaker, notwithstanding all be not weak alike, nor strong alike, but some weaker, some stronger than another: yet, while they that are strong, do not glory in their strength, but in the Lord, the godly stronger will bear with the infirmity of the godly weaker, The stronger ought to bear with the weaker. nor will take the advantage of all the christian liberty, which other wise they might, and may still use in freedom of conscience, without any controlment of those ordinances: and yet, were it but for fear of offending the weaker (and following Christ, that would not break the bruised reed) they will still check themselves with this sentence of the Apostle, 1. Cor. 10.23. All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: which though they be lawful in their own nature by the law of God, yet if we must submit ourselves to an uniformity with our Brethren, to edify and win them to greater matters, as Saint Paul saith, He became all to all, that he might win all: how much more, when to these good purposes, a godly Synod hath made such ceremonial constitutions, to restrain or compel those that in arrogancy, disdain, or obstinacy, would not thus draw together by one rule in one uniformity, ought the godly people, yea, although all were strong, and none weak among us: yet, for fear of opening a gap to licentiousness and disorder, or to the breach of public concord, or to the contempt both of the Synod, and also of the Magistrate, to yield all due obedience and reverence to the uniform observation of such lawful ceremonial constitutions. And those (especially being private persons) as should call these uniform ordinances, biggins, babbles, and rattles, deserve to be rattled up with other rattles, for so unreverent contempt and disobedience. How much better, and with more grave advisement than these, our learned discoursing brethren, writeth calvin on these Constitutions of the Church, who in the tenth Chapter of the fourth Book of his Institutions, Section 1. speaking of the power of the Church, in making Ecclesiastical laws, he sayeth even in these words. Haec potestas tractanda nunc est, etc. calvin of the Church's constitutions. This power is now to be treated upon, whether it be lawful for the Church to bind the consciences with her laws: in which disputation, the political order is not touched, but only this is handled, Ca●uine in Inst●t. lib 4. ca ●0. sect. 1. What constitutions of the Church are to be impugned▪ s and what are not. that God may be orderly worshipped, according to the rule that he hath prescribed, and that the spiritual liberty, which respecteth God may remain safe unto us: the use hath obtained, that those things are called the traditions of men, whatsoever Edicts of the worship of God besides his word, have proceeded from men. Against these is our strife, not against the holy and profitable constitutions of the Church, which make either to keep discipline, or honesty, or peace. The end of our striving, is to restrain the unmeasurable and barbarous Empire, that they usurp upon the souls, which would be counted the Pastors of the Church, but in very deed, are the most cruel butchers. Here we see, what Ecclesiastical laws and constitutions calvin alloweth, and what he impugneth. If they be such as be made for matter of the worship of God, or to encroach upon the spiritual liberty of the conscience, calvin proclaimeth war against them, and so do we also, but, if they be such as tend to any of these three good ends, discipline, honesty, or peace, calvin pro●esseth not to strive with any such constitutions, and such only do we defend, and either our Brethren strive against them, or we agree so far herein. But here calvin (lest the good and lawful constitutions also, shoul● be thought suspected, as matters touching the entangling of the conscience,) after he hath moved the question of Saint Paul's saying, Rom. 13.5. how we must obey the Prince's laws, not only for wrath, but for conscience, proprie autem, etc. but properly conscience respecteth only God, as I have already said. Hereupon (saith he) sect. 4. it cometh to pass, Sect. 4. that a law is said to bind the conscience, which bindeth a man simply without men's looking into it, or without consideration had of them, as for example, How Gods law doth bind the conscience in the breach thereof. God commandeth not only to keep the soul pure and chaste from all lust, but also forbiddeth any uncleanness of words and outward lasciviousness. To the observation of this law my conscience is subject, although there were no man else in the world alive. Even so, he that demeaneth himself intemperately, sinneth not only in that he giveth evil example to his brother, but he hath his conscience tied with a guiltiness towards God: In matters indifferent the conscience is free, though the body obey for avoiding offence. in matters that are indifferent, the reason is otherwise, for if they breed any offence: we ought to abstain, howbeit, with a free conscience, so doth Paul speak of flesh consecrated to Idols: If any (saith he) cast a scruple, touch it not for conscience sake, conscience I say not thine, but the others. The faithful man should sin, if before hand being admonished, he would notwithstanding ea●e that flesh. Nevertheless, howsoever in respect of his brother, an abstinence is necessary for him, as it is of God prescribed, Obedience for conscience sake. yet for all that, he leaveth not to hold the liberty of conscience: we see how this law, binding the external work, leaveth conscience unbound. Now to return to the human laws: if they be made to this end, To what end human laws may be, or may not be made. to cast a religion upon us, as though the observation of them were by themselves necessary, we say that they were imposed upon the conscience, which thing was not lawful, for our conscience hath not to do with men, but with God alone, whereunto appertaineth that common difference, between the earthly court, and the court of conscience, etc. But yet (saith calvin further on this matter) that difficulty is not cleared that ariseth out of Paul's words. For, How princes must be obeyed for conscience. if we must obey Princes not only for because of punishments, but of conscience, it seemeth to follow thereupon, that the laws of Princes have dominion over the conscience: which thing if it be true, the same also must be said of the laws Ecclesiastical. I answer: First, we must distinguish, inter genus & species, between the general kind, and the special forms thereof. For, although the particular laws touch not the conscience, yet are we holden by a general commandment of God, The prince's laws touch the conscience in generality, though not in specialty. which commendeth unto us the authority of the Magistrates: and on this hingin (or principal point) consisteth Paul's disputation: the Magistrates, because they are ordained of God, are to be prosecuted with honour: in the mean season he teacheth not, that the laws which are written of them, pertain to the inward government of the soul, while in every place he extolleth both the worship of God, and the spiritual rule of living justly, above any whatsoever decrees of men. Another thing also is worthy to be noted, (which yet dependeth on that we have said before) the laws of men, whether they be made of the Magistrate, or of the Church, although they are necessary to be kept, (I speak of good and just laws) even therefore (notwithstanding by themselves they bind not the conscience) because the whole necessity of keeping them, hath respect to the general end, How good laws made of the Magistrate or of the Church, are to be kept. but it consisteth not in the things that are commanded: from this order they differ far, that both prescribe a new form of worshipping God, and ordain a necessity in free things. Thus far doth calvin show, how far the Magistrates, and the Church's constitutions, are good and necessary to be obeyed of all alike the christian subjects, so far as they impose no simple necessity of themselves, nor any necessity at all to salvation, nor directly touch the court of conscience, nor are matter of God's worship, from all which three points, all our Magistrates and Churches constitutions are free, and therefore, except our Brethren will offer them wrong, they have no just cause to refuse or impugn them. Concord in constitutions. When calvin hath now thus declared, how farre-foorth the Magistrates, and the Church's constitutions are lawful and good, after he hath at large confuted the traditions of the Papists, (lest rashly we should condemn all alike) he showeth again in the 27. Section, Sect. 27. how we must take heed what constitutions of the Church we inveigh against. But (saith he) since the most part of the unskilful persons, when as they hear that the consciences of men are wickedly bound to human traditions, and that God is worshipped in vain, they with the same dash include all the laws, All the Church's laws are not to be counted human traditions. wherewith the order of the Church is established, we must here also in good time, meet with their error. Certainly we may very soon be here deceived, because it appeareth not by and by at the first show, what difference there is between those laws and these, but I will so lay down the matter in few words, that the likeness of them shall beguile none. This (first) let us hold, if in every society of men we see that it is necessary there be some policy, which may serve to nourish the common peace, Some rite or ceremony ought ever to flourish. and to retain concord: if in the affairs that are to be achieved, there ought always some rite (or ceremony) to flourish, which that it should not be cast off, appertaineth to public honesty, yea, and to humanity itself. The same is to be observed especially in the Churches, which are best of all upholden, with a well set constitution of all things, but then without concord, No Churches at all without concord. they are utterly no Churches at all: for which cause, if we will have good regard to the safety of the Church, we must wholly with diligence look to that which Paul commandeth, that all things be decently done, and according to order. But when as in the manners of men, there is so great diversity, so great variety in their minds, so great fight in judgements and wits: neither is any policy firm enough, except it be settled with certain laws: neither can any rite (or ceremony) be kept, without a certain standing form thereof: the laws therefore that are profitable hereunto, we are so far off from condemning them, that we rather contend, that if these were taken away, The force of laws. the Church's sinews are dissolved, they are wholly defaced and scattered abroad. For that which Paul requireth, can not be had, that all things should be done decently and in order, except order itself and comeliness consist by observations (as it were certain bounds) added thereunto. Order and comeliness maintained by observations. This thing is only to be always excepted in these observations, that they be not believed either to be necessary to salvation, and so bind the conscience with a religion: or that they be directed to the worship of God, Sect. 28. and so piety be reposed in them. We have therefore the best and the most faithful note, which purteth difference between those wicked constitutions (by which it is said, that true religion is obscured, and the consciences subverted, Comeliness and order. ) and between the lawful observations of the Church. Either decency, or order, or both, are the notes of difference between good and evil constitutions. If we shall remember unto these, that one of the two be ever set down, or both of them together, that in the holy assembly of the faithful, all things be decently performed, and with the dignity that is meet: that the community itself of men be retained in order, as it were with certain bonds of humanity and moderation. For, whereas it is once understood, that the law is made for public honesty sake, the superstition is already taken away, into the which they fall, that measure the worship of God by men's inventions. Again, when as it is known that it tendeth to the common use, that false opinion of bond, and of necessity is overthrown, which cast a great terror to the consciences, when as traditions were thought necessary to salvation, sith that here is nothing sought, but that charity might be nourished amongst us by a common duty. These words of calvin, do most clearly prove, a necessary uniformity of all the people in common alike, to the observation of these ceremonial laws, and constitutions. And here, lest any scruple or cavil should arise, about the understanding this way or that way, of these the Apostles words, which are the general squire of all these ceremonial constitutions, Let all things be done decently, and in order: calvin also expoundeth the true and simple understanding of them, and proceeding, sayeth: Caluines' definition of comeliness and order. But it is worth the labour, yet more clearly to define, what is comprehended under that comeliness which Paul commendeth, and what also under order. And verily, the end of comeliness is partly, The end of comeliness that while the rites or ceremonies are adhibited, which may move a reverence to the holy matters, we should by such helps be stirred up to godliness: partly also, that the modesty and gravity which ought to be regarded in all honest actions, should there shine most of all. In order, this is the first thing, that they that are the Governors should know a rule and law of well governing: but the people that is governed, should accustom themselves to an obedience of God, and to a right discipline, and then, that the state of the Church being well composed, peace and tranquility be provided for. We will not therefore call that comeliness, wherein there is nothing besides a vain delight: The false and vain comeliness. the example whereof we see, in the Theaterlyke furniture which the Papists do use in their divine service, where nothing else appeareth, than a vizard of an unprofitable gorgeousness, and an excess without fruit. But unto us, that shall be comely that shall so be fit for the reverence of the holy mysteries, that it be a meet exercise unto godliness, True and fruitful comeliness. or at the least, ●reath of orders. that which shall make a beawtifying agreeable to the action, and yet the same not without fruit, but that it may admonish the faithful, with how great modesty, religion, observancy, they ought to handle the divine service. Moreover, that Ceremonies should be an exercise unto godliness, it is necessary that they lead us strait to Christ. Likewise for order, we will not set it in those toyish pomps, that have nothing but a vanishing glory, True and false order. but in that composition (or placing of things together) that may take away all confusion, rudeness, stubborness, all troubles and dissensions. To all this again, we agree with calvin, and desire no other, nor have (I hope) any other Ecclesiastical laws, and ceremonial constitutions, then are answerable in all points to this interpretation of comeliness and order, howsoever to the honour of these our brethren, they may seem otherwise. And here calvin (after he hath exemplified this general rule with such ceremonial constitutions as are mentioned in the scripture, which I reserve, till our brethren anon shall lead us to the ceremony of kneeling) he concludeth thus upon the general precept of the Apostle. Last of all, sith that for this cause he delivered nothing expressly, because these things are neither necessary to salvation, Sect. 30. Discipline and ceremonies are to be diversly applied to edification, according to the manners of every nation and age. and aught to be diversly applied to the edification of the Church, according to the manners of every nation & age, therefore it shall be meet as well to change and abrogate those that are used, as to institute new. I confess in deed, we must not run rashly, nor often, nor on light causes, to the making of new, but, what may hurt or edify, charity will best judge, which if we shall suffer to be our moderatrix, all shall be safe. But now it is the duty of the christian people, to keep such things as are ordained according to this rule (with a free conscience in deed, and with no superstition) howbeit, with a godly & an easy inclination to obey them, not to hold them in contempt, Sect. 31. Haughty disdain and frowardness, in violating ceremonies. not to overslip them of reckless negligence, so far is it off, that by haughty disdain, and frowardness, they should openly violate them. What liberty (thou wilt say) can there be of conscience, in so great observance and heed taking? yea rather, it shall notably stand together, when as we shall consider, that the sanctions whereunto we be bound, are not fixed & perpetual, How we are all bound to these constitutions to observe them, though all of us have no need of them. but are outward rudiments of our humane infirmity, whereof, though we all of us have no need, yet we all of us do use them, because we are mutually bound to nourish charity amongst us one to another, this we may reknowledge in the example above cited. What? is there a religion consisting in a woman's * Carbaso. linen kerchief, that it were a wicked thing to come forth bare headed? is the decree of her silence a holy thing, that can not be violated without heinous wickedness? is there any mystery in kneeling, in burying of a dead corpse, which can not be passed over without great offence, that must be purged? no such thing: Ceremonies. for if a woman have need to make such haste to help her neighbour, In what extraordinary and necessary cases, ceremonies and constitutions may be omitted. women's covering o● uncovering their head. women's speaking. Praying standing, or kneeling. burial. The custom of the region to be regarded in ●hese things The breach by contempt or contumacy of ●hese things Festival days. Manner of building Churches. Singing Psalms. The changing of these things by every body, is the occasion of contempt. Caluine● re●erent writing of Ceremonies, how far different from these our Breath. that she can have no leisure to cover her head, she hath offended nothing, if she run to help bare headed: and there is place where she hath no less opportunity to speak, than in an other place to hold her peace. And also, there is nothing that letteth him to pray which standeth, who being let by disease, is not able to boowe his knees. To conclude, it is better in good time to bury the dead, than where there wanteth a winding sheet, or where there are not some to carry forth the corpse, to tarry till it putrify above ground. Howbeit, there is nevertheless in these things, that to be done, or to be taken heed of, that the custom of the region, the ordinances, yea finally, humanity itself, and the rule of modesty shall suggest: wherein, if by unskilfulness or forgetfulness, any thing be done amiss, no crime is committed: but if it be done of contempt, it is a contumacy, or proud stubborness, not to be allowed. In like manner, the days themselves what they should be, and the hours, what manner building of the places, which Psalms, what day should be song, it maketh no matter. And yet it is meet, that there be certain days and hours standing, and a fit place to receive them all, if there be any consideration had of peace keeping. For of how many brawls, would the confusion of those things be the seed, if that according as every body liked, it were lawful to change those things that pertained to the common state? sith that it will never come to pass, that one thing would never please them all, if matters, as though they were laid forth in the midst among them, were left at every one's choice: but if any body grumble hereat, and would here be more wise than he ought to be, let him see to it with what reason he may approve unto the Lord his way wardness. Nevertheless, this saying of Paul ought to satisfy us, that we have not a custom of contending, nor the Churches of God. Thus modestly and with great gravity, writeth calvin of these Ecclesiastical Ceremonies and constitutions, wherein, although it were but of a linn●n kerchief on a woman's head, yet, (for public order sake) he would not have it contemned, though upon occasion or necessity it were omitted, so far off was calvin from this contemptuous likening of these smallest Ceremonies in the Church, to the sucking of the dug, to the wearing of biggins, and to the carrying of rattles, and other childish babbles, or to the scoffing at the uniformity of them, as though we would feed old men and sucking infants all with one kind of meat, or as though we would clothe all ages in a robe of one assize: for, notwithstanding (as calvin saith) they be but outward rudiments, to help and strengthen our human infirmity, whereof (some being of riper age in Christ than other) we all of us have no need of them, The Constitutions. Acts 15. & yet (saith calvin) we all of us do use them, & why so? but that, both because (saith he) we are mutually bound to cherish charity amongst us one to another: and because it is not lawful for every body to change those things, Why every particular person or congregation may not alter ceremonial constitutions. that appertain to the common state, but that they must be only changed or taken away, by the same authority that did make them: and as they are not lawful to every person, no more are they lawful to every particular Church to change them, because they reach higher▪ even to the common state of the whole region. And beside, if it should be suffered, that every private person, and by the same reason, every private congregation, might change the Churches public constitutions: since that, tot capita, tot sensus, no one constitution would ever please all persons: this would become the very seed (as calvin calleth it) of all brawls and confusion, and in the end, the clean overthrow of the Church. These principles of calvin being well weighed, let now the indifferent reader judge, how truly our Brethren say of these ceremonial constitutions, wherein we of long time in England, have been carried away with an untrue principle, that uniformity must be in all places, and things alike. If this be an untrue principle in these matters, then hath calvin himself helped to carry us away. True or untrue principles of uniformity. But (I am afraid) our Brethren (for all their learning) are alittle too much carried away with affection, that maketh them both in this matter and in many other, mistake untrue, for true, and true, for untrue principles. But let us now see our brethren's reason, that they allege against uniformity in these ceremonial constitutions. Our land is not yet wholly converted to Christ (so great hath been our negligence hitherto) therefore there can not be such an uniformity of orders in all places as shall be profitable for all. The learned disc. pa. 120. This argument, although we have seen it already sufficiently confuted by calvin, let us yet consider it somewhat further, in the example even of these constitutions, Bridges. made by the Apostles and Elders, Acts 15. so often alleged by our Brethren: for, if this argument be good, then could not they have made (as they did) those Ceremonial constitutions, and commanded the charge of keeping them for any time, The Apostle decree, Acts 15. general, and to be kept uniformally during the time thereof generally and with like uniformity of all the Churches, to whom they wrote their letter and decree, saying: verse 23.28. and 29. the Apostles, the Elders, and the Brethren, unto the Brethren that are of the Gentiles, in Antiochia, and in Syria, and in Cilicia, etc. It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us, to lay no more burden upon you than these necessary things, that is, that ye abstain from things offered to idols and blood, and that which is strangled▪ and from fornication, from which, if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well, etc. Conversion to Christ. Were none of all those Christians in the Churches, to whom they wrote these decrees, wholly converted to Christ? Whether all the Churches were wholly converted. or were all the christians in all those churches, wholly converted, or converted all alike? and yet the decree was generally, to be uniformly kept of all those churches. Yea, what shall we say to the Church of jerusalem itself, where this decree was made? were they all wholly converted to Christ? no hypocrites, nor yet weak brethren among them? Whether the Church at jerusalem were wholly converted. did not even the Elders of jerusalem themselves, bewray the great weakness of their multitude, when as afterwards, Acts 21. S. Paul came to jerusalem? did they not say to Paul, vers. 20. thou seest (Brother) how many thousand jews there be which believe, and they all are earnest followers of the law, etc. and for these weak brethren's sakes, they counceled S. Paul to purify himself being a jew, according to the ceremonies of the jews: and although they knew the christian liberty, yet would they have S. Paul (to avoid the offensive opinion, that the multitude of the christian jews had conceived of him) to conform himself unto their weakness. All the Church of Corinth not wholly converted. and yet all uniformally subject to the apostles orders. And what shall we say to the other Churches of the Gentiles? were all the Christians in the Church of Corinthus wholly converted to Christ? and yet notwithstanding, S. Paul ceaseth not to prescribe unto them all alike, some ceremonial constitutions: neither was the difference of their strengths, or weakness in their conversion to Christ, any breach or let, to the uniformity of their observing the same. But by this reason of our brethren, there could be no uniformity of ceremonies, not only then with them, or now with us, By our Breath, reason, no land nor Church in the world should have uniformity. in all places of the Church and land of England, but in no place in all the whole world: for, where is the whole land or church wholly converted to Christ? if they say, that by these words, not wholly converted, they mean not all, nor the greatest part, but that some be not converted to Christ: then they confute their own reason, in that the weakness of the lesser part, aught to be no prejudice, to the making of uniform ceremonies unto the greatest part: for the law considereth rather the universal multitude, than every particular party, and so, confessing that our land (God be praised for it) is for the greatest part converted, though not wholly converted, How our land is wholly converted. in respect of every person: yet, as the greatest part is commonly called by the name of the whole, it may be well said also, to be wholly converted. But what mean they hereby, that our land is not yet wholly converted to Christ? Our Breath. confession that for religion we converted to the whole substance thereof. they have confessed in their preface unto this learned discourse, that for the substance of religion, it is now publicly maintained for our true & holy faith. If any be not yet converted unto the whole truth thereof, how doth not this argument make the more, for uniformity in these ceremonial constit. were it the easilier to win them (if by any means they may be won) by keeping an uniform order in those ceremonial constitutions, that are neither ill of themselves, The land not wholly converted. and are but ordained to these good ends, that order and comeliness be retained? shall we rather win and convert them to Christ, Uniformity in other matters the readiest way to win such as are not yet converted. both by rejecting all uniformity in those ceremonial constitutions, that both they and we agree upon to be good and lawful, and also by rejecting all uniformity in any other that may be devised? Yea, by this their rule, we should keep no uniformity in any of those ceremonial constitutions, that they their selves set forth unto us: or, is it lawful for them, to press their Ceremonies upon us, to be observed with uniformity, and is it not more lawful for us, having the law with us, to do the like to them, Our Breath. their selves urge uniformity against this principle. so long as we urge none, nor otherwise, than serving to order and to comeliness? if ours seem not so to them, no more do theirs seem so to us, and we hope, and thank God, that we are also even the greatest part, and therefore may be called the whole, that are (we trust) wholly converted to Christ: How we are and are not wholly converted to Christ. wholly (I mean) for substance of Religion, though in measure of faith, and conversation of life, there is none of us all, nor yet of our Brethren, so wholly converted, but that the best of us all come short, and oftentimes divert from Christ, and must still be fain to cry to Christ, Convert me domine, & convertar, Convert me Lord, and I shall be (wholly) converted. But will uniformity (in those Ceremonies, that are given to help and strengthen our weakness) hinder our Conversion unto Christ? yea rather, how will they not greatly further it? But now, if we be not so wholly converted to Christ, as we ought to be, Our Breath accusation of negligence. although (I confess) negligence may be some part, & too great a part, the cause thereof: yet (I fear me) our brethren's too double diligence, Our Breath. too double diligence. in disturbing the concord of the Preachers, and even in this rejecting of uniformity in these ceremonial constitutions, giving liberty not only to every Synod of themselves, but also to themselves in these their discourses, without any Synod, and without yea against the authority of the civil christian Magistrate, and much more without, yea against the whole state of the Church in this our land, yea giving liberty to every particular church, and withal by these their reasons, to every private person, according as he or she is weak or strong, to admit or reject all uniformity, to alter and innovate as they fancy, all such Laws and constitutions of ceremonial rites & orders, as are by a lawful & godly Synod of the Church decreed; & by the authority of the civil christian magistrate, confirmed, established & proclaimed, to be universally among us, & uniformly observed. These sayings & doings of our Brethren their selves, These stirs moved by our Breath. a great cause that many are not converted. have been, if not the chiefest, yet not the least cause, that not only our land is not so wholly converted to Christ, as it might otherwise have been, but that so many are wholly averted from Christ, and become perverted renegates & apostates unto Antichrist, that before these stirs between our brethren & us began, were very well coming on, & by little & little (so far as man can judge or hope by outward signs) might have been thoroughly won, Assemblies for new orders. and wholly converted to Christ, or might yet in the unsearchable riches of gods mercies be reclaimed and reconuerted. But, firmum flat fundamentum, Deus novit qui sunt sui. If they be none of Gods elected, exi●runt e nobis, non fuerunt ex nobis: they went from among us, they were none of us. But now to our brethren's conclusion, that they gather on these premises. Therefore it were meet that the Overseers, and Elders of the Church, should come together to consider of this matter, The learned disc. pa. 121. what orders were most meet for diverse places, to bring them to the obedience of Christ: what for the furtherance of them that are newly come, and what for the continuance and increase, of them that are very well come on. Here still the sovereign Prince or civil Christian Magistrate, Bridges. is either clean forgotten, or of purpose rejected, as having no stroke at all in these matters, except they will include the Prince in one of these terms, The Prince still omitted the Overseers and Elders of the Church. But they have before restrained those titles, to the Pastors, and to those Elders whom they call the Governors, and distinguishing the Prince from them, they call him the civil Christian Magistrate. But now, what orders when they come together to consider of this matter, can these Overseers and Elders devise, that shallbe most meet for diverse places: The Elders assembly to consider of orders meet for diverse places. if they consider not on this withal, that (if not in all places, yet at the least in all those diverse places) they should be uniformly kept? For, to keep diversity, or to keep them diversely, in those diverse places, what is it else, than to be bound in no places to no orders at all? Whether the orders that shall be devised shall be kept uniformly. Will they not yet at least wise, have those orders that shallbe devised, for the furtherance of them that are newly come, to be uniformly kept among all them that be such persons in all, or diverse places? And likewise, those orders that should be devised, for the continuance and increase of them, that are very well come on, to be kept also uniformly in all those diverse places, where such persons be? But again, if they shall consider this better; what certain order can here be set down, that shall be meet for the diversities of these persons, when they still (by the grace of God) are growing up, and ware daily and hourly of riper age and riper, and always going forward and coming on to Christ, as to the goal and mark set before them. What? And shall then these Overseers and Elders make the orders most fit to the Pastors, do nothing else but still come together and daily and hourly change their orders? Or shall these persons wear their coat still of one assize? Or if some come on forwarder than othersome, so that they can not keep a jump and meet proportion to every one; shall we have no certain orders at all, for fear these Overseers and Elders should miss in some? See, what a childish reason (if I may be so bold to return the term) this is of our Brethren that tell us of childish babbles, How the new orders should kept. to take away all uniformity of ceremonial constitutions, and all for the difference of some diverse persons. And yet we deny not, but that as there are diversities of persons, there may well be diverse and several orders appointed for them; divers orders kept uniformly in the degrees of diverse persons. howbeit, to be kept uniformly by those diverse degrees of persons, for whom they are made. For we do not in such manner (as our brethren untruly report of us) feed old men and sucking infants all with one kind of meat, nor clothe all ages in a robe of one assyze: but such and such ceremonies, are appointed to such and such degrees of persons, and not all to all alike, although some of those ceremonies be of that nature, Some ceremonies may serve both old and young. that they may as well stretch to all; as some one kind of meat may be fed on, even of old men and of young also, as well as of sucking infants; and of sucking infants, as well as of old and young men. May not all the people in a parish come to some one Church, in some one place, at some one time, appointed: and there all of them kneeling on their knees (at least so many as be able) say altogether some one appointed form of prayer, or confession, or thanksgiving: may they not all (at least as many as can) sing together some one certain number of Psalms or hymns? May not all infants, by some one public form prescribed thereof, be Baptized alike? And some one like public form be appointed, for all the communicantes to receive the lords supper after one manner? May not one form of marrying be appointed to be used through out all the whole Land and Realm of England? If there can be no one ceremonial law or constitution made of these things: Our br. prescription of ordinances and ceremonies to be used in general uniformly. how have our Brethren abused us, that have set out a book of common prayer, wherein many of these (some one) ordinances, (being all of them indeed but ceremonial constitutions and decrees) are set down and prescribed to be in generally and uniformally used of all the Churches in the Realm, so far as their authority stretcheth to prescribe them? For if they prescribe them not: why do they set them out, if they regard not who use them, and who use them not? I see not therefore, but that even by their own example, (and much better having utter warrant) some ceremonial constitutions may be well decreed, for an ordinary public and general order, to be uniformly kept, of all Churches a like in a whole Realm, so far as other necessity or some particular occasion, The learned disc. pa. 121. & 122 doth restrain them. The same doctrine, although not the same parts of doctrine, is to be every where: but ceremonies, even as they be ceremonies, do admit variety; as time, persons, and occasions serve to be diverse. Yea Christian liberty, in them sometimes, Variety of ceremonies. is necessary to be testified, because there are many so simple, that they know not the difference between those things, that are necessary in the Church, and those that are not of necessity. There be that think a Cross or Foont (as they call it) is as necessary in Baptism, as water: and that kneeling at the Communion, is more necessary than preaching of the lords death: that a surplus in Common prayer, is more necessary, than a devout mind: and great occasions offered to the ignorant so to think, when they see them that preach most diligently, pray most fervently, and minister the Sacraments most reverently, according to Christ's institution, to be displaced of all ministery, for a Cross, or a Foont, or a Surplus, or some such other trifle. There is great difference between Doctrine and Ceremonies, Bridges but if our Brothers former reasons should hold, to respect the diversities of the people: they might alter the unity of the doctrine too. But the same parts of doctrine (they say) are not to be every where. How the same parts of doctrine are not to be taught every where. This is spoken somewhat too obscurely. For, the doctrine and all the parts thereof, are indeed to be every where, though (I grant) not all to be taught every where to the same persons, at the same time: and so may the use of the same ceremonies also, upon occasion be altered, or left off. But ceremonies (they say) even as they be ceremonies, do admit variety. How ceremonies admit variety, and uniformity much better. This I grant likewise, and yet again even as they be ceremonies, they as well admit uniformity, and in some cases especially may much better admit uniformity (even as they be ceremonies) than variety, Variety admitted in constitutions ceremonial accidentally and much nearer is it to the nature of any ordinance and decree, be it ceremonial or otherwise, to admit uniformity than variety. For else, it could be no certain decree. When as the variety which it admitteth, cometh unto them in that respect, as extraordinary times, persons, and occasions, serve to be diverse, or as necessity itself (that hath no law) enforceth the breaking of the ceremonies, How the christian liberty in ceremonies necessary to be testified sometimes, & at all times. all which is but accidental to them, and no prejudice to the ordinary and general use of the same ceremonies uniformity. Yea (say they) Christian liberty, in them sometimes is necessary to be testified, because there are many so simple, that they know not the difference between those things, that are necessary in the Church, and those that are not necessary. Things necessary and not necessary. This we grant likewise, that sometimes in ceremonies the christian liberty is necessary to be testified. Yea rather, at all times the christian liberty is to be testified. And when w●● use ceremonies most uniformally, then is the best use withal of this restification of the christian liberty. And therefore it yet followeth not, that upon such testification made, we must never keep any one order or uniformity of any ceremony at all. Sometimes ceremonies altered for their sakes that knew not the difference of necessary and not necessary things. And yet beside, we grant this also, even for the testification of the Christian liberty, by omitting sometimes or altering some ceremony or some part thereof; and even for this cause also that our Brethren here allege. Yea, although there were not many so simple, that they know not the difference between those things, that are necessary in the Church, & those that are not of necessity; yet, because this error might grow in them, if the uniformity of all ceremonies were urged too precisely. Howbeit, all this hindereth not, but that for the ordinary and general use, the uniformity of them may still remain, specially being so used, that testification at all times or often may be made against all absolute necessities, Not only simple persons, but learned have erred in this matter. and all superstitions, or any other abuses of them. Which indeed is the more needful, because this error of simple necessity, is not always only of simple persons: but even of learned men. As we read of S. Peter, how stiffly for a while he held the necessity of the jewish ceremonies, after their date was out. And how the multitude even of the faithful jews were so affected still unto them that S. Paul was feign for that time, to yield to the conformity of them. And this is not the smallest error, among the most learned of the Papists at this day. Yea, by their leave also, I think these our Learned discoursers do chiefly stumble at the like stone. Our Brethr. error in not knowing necessary and unnecessary things. Not only about the jews judicials, but for their Sanedrin and these consistory Elders (if there were ever any such as they pretend, but can prove none) and for some parts of discipline and ceremonies too: urging these things as necessary that are not necessary. Might not a man be so bold for all these things, as to send home these speeches to the authors of them? Yea Christian liberty, in them sometimes, is necessary to be testified, because there are many so simple that they know not, the difference between those things that are necessary in the Church, and those that are not of necessity: when as we see, so notable learned men even in their Learned Discourses, so foully overshoot themselves, in not considering thoroughly of this difference between things necessary in the Church, and not of necessity. But to come now to the particular ceremonies, wherein our Brethren would have this variety admitted. There be (say they) that think a Cross or Font (as they call it) is as necessary in Baptism, as water. For my part, I have not heard of any such, that think so, Baptizing with a cross and a font. nor I ever read of any the grossest Papist, that so writeth. They rather err on the other side, in standing too much on the necessity of water, when they make 〈◊〉 the necessity even of salvation. I grant, The sign of the cross in Baptism. they put too great a confidence in the sign of the Cross, and many have done and do, abuse it with foul superstition and Idolatry. But yet: all this debarreth not, but that there was in the primitive Church before those abuses came, and since those abuses (God be praised) have been removed from among us, there may likewise remain, some good use thereof: being only used as a sign or token, without any opinion of virtue in the same. For, we do not detest the sign itself, as did julian the Apostata, though we honour it not, as julian upbraided falsely to the Christians, that they did. As for the font, (for so we call it indeed, and may well enough, Baptizing in a font. with out any suspicion of the term) in my opinion, is the fittest of any ordinary place, for the baptizing of our infants. Now, if these caeremonies do admit variety, as times, persons, and occasions serve to be diverse: then are they not of themselves mere superstitious, nor yet utterly to be left off, no, though they have been (as hath the sign of the Cross) shamefully abused, If these ceremonies admit variety, than they may be used but these caeremonies being so used, as they are now ordained to be used, and that with liberty of exception against the abuses, and testification of the right use of them: they may be used still, even by our brethren's confession well enough, so that we will grant them, that they may admit variety: and we are content to grant it, if they would indeed (as here in word they say) but admit it sometimes, and leave of the sign of the Cross in Baptism now and then, only to remove the error of necessity from the simple, so that they leave it not of in contempt, nor usually: Our Brethr. encroaching upon the liberty of variety. or that the infant sometimes (as times, persons, and occasions serve to be diverse) be not baptised in the font, but in a basin: so they do not (upon this permission of variety sometimes) in the end grow from sometimes to all times, and make a necessity on the contrary, that it must not be baptised in the font, and the sign of the Cross must not be used at all: because both the font and the Cross have been abused. If they would not (as some do) encroach upon this liberty of variety, but use it with discretion, when diversity only of time, 〈◊〉, persons and occasion served: there is none of our Brethren that might incur displeasure, much less displacing by so doing. Kneeling at the communion. And that kneeling (say they) at the Communion, is more necessary than preaching of the lords death. If kneeling at prayer and thanksgiving be a good caeremony, it may be well appointed to be used also at the Communion▪ when (besides our recording of the lords death) we pray unto him, that we may receive those his heavenly mysteries worthily, kneeling at the Communion. and give him thanks both for the same his precious death, and for the institution of this memorial thereof, and all the other his benefits: whereupon, the name of Eucharist or thanksgiving, is one of the proper names of this Sacrament. How preaching is or is not simply necessary at the communion. But to say, that some think kneeling at the communion is more necessary than preaching of the lords death, is hardly and doubtfully spoken. If they mean by preaching that which Christ saith, so often as ye shall do these, ye shall show forth the lords death: I grant, in that sense, preaching is simply necessary, and so, far more necessary than is kneeling, How kneeling is or is not necessary at the communion. which is but necessary conditionally, and that not in the proper sense of necessity but of conveniency. But if they mean by preaching the free Discourse by the Pastor, at large and at his voluntary, treating on the lords death, besides the ordinary form in the book prescribed: then is not preaching at the Communion (for any necessity thereof) any more necessary than is kneeling; and in some respect not so necessary neither, in that an order thereof may be easilier appointed to the Communicants, and observed of them, than a Sermon at the ministration of the Communion, to be always so preached by the Pastor. How kneeling at the communion may well admit a decree of uniformity. As for kneeling, is indeed but an outward ceremony, nor any thing comparable to preaching, in the dignity of the action: howbeit, it is a reverent external action, and so being easy for the most part of all the communicantes to be performed, it may well admit a ceremonial constitution and decree for the public and uniform observation of the same. Whereupon (me thinketh) calvin also writeth very well, even among those his testimonies that I last cited, but I there passed it over and reserved his observation of kneeling, with his other particular examples, for this place. Who saith hereon, Lib. 4. Instit. cap. 10. sect. 29. in these words. Calu. in Inst. lib. 4. cap. 10. sec. 29. Of the former kind, (that is to say of those ceremonial constitutions that are for comeliness) Paul hath examples: as, that no profane banquetes be mixed together with the holy supper of the lord Ceremonial constitutions for comeliness. That women except they cover their heads, come not forth into a public place, and many other things are had in 〈◊〉 use. That we pray kneeling and bare headed, that we administer the Sacraments of the Lord not uncleanely, but with some dignity, that in burying the dead we give thereto a certain honesty, and such other things as pertain thereto. In the other kind, (that is to say for order) there are hours, designed to the public prayers, to the sermons and to the mystical actions. In the sermons themselves there is quiet and silence, and places appointed thereunto, the tunes (or singing together) of the hymns; and days prefixed for celebrating of the L. supper, calvin for kneeling. that which Paul forbiddeth that women teach not in the Church, and if there be any such like things. But chiefly those that conserve discipline, as the Catechizing, the Eccl. Censures, excommunication, fasts, & the things that may be referred to that catalogue. All eccl. constitutions either pertain to rites and ceremonies, or to discipline and peace. Thus may we refer all the Eccl. constitutions, which we receive for good and wholesome, unto two heads: for the one sort of them have respect to rites and ceremonies, the other to discipline and peace. Howbeit, because here is danger, lest of the one part the false Bishops should snatch a pretence hereupon, to excuse their wicked and tyrannical laws (he speaketh of those Popish Bishops whom he before described:) and on the other part, Sec. 30. lest there should be any too much fearful, which being warned by the former evils, would leave no place at all to laws, be they never so holy: it is a thing worth the labour here to testify, that (to conclude) I do allow those human constitutions, which are founded on the authority of God, and which are taken out of the scripture, and so are wholly divine. How kneeling is both an human and divine tradition. Let the example be in the kneeling which is made while the solemn prayers are had. The question is, whether it be an human tradition, that is lawful for every one to refuse or neglect. I say, it is such an human tradition, as that with all it is a divine tradition. It is of God, in respect it is a part of that comeliness, No one form of discipline & ceremonies not particularly prescribed to all ages. the care and conservation whereof is commended unto us by the Apostle. But it is of man, in respect that it designeth out in specialty that which generally was ordained, rather than expounded. By this one example we may esteem, what we ought to think of this whole kind, to wit, because the Lord hath faithfully comprehended with his holy eyes, and clearly declared, both the whole sum of true righteousness, and all the parts of the worship of his godhead, and whatsoever was necessary to salvation: in these he only is our Master that must be heard: but because in external Discipline and Ceremonies, he would not particularly prescribe what we should follow; neither judged he one form to be convenient for all ages of the world: we must here flee unto the general rules that he gave, that what things so ever the necessity of the Church shall require to be commanded for order and comeliness, may be driven to them. Thus among other these ceremonial constitutions, writeth calvin, of kneeling at the times of solemn prayers, which are then most requisite, while we are participating the heavenly mysteries of the lords supper. And therefore kneeling, though it be not necessary with any simple necessity in itself, Wearing the surplus. yet as it is a reverent and divine ceremony, it is necessary, as convenient, at the times of solemn prayer and thanksgiving, and of consequence, at the communion, both for order and comeliness of the body's gesture, and for testification and edification also, of the minds devotion. But least a surplus here should be left out; that a surplus (say they) in common prayer, is more necessary than a devout mind. I do not think that any man is, or ever was of that opinion: For were he never so blind a Papist, yet till he chiefly stood on his blind devotion. And I appeal even to our brethren's consciences, whether they think indeed (as I believe they do not) that any man is of that mind. But what shall the reader and and all the people think of this, that the surplus being here one of the ceremonies brought in for instance, to admit variety, as times, persons, and occasions serve to be diverse, and so of consequence, may well be used, yea, and by the correlation of this rule, should be used ordinarily, though it admit sometimes such occasion of leaving it off. And this also is become one of the desires in this Learned Discourse, of all the faithful ministers that seek the reformation of the Church of England, that the surplus may be accounted but as a ceremony that admitteth such variety. The wearing a surplus. And yet we see, there are many amongst them so devoted against a surplus; that rather than they will wear it at any time, they will forsake all the ministery, and make great stir and trouble about it, notwithstanding the judgement of all the reverend and learned men, that have testified (as even here their selves also are feign to do) the indifference of it, and of the use thereof. But our Brethren not thinking of this contradiction between their own writing and their doing, but thinking (if at least wise they so think indeed) that there be (but what number they tell not) that think these ceremonies are more necessary than they be: let us now see, what reason moveth our Brethren to think that there be such as do think so. Of the occasion that some think these ceremonies are more necessary than they be. And great occasion (say they) offered to the ignorant so to think, when they see them that preach most diligently, pray most fervently, and minister the Sacraments most reverently, according to Christ's institution, to be displaced of all ministery, for a cross, or a font, or a surplus, or some such other trifle. Every thing here that misliketh our Brethr. is but a trifle with them. And thus they pretend unto the world, that they be displaced but for trifles, Our Brethr. are not displaced for trifles. But what soever these are, is all the communion book, and public prescribed form of divine service but a trifle too? And is the civil Christian Magistrates authority, and so, the Queen's majesties supreme government, in all Ecclesiastical causes so well as temporal, and of consequence, in all these and other causes in controversy between us, Displacing of Ministers. but a trifle with our Brethren too? and is all the superior authority of the Bishops, all the controversies about Discipline, and the Ecclesiastical Regiment of their tetrarchy, for Doctors, Pastors, Governors, The chief matters wherefore our Br. are displaced. and Deacons offices which they contend for, and all the other particular matters in question, both in this Learned Discourse, and in all their other treatises which they still set forth, nothing but trifles? For, these are the chiefest matters of their displacing, which are indeed far more weighty matters than is the making a sign of the Cross, than is the baptizing in a Font, or than is the wearing of a Surplice. If the ignorant think that they are displaced from all ministery, only for a Cross, or a Font, or a Surplice, or some such other ceremony, as they call trifles: surely, then are they very ignorant, and our Brethren delude the people in this ignorance, that tell them they are displaced from all ministry, but for these causes. Although indeed, were they displaced from all Ministry, Some not displaced but forsaking their calling. for none other causes then such as these, admitting also that these were but trifles too, as here they call them: albeit, some of them have voluntarily displaced themselves from all ministery, forsaking their calling, without being by any others displaced: but admit also they are displaced, and that from all ministery, (which notwithstanding, the most part of them, or the most learned of them, are not: and whether they are so, that compiled this Learned Discourse, God and themselves do knows:) yet am I sure that they need not, nor if their selves were not in greater fault of more contempt & obstinacy against these things, Faithful Ministers should rather yield to trifles than be displaced for them. than the weight of these things (by their own account) amounteth unto, they neither need, nor should be displaced of all ministery for them. For if these things be (as they say) but trifles, when as the yielding to them might keep themselves from being displaced: ought they for trifles to be the occasion of their own displacing, from such weighty matters as is all the ministery? So that even that which they pretend to the ignorant, yea, to the learned and all, in this their Learned Discourse, (to breed more odiousness to the displacers of them) as that they are displaced for trifles, doth show that this excuse is but a trifle, (or rather an untruth,) when as the matter, the more trifling it is, bewrayeth the greater obstinacy in him, that will rather suffer him to be displaced of all the ministery, and thereby all the people to be utterly given over to the wide world, for any benefit at all of the Ministry they shall have by him, or by any other of his procuring, rather than he will relent to the Synod, to the Church, to the Realm, to the Prince, but in any one thing, and that but such, as he his self confesseth to be but a trifle. How doth not this, the more that they extenuate the matter, aggravate the crime, and make it (as our Brethren said, Pag. 93.) that a less crime increased with contumacy and contempt of the Church's admonition, may become worthy of the fame castigation? But here our Brethren are so far from the acknowledgement of this great fault, Our Br. praisiug themselves. that to move the reader more with the indignity of their displacing, they fall a praising themselves, that they preach most diligently, pray most fervently, and minister the Sacraments most reverently, according to Christ's institution. All which three points in whom they do indeed concur, we must needs confess deserve high praise. And would God, both they, and we, and all the ministery, may do our endeavours to the uttermost of our gifts in these three duties. Our Br. most diligent preaching. But if our Br. preach never so diligently, and yet cut not the word of God a right and with discretion, (an ounce whereof is worth a pound of Learning:) if they speak not the words of truth and soberness, as Saint Paul saith to Festus, Acts 26. ver. 25. But spend all, or the most of their preaching, in contention about these unnecessary controversies, in Discoursing of Regiment and matters of state, in invectives against their Brethren, against the Prelates, yea, against the Civil Christian Magistrate, Discretion with diligence. (and all for the urging of these platforms,) it were a great deal more commendation (in other men's opinion, than it is in their own) to be less diligent in preaching, than some of them be. Notwithstanding, diligence in a good preacher indeed, is worthy both great commendation and (as Saint Paul saith) double honour. And whereas they recommend themselves also, that they pray most seruentlie: Our Br. most servant prayer. I am glad to hear of it, and God grant they do so. But why do they blab it thus to all the world, with publishing it in print? do they seek the people's praise herein also? must the fervency, and most fervency of their prayer, be blasoned thus abroad with this trump of their own Learned Discourse thereon? O that our Brethren would rather have remembered, what Christ said, Math. 6. ver. 5. of these that seek praises for their prayings A●en dic● vobis mercedem habent. Howbeit, fervency in all goodness deserveth praise, and in prayer is even the marrow of it. But, such fervency as condemneth (be it never so sound and godly) all prescribed form of public prayer, set forth for the people's use and edifying, by the authority of the true Church of Christ, and of the Christian Magistrate, is too fiery a fervency in my judgement. Too fiery fer●encie. Our Br. most reverend Ministration of the same. And as for their third commendation that they Minister the Sacraments most reverently, according to Christ's institution. What mea● they hereby? can they prove that our Communion Book, the prescribe● order whereof they refuse, both in public baptism and in the lords Supper, The Synods making pure caeremonies. for any material & necessary parts of the Sacraments are not ministered according to Christ's Institution? If they mislike them for any formal or accidental part, (which is rather no part at all) as not of the substance of them, but accedents and ornaments of comeliness and order,) do they also minister the Sacraments, according to Christ's institution, for place, for time and for all the manner of them (if the name of Christ's Institution may be applied to these appendances) as, for baptizing them in rivers, for ministering the Communion after Supper, Our ministration of the sacraments. for sitting at a Table, or rather on the ground, and such like? if it be lawful for them to leave all these circumstances, and yet they may be said to minister the Sacraments most reverently according to Christ's Institution: why should they refuse to Minister them according to the order prescribed by our Book, except they can prove, that we minister them not in any godly manner, but against Christ's Institution wickedly and unreverently, which they shall never be able to prove. Yea we minister them with all due reverence, and in many points, a great deal more reverently than they do. And therefore for these their unreverent demeanours, and obstinacy therein, against our good and reverent orders, by order and authority of the Church and Magistrate established, they are worthily displaced, though with grief thereat no less to us, Our Br. the chief causes or their own displacing. that they should deserve it, than unto them that they should feel it. But hereby the ignorant, and all other may well perceive, that it is not as they would bear the world in hand, they are displaced from all ministery for a Cross, or a Font, or a surplice, or some such other trifle, as they call them: but for matters far more importaunt and necessary, they their selves by their wilful contumacy, being the chief causes of their own displacing. The Synod therefore, aught to be careful in ordaining of caeremonies, The learned disc. pa. 122. not only that they be pure and agreeable to the word of God: but also that they be expedient for the time and persons, for whose use they be ordained: and as wilful contemners of good orders established by public authority, are worthy to be corrected, so entangling of men's consciences, or Tyrannical coaction in these indifferent matters, must always be avoided. Still our Brethren give the whole authority in ordaining of Caeremonies, to the Synod. Albeit, I gladly subscribe thus far hereto, Bridges that in ordaining of caeremonies, The Synods carefulness in ordaining ceremonies. (and so far as their authority to ordain reacheth:) the Synod ought to be careful, that they be pure and agreeable to the word of God. But again, understanding this purity of them, in their own nature and institution, although by corrupting the fame institution, they have been afterward defiled. For these caeremonies that the Apostles and Elders Act. 15. did ordain, had been also defiled by the jews with great superstition of holiness in them, and erroneous opinion of necessity, of the worship of God, Caeremonies not utterly abolished though they have been defiled. of the wrought work, of merit, and of preferring them above faith in God, and the moral commandments of the Law: and yet for all those former so dangerous abuses, yea, for all the date of them was also expired: The Apostles and Elders, considering the weakness of the Christians (for the most part of the multitude) did ordain those caeremonies to be uniformly & generally (for the time) used, without any of those errors or corruptions of them. And so now in like manner, if any caeremonies in their own nature be not evil, or be indifferent, and were first instituted only for purposes that were good, though the posterity degenerating have corrupted (with errors and superstitions) th●se good caeremonies, and so made them evil: yet may the Synod now with the authority of the Prince confirming them, not only (if they think it best) remove and abolish those corrupted and defiled caeremonies: but also (if they see there be needful and expedient use of them) removing all the corruptions, defilings and superstitions of them, and re●●ning them unto their first good ends and institutions, they have good authority with the Christian Magistrates approbation, to reordeine them. And so may those caeremonies well be called and holden, (for all their former pollution) pure & agreeable to the word of God. But the Synod (say they) must not only have a care of this point in them: but also that they be expedient for the time & persons, for whose use they are ordained. This I grant likewise. And even therefore we use the caeremonies now in our Church ordained, because they be expedient for the time and persons, Caeremonies expedient for the time and persons. for whose use they are ordained. And contrariwise, although we improve not in other reformed Churches their caeremonies different from ours, which our Brethren would bring in (though their variety of ceremonies in one state, is more to be misliked) yet we admit not those caeremonies even for this, because they are (considering well the time and persons) not so expedient either for our time, or for our persons, but would breed great offence to many among us, and no less danger to the state both of our Prince and of our whole Church also. Our Br. caeremonies not expedient for our time and persons. And therefore, as we hold us content with our good and lawful caeremonies: so we accept this that here they say, wilful contemners of good orders established by public authority, are worthy to be corrected. But, sith we may well take our orders established by public authority, for good orders, till they can (better than yet they have been able,) prove them to be ill orders (I speak not of the abuses of them, but of the orders themselves, Yielding obedience. according to the ends and institution of them) it followeth, that they being both wilful contemners, and that is more, not only open breakers, but (all that ever they can by preaching, writing, and practising, earnest impugners of them, they are (by their own verdict) worthy to be corrected: although we wish rather their amending than their correction. And yet let them think of this, Intanglingmen consciences. that whereas the orders that they would erect, are not established by any public authority among us. What correction then shall men judge that they are worthy of, who being but private persons and without all public authority, would establish, and impose those orders upon us? As for entangling of men's consciences, or tyrannical coaction in these indifferent matters, that it must always be avoided, we hold well therewith: neither do we know or allow of any such intanglinges or coactions, but do as much mislike it, as they do. To what indifferent matters obedience is to be yielded. Howbeit, in those matters, which in their own nature are indifferent (but not indifferent in their use, being established by public authority:) we affirm, that a dutiful obedience and reverence may be required, and is to be yielded, without any note or touch of tyrannical coaction, in them that have authority, or any entangling of men's consciences that obey them, when in the ordaining of them, plain exception is made, both against the opinion of necessity, and of all matter of worship, religion, and conscience in them, and that they are ordained only, for order and comeliness sake. The argument of the 15. Book. THis Book proceedeth further on the Synods. First of the Synods Eccl. Censure, for faults and controversies, and whether there would not still be as many and worse than now there are, and that even in the Pastors also. Of our Br. remedy by having two Pastors at least in every Congregation, and if these two Pastors contend, of the remedy by the Synod. Of their example in the assembly Act. 15. Of Timothy's Eccl. Censure without Synods. Of Danaeus judgement in calling Synods and Counsels not without the Prince's licence. Of the Assemblies of particular and Shire Synods, and what authority our Br. ascribe unto them, and what danger they would breed to the whole state. How the elections and ordaining of all th● Pastors in the Realm should be made by these Shire Synods. Of the example that they would prove it by, Act. 14. in Paul and Barnabas ordaining Pastors by the people's election. How election by the people is not necessarily inferred on that example. How our Br. exclude their Elders that are Governors and not teachers from dealing in these matters. Of calling a Synod where any Benefice is vacant or Pastorship void in all England. What the Synod; what the Congregation hath to do therein. Whether this be the right electing and ordaining grounded on the word of God & practised in the Church 200. years after Christ. Whether the right of patrons presentations be profane and prejudicial. Whether the Bishops giving of orders be presumptuous and full of absurdities, and of the 4. absurdities and presumptions whereof they challenge it. First, that the Bishops do more than the Apostles durst do, without the Church's election. The second absurdity and presumption in giving an office without a charge of a flock. Of the difference of giving orders and offices. Of the difference of a Constable and Church warden from the orders and office of a Minister. Of the offices made in respect of a place, that yet cease not their interest with the dispossession of the place. Whether the ministery dependeth on this or that place. How our Br. were made Ministers, if they be faithful Ministers. How the name and office of Minister and Pastor is not so altogether of act and esse, that it admitteth not also a potential ability. Of the difference of making Ministers without a flock and living assigned to them, and of making Bishops without a Bishopric. The third absurdity and presumption of vagabond and wandering Ministers. Whether a Minister ceaseth to be a Minister being out of his charge. Whether the charge of the function or of the place be of the essence of the ministery. Whether our ministery smelleth of the Popish indelible charectar. Whether the Minister is to be ordained a new after suspension or excommunication. The fourth absurdity & presumption of making unfit Ministers & of the offence hereof, and of our Br. comparing them to jeroboams Priests. Of the complaint hereon, and the imagined excuse by necessity. Of the exercises of the ministery and enforcing the Ministers to study. The Accusation of other crimes ensuing for greater and lesser livings. Whether the Popish Priesthood be allowed. Of the Statute for reading the Articles, and of the officers bribings. Of old Sir john lack latin riding about to his Benefices, to read the Articles. Of the godly meaning of the Statute, and whether the Statute be not directly against our Br. or no. Of the maintenance of the two Pastors in every Congregation, besides the Doctors, the Confistory of the governors, and the Deacons in the same, and of the new transposing of all the Parishes for their provision. Of the abuses (as many as any now there are) creeping in, when they have all that they please. Of the corruptions in the particular Synods and visitations, by Chauncelors, Officials, Registers, & Apparitors. Of our general Convocations, and their complaining of Chauncelors & Lawyers in them. Of the Bishop's several place in the Convocation, & of their authority of prohibiting to speak in the Convocation. Of subscribing to the Articles confirmed in the Parliament, Anno 1562. with the accusation of the Articles for gross and palpable errors, and the examination of them. The accusation of the Bishops to exercise Lordship over the faith, and to overrule all the Synod, and how this accusation reboundeth on these new Pastoral Bishops in their Synods. The Synods Eccl. censure THE Synod hath further authority concerning discipline, to reform and redress by Eccl. censure, The learned disc. pag. 122. & 123. all such defaults and controversies, as cannot be determined in the particular Churches: As for example, if the Pastor himself have need to be severally punished, where there is but one Pastor in a church: or if Elders which should be reformers of others, have notoriously misgoverned themselves: or if they have been led by affection to condemn an innocent, or to justify the ungodly: in these and such like cases, all contention is to be concluded, by the authority of the Synod. Bridges. SO far as is warranted by evident Scripture, or is not prejudicial to her majesties supreme authority, nor to any the good orders established in the Churches, & Realms of England and Ireland: and with the like exception of the right & interest due to every on● in other states and countries: The Sinods ecclesiastical censure for faults and controversies. I grant this further authority of the Synod, to reform and redress, by the Eccle. censure, all such faults and controversies as cannot be determined in particular Churches. As for the examples, that here for instancies they bring in, run all upon their former presupposalls, of these pretenced Pastors and Elders. Nevertheless, (by the way) we may hereby perceive, that if we should set up such presupposed Pastors and Elders, as our brethren would have: we should so little be free, Faults & controversies would be still as many & worse, if not more, than now there are. either from defaults of life, or from controversies in these, or such like matters: that still there would be as much ado, not only to punish and reform the people; but even the Pastors themselves and that severely, and perhaps, more a do also, (when the authority of the Prince & Prelates, and the laws established were dissolved, and dispersed to several congregations, or Synods, than now there is. More pastorsin a congregationn, more controversies. Yea, but (say they, this might be) where there is but one Pastor in a Church. And what if there be more Pastors in a Church than one (for so would they have it that there should be more) may there not fall out as great, and more controversies too, among them twain than where there is but one? and should not the Synod punish them both, if they were both faulty? and indeed they have showed the examples hereof already, A lively & late example of 2. Pastor's equal in one congregation. in some places, where of late the congregations have had two of these Pastors, (as the saying is, unum arbustum non alit duos erythacoes) such contentions and part-takings have been between them, that the whole congregation hath been thereby divided, and dissolved. Example, that congregation which (because they could not at hoame have this tetrarchy of Doctors, Pastors, Governors, a●d Deacons, in such manner as is here prescribed,) went over not long since, into the low Countries, there to enjoy them. Fleeing to Synods. But how long agreed these their two Pastors and their other Governors? did they not even there also (and that in short while) break forth into such sharp contentions, that they were soon divided into two congregations of one, and at length, the most part of them came home as wise, or perhaps wiser than they went out, being taught by experience. (which they say (pag. 48.) is the mistress of fools) to to repent themselves at leisure, for their to quick following of these new devices. But may these Elders also which (they say) should be reformers of others, The misgoverning of these new Governors. so notoriously misgovern themselves, that not only they may be lead by affection, but so far lead thereby, as to condemn an innocent, or to justify the ungodly, it appeareth by this, they may; and it is not unlikely, but that, as here they put the case thereof before it gins, so, were it once begun, we should feel to late the lamentable experience, by the notorious misgovernments of those governors. But say they (not for remedy to prevent it, for that were the best, to cut it off, according to the old saying, obsta principiis, s●ro medicina paratur: but for redress when it is done, as when the pate is broken to lay a plaster.) In these and such like cases, all contention is to be concluded by the authority of the Synod. Here is still no authority but all of the Synod. And can nothing else, or must none else, have authority to remedy these matters, but a Synod? & must a Synod (which is an assembly out of many particular Churches) be always called together, Our brethren's continual fleeing to Synod●. so often as any contention or default happeneth among Pastors, or among the Elders, in any one church or congregation? If it be such a default or controversy (say they), as cannot be determined in the particular churches. Lo, here may our brethren see and learn, The inconveniences by the want of the jurisdictions already established. what it is to take away the Bishop's jurisdiction in a Diocese, and in a Province the Archbishops, and the Princes Superior authority also in a Realm or Kingdom, for, let their jurisdictions and authorities stand, these controversies and defaults might be punished, decided and reform well enough, and never trouble so many Churches, by calling so often their Pastors from them, by gathering, and continuing Synods for these matters, and so perhaps breed more and new contentions. But (say they) some example we have thereof. Acts. 15. where those contentious Schismatics that withstood Paul and Barnabas at Antiochia, were constrained to yield by authority of the Counsel, and Paul and Barnabas restored to their credit. We do not deny the authority of a Council, nor of that holy assembly, and if they will so call it, a Council or Synod, whereby Paul and Barnabas were restored to their credit, and the contentious Schismatics constrained to yield. The assembly act. 15. And would God our brethren would consider more advisedly the force of this Example, lest in their not yielding to the authority and decrees of the lawful Synods and councils holden in this Realm and Church of England, about these matters which they impugn, they show themselves to be more factious, than were those contentious Schismatics. But now, if we shall more nearly level these Synods and Counsels that our brethren would have, The assembly. act. 15. was not a Synod of divers particular Churches. for the determining of these controversies, & concluding all contentions, and for the punishing of all such notorious defaults and misgovernements, to be called together into an assembly of the Bishops or Pastors of divers particular Churches, comparing the same with this assembly Act. 15. of the Apostles and Elders at jerusalem: we shall not find, that (besides the parties sent from Antiochia, where the controversy arose) there was any assembly at all, either from divers, or from any other particular Churches, but only the assembly of the Apostles and Elders of jerusalem. Ver. 1. Wherein the text is clear. verse. 1. etc. Then came there down from judea certain men, & taught the brethren, saying: except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye can not be saved. And when there was great dissension and disputation by Paul and Barnabas against them; they ordained that Paul and Barnabas and certain other of them, should go up to jerusalem unto the Apostles and Elders, about this question" that is (saith Beza) judices illis ferebant Apostolos & Seniores Hierosolymitanoes, Beza in Act. 15.2. they appointed the Apostles and Elders of jerusalem to be their judges. Vers. 3. Thus (saith Luke) being sent forth by the Church, they passed through Phoenicia and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles, and they brought great joy unto all the brethren." But here Luke telleth not, that they brought any of the Elders of the churches, either of Phoenicia or Samaria, or of any other Churches else, with them to jerusalem. Vers. 4. " And when" (saith Luke)" they were come to jerusalem, they were received of the Church, and of the Apostles and Elders, and they declared what things God had done by them. But (said they) certain of the Sect of the pharisees which did believe, rose up, saying that it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses. Then the Apostles & Elders came together to look to this matter. Here, when they came together, no mention is made of Churches, but of the Church, and of the Apostles and Elders. Which Elders (we have showed out of Calvin) were the Pastors of the Church of jerusalem. So that if this assembly shallbe called a Synod or Council: yet was it but a Synod or Council of one particular Church, and the Apostle S. james being the Governor or Bishop of that Church (as is before proved) was the concluder and final determiner of that controversy. And therefore, When a Synod is requisite. where our Brethren say, some example we have hereof. Act. 15. This example fitteth not so well as they ween, neither for the Synods that they would have, nor for the authority of the Synod. But if they will decide the matter by examples, The Exam. of punishing by eccle. Censure in the authority given to Timothy. especially for redressing by Eccl. censure, defaults and controversies, and for punishing those Pastors or Elders of the Church which should be reformers of others, and have notoriously misgoverned themselves: Why forget they here, how Saint Paul gave Timothy, not only authority to make Pastors over divers particular Churches: but also how to receive accusation against the Pastoral Elders, and those that sin, that is (as our brethren call it) notoriously misgovern themselves, to rebuke them openly, that is (as Calvin exposideth it) ut quisquis inter eos male se gesserit severè corrigatur. The first seeking of redress by eccl. Cens. is of the bishop or Archbishop not of Synods. Whosoever among them behaveth himself ill, that he be (say our brethren) severely punished. So that, if the Pastor's defaults and controversies cannot be redressed by Ecclesiastical censure, not determined, in the particular Churches, wherein they are Pastors: why should they not first go either to the Bishop of the Diocese; or further, to the Archbishop of the Province, as we have seen sufficient proof that Timothy was? But if the matter be so difficult, that it cannot yet be by them determined: then in deed, by the authority and licence of the Christian Magistrate, (if there be a Christian Magistrate, as GOD be praised we have, When a Syn. or council is requisite. if we can be thankful and obedient) a Synod or Council of many Bishops and Pastors, may be called and holden, to reform and redress those enormities. Sic tamen convocetur Prouinciale concilium etc. saith Danaeus, Danaves in Christ. Isag. Part. 3. li. 3. cap. 38. lib. 3. Isag. cap. 38. But let the provincial Council be so called together, that the same Synod be signified unto the faithful Magistrate of that place whereunto it cometh together, to the end that all suspicion of Coitionis. cluttering together or of faction, may be avoided; besides that, neither aught that Provincial Synod to come together, Notice and leave granted of the Christian Prince to have a Synod or counsel. nor yet to be summoned, but that the power of calling together such an assembly, either generally or specially, from the chief faithful Magistrate of all that Region, Kingdom, or Common weal, whereof that Province is a part, be before hand expressly or by silent yielding, granted and given unto the Church and to the Pastors thereof. And in deed for such great matters and controversies in Religion, and notorious misgovernances, not only of Pastors but of the Bishops and Archbishops themselves, (when the matters could not be concluded, How the general and provincial counc. were called & holden. nor the persons severely punished in their particular Churches): many Provincial and general Counsels were called and holden, as against the Arrians, Macedonians, Nestorians, Eutichians, Monothelites, etc. Which Counsels have decided those great controversies, deposed and condemned the authors and maintainers of them, Particular Shire Synods which the particular Churches could not do. Of which examples there are store in the Ecclesiastical Histories. The learned disc. pag. 124. For which causes, Synods ought oftentimes to be assembled, though not general of the whole Realm, but particular of every Province or Shire, as it may be most conveniently, that such things as are to be reformed may be redressed with speed. To this we grant with such exception as before, and it is in use also, for such petite and particular Synods, Bridges. as every Bishop hath in his Diocese, and in the partitions thereof, Particular Synods. as Dioceses be now taken, in the Ecclesiastical acceptation of the word, differing from the civil acceptation. For in the civil Law, Bernar Waltherus lib. 1. miscell. cap. 19 as Bernardus Waltherus noteth lib. 1. miscell. cap. 19 the word Diocese is now and then taken for a Province: as in lib. 1. c. de priva. Carcer. where, Aegyptiaca Diocoesis, is used for the Province of Egypt. But he thinketh rather there is a great difference herein, for that many Provinces were contained under a Diocese, The acceptation of the terms, Province and Diocese civilly and Ecclesiastically. as were many Dioceses under a Prefecture. But we understand these terms of Diocese and Province otherwise, for a Province to contain under it some number of Dioceses: and a Diocese to contain some number of particular Churches or Parishes, which now and then are bounded or parted in divers Shires. And look how the laws Ecclesiastical, and the common laws of this our Realm have delivered unto us the distinction and acceptation of these names, ratified by custom, in the same sense do we accept them without alteration or contention. So that, although we have not Provincial Synods so oftentimes, yet have we Episcopal Synods, Our triennall and annual Synods in every Diocese. and Synods of other ordinaries, such as are thought (if they be well used) most convenient for our state and Churches: if they be abused, the fault is not in the law, but in the officers. These smaller Synods, as they have their ordinary times appointed, and are limited for the number of the particular Churches that are in them to assemble together: so is their authority limited accordingly. As the Synods are limited, so are their authorities. For, if we shall consider all the premises, what our Brethren have given unto the Synod; If any controversy (say they) of doctrine do arise, the lawful Synod hath to consider that it be determined by the word of God: and to determine of the use of ceremonies pag. 116. And that, also for order and comeliness and best edification, the Synod hath to determine, what shall be observed in particular charges, as of the time, place, What great authority and in how many things is by our brethren given to the Synods. and form of preaching and ministering the Sacraments. pag. 117. That to make ceremonial constitutions, whereby the Church must be governed in mere Ecclesiastical matters, it is out of all controversy, etc. This authority was proper unto the Synod. pag. 118. Yea, that the Church was lawfully vested with absolute authority, and the Synod hath to decree concerning ceremonial orders of the Church, whereof some may be general to all congregations, some particular to certain churches. pag. 119 & 120. The danger by these shire Synods. That the Synod ought to have such regard of all Churches, that they have special regard of every one. pag. 120. That the overseers and Elders of the Church should come together to consider of this matter, what orders were most fit for divers places to bring them to the obedience of Christ, what for the furtherance of them that are newly come, and what for the continuance and increase of them that are very well come on pag. 121. Thus the Synod therefore aught to be careful in ordaining of ceremonies, not only that they be pure and agreeable to the word of God, but also that they be expedient for the time & persons, for whose use they are ordained. pag. 122. That the Synod hath further authority concerning discipline, to reform and redress by Eccl. censure, all such defaults and controversies, as cannot be determined in the particular Churches; To what Synod all this great authorrie is given. both to punish severely the Pastor himself, and the Elders that should be reformers of others. Here is great authority given to the Synod. And what now is this Synod that hath all this so great authority? Is it a general Synod? No. Is it a national Synod? No, neither. But what of that, though it be not general of the whole, but particular of every Province? A, then is it yet at least of a Province, that hath so great authority. Nay, soft, not so, but particular of every Province, or Shire, as it may be most conveniently. What? and is this Synod that we have talked of all this while, a Synod of a Shire? And do our Bre. think this may be most convenient, All this authority given to the particular Synod of every Shire. that every Synod of every Shire may do all these things, as seemeth best to their wisdoms, one Shire one way, and another Shire another way; and so many divers orders of ceremonies and disciplines in every Shire, as it pleaseth the Synod of that Shire to determine? Well, yet this is somewhat better than it was before, Though this be dangerous to the state of the whole, yet better than to abolish all uniformity. when uniformity of ceremonies was clean condemned for an untrue principle. For by that untrue principle of theirs, not only all the authority therein of all Synods was overthrown: but every Church, yea, every man (for ceremonies) might alter or change them at his pleasure, for fear he might be thought to hold an untrue principle, that there should be an uniformity in them. But yet would this breed a meruestlous diversity, and a number of continual garboils and contentions in this Realm, if every Shire therein had their Synod, which Synod had full authority to do all these things aforesaid. The danger growing by this authority of these Shire Synods. Howsoever our Brethren think this may be convenient: it cannot sirke into my dull head, but that if every of these Shire Synods had this authority: it would soon be a sorry England, the whole Realm consisting of so many Shires, and all the Shires ruled by so many Synods, and all the Synods having so much authority, yea full authority, every one of them, as much as hath the whole in all. For, what is here left to the whole national Synod, yea, were it to a general ecumenical and universal council, The Synods election of Pastors. that this Shire council or Synod cannot do, if it have all this foresaid authority? And if one Shire then determine one thing, & another Shire determine the contrary: to what higher Synod shall the appeal be made? Or what need the other care for such appeal: Or what authority hath any other Synod, more than that Synod had? And might not all be then in a wise pickle? call they this a redressing with speed? I pray God send us better speed, than (I fear me) we should find by such a redressing. But I hope our brethren will either help us again with some more speedy means and good devise, how we may shake of the doubts of these absurdities and inconveniences: or else their selves on better advisements of them, will neither seek quirks to salve and colour them, nor yet maintain them any longer, but renounce them; when they shall perceive that their good meaning in them, doth nothing answer to the perilous danger of them. Last of all, for as much as the Election of Pastors, is a great and weighty matter, The learned disc. pag. 124. which ought not to be permitted to the judgement of any one man, but pertaineth to the Church whereunto they should be chosen, both for better advise in choosing of a meet man, and for authority in causing him to accept their Election: it is convenient that it be done by the judgement of the particular Synod. Our brethren here from the correction, return to the Election of Pastors, Bridges. because (say they) it is a great and weighty matter. They urge a fresh, The Synods election of Pastors. that it ought not to be permitted to the judgement of any one man, but pertaineth to the Church whereunto they should be chosen. I reply: that although in some Churches it may well so be, and hath been, and is, that the Church had, or hath some voice, inter-est, or consent, in choosing of their Pastors, namely in choosing of the Bishops: as the Pastors of all Cathedral Churches have yet some interest, in the electing of the Bishops to their Churches, whom the Christian Princes by the prerogative of their chiefest estate. and as Patrons for the temporalties that they have endowed the bishoprics withal, and for their chief charge that they have in general, and specially of all the Churches in their Dominions, do commend unto their elections: yet on the other side, many Churches have been and are furnished with good Bishops, and especially inferior particular Churches with excellent Pastors, Christ's and S. Paul's, (besides Tim. Tit. &c.) manner of electing Pastors. by the judgement and appointing of one man. And we have good warrant also for the same. For not only Christ himself by his own only judgement, did first elect and ordain the Apostles, and all the other 72. Disciples: but also Saint Paul elected and ordained Timothy and Titus to be Bishops, or rather, Archbishops, of Ephesus, & Creta: Election without Synods. & that they (mentioning no other joined with them in the Authority of that action) should also ordain others to be Bishops and Elders, in every City of those Provinces. And although they except, that Christ's doing herein is above all other: The exception of Christ's example. yet me thinketh, that it is the better Example. For, had it been absolutely evil, to appoint any to be a teacher of the people, and to minister the Sacrament unto them, whom the people their selves had not chosen: It is not simply evil to appoint a Pastor whom the people before have not chosen. then would Christ (being but one man) never have so chosen any at all to that office. Neither helpeth it their turn, that they say, the Apostles had not certain places or bounds assigned unto them, wherein to preach and Minister the Sacraments, as Bishops and Pastors have: for, neither the limitation of the places, as any prejudice to the matter, nor yet the very Apostles, The exception that the Apostles had no certain places assigned to them. and the 72 Disciples were so left at large, by these words of Christ, Mark. 16. 15. Go into all the world, and preach the Gospel to all Nations. etc. But that both for a while, the places of their Preaching were limited unto them before this commission. 〈◊〉 also that afterward, they did portion out among themselves certain parts and limits of the world, wherein they would preach: and some continued still, or most commonly at or near about jerusalem: and james had such especial Resyance and charge in that Church, that he is called both of the ancient and late writers (as we have seen) the Bishop thereof. But what shall we say to those Pastors, The Bishops and Pastors made by Timothy and ● Titus without calling synods. that in every particular Church of their provinces, were made by the only judgement of Timothy and Titus? For, the text inferreth no necessity whereon we should gather, that they were chosen and ordained by the judgement and authority of any other. Yea the very words of the Apostles charge, to ordain them city by city, or in every town, (except we shall say, he called the Synods to every town) plainly argue, that the making of them was without Synods. But let us now see how these sayings hang together, Our brethren's contradiction in the election. that the election of Pastors pertaineth to the Church whereunto they should be chosen: and yet, it is convenient that it be done by the judgement of the particular Synod, which they called before, the Synod of every province or shire. For, whatsoever their reasons are that here they allege, both for better advice in choosing a meet man, and for authority in causing him to accept their election: yet, if the Election pertain to the church, whereunto the parties elected should be chosen; then, either it pertaineth to both, or not to the judgement of the Synod, be it either particular or general. For the Synod is not the church whereunto they are chosen; except they will call a particular church, a particular Synod. And though they say, they give not the synod the authority in choosing a meet man, but only, for better advice in choosing a meet man, & authority only, in causing him to accept their election: yet doth not this follow hereupon, The Synods judgement in election. that it is convenient that the election itself be done by the Synods judgement. For than hath the judgement of the Synod authority in the election itself, and such authority too; that if any election of a Pastor in any congregation be made, without the judgement, at the least of a particular or shire Synod; it is an inconvenient election. To avoid with inconveniency, it must needs fall out, that so often as any Pastorship is vacant in all England; by and by there must not only be an assembly made by that particular church, but also a Synod be called and assembled of the whole province, or at least of the whole shire, for their judgement in the election of every particular Pastor to be chosen. Whereby we should have if not in every shire, yet in most shires, continual Synods. But in every assembly or company, some one of necessity, (& he a Pastor or Elder,) must have this prerogative to order and dispose the same with reason, or else great confusion is like to follow: pag. 114. and how then, must it not also follow of necessity, that there must be a continual prerogative of one, among and over the Pastors? But what gross contradictions these sayings imply: and that is more, what daily molestations, contentions, dangers and inconveniences, these their so often & continual assemblies & Synods of every shire, either with the Princes warrant (as Dancus would have it) or without it, would breed throughout the whole realm, although there were no other danger by their former too too great authority, but only this their advice, judgement & authority in the elections of every new Pastor that is to be chosen over all England: The learned disc. pag. 124. & 125. I refer it to the further consideration of the indifferent reader's judgement. That no one man hath authority to ordain Pastors and to impose them over Churches, hath been before declared, by the example of the Apostles Paul & Barnabas, who although they were Apostles, yet would they not challenge that prerogative unto themselves, but by common Election they ordained Elders in every Church. Bridges. Acts. 14.23. Act. 14.23. Timothy also received his charge, Paul and Barnabas challenged to themselves the prerogative of ordaining Elders No mention of common or any election. although it were through prophecy, by imposition of hands of the Eldership. 1. Tim. 4.14. 1. Tim. 4.14. Our brethren now to confirm this, that no one man hath authority to ordain Pastors: rub over here again their former examples, and first, of Paul and Barnabas. Act. 14.23. Act. 14.23. But the text is most plain, that Paul and Barnabas did challenge that prerogative unto themselves. And as for ordaining Elders in every church, by common election: the testimony here cited, mentioneth neither common election, nor election at all. Although (I grant) election is inferred to have preceded, where ordaining is mentioned. The word (as we have often seen before) is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The proper signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as who say, ordaining, by confirmation or stretching forth of the hand. The Geneva traunslation calleth this, ord●yning by election. And our brethren here, Paul and Barnabas ordaining. (to express withal, whose this ordaining by election was) do add, common election. Beza telleth us (as we have heard) of the old custom among the Grecians and Romans in holding up their hands, and thereby giving their voices in the Elections of their officers. True it is, that many times the word is so taken. But doth it follow, it must be so taken here: have we not heard Caluines better interpretation, that referreth it to the laying on of the Ministers hands, and not to the lifting up of the peoples? and so, let the word be translated for election, must it follow it was the people's? But it is a world to see, how the greatest learned and best of all, when they have once diepely conceived an opinion, will draw things to their own construction. For, although Bezaes' travels & learning in his observations on the new Testament, deserve in general, both laud and admiration, yet now and then overshootes (and that not small) do escape him, as they did Erasmus and others before, especially in so great and difficult a work. Nemo omnibus horis, and (as they say) Bonus aliquando dormitat Homerus. Yea a mean person of no great learning, that otherwise is no whit comparable, yet if he do but mark here the contents itself, and sense thereof; may most eastly perceive that they understand this word clean amiss. To whom the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is referred. For to whom is this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 referred? to the people? or to Paul and Barnabas? Luke saith in the two verses next before; And preaching, (or when they had preached) the Gospel to that City: and teaching (or had taught) many, (or had made disciples many) they returned, etc. Who preached, taught or made Disciples, and returned here? Is not all spoken of these two only, Paul and Barnabas? confirming the souls of the Disciples, and exhorting to continue in the faith, etc. Vers. 21. Vers. 22. Who confirmed them here and exhorted them? Are these words spoken of any more, than Paul and Barnabas only? and than it followeth: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Vers. 23. etc. but ordaining by confirming with the hand (or, when they had ordained by confirming with the hand) elders unto them, by the church, or as we english it (throughout every Church, praying with fastings, they commended them to the L. on whom they believed: Vers. 24. & passing throughout Pisidia they came to Pamphilia; Vers. 25. & speaking, (or when they had spoken the word in Perga,) they went down to Attalia. Is it not here most apparent, that these actions, both before & after, are still spoken of Paul & Barnabas? and wherefore then should these words of ordaining Elders unto them, with confirming by the hand, be understood of the people's ordaining the Elders with them? Is it because they may gather that the people prayed and fasted with them? And for the fastings I grant, because he saith with fastings, How the people's actions were joined with Paul's & Ba●nabas. & telleth not who fasted any more especially than other. Albeit, for praying, it may well be ascribed for the action of making or pronouncing these public prayers, unto one or other of these two. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Our brethren may remember their own words, pag. 63.64. As it were great confusion and uncomeliness, for every man to make his several prayers in the public assemblies: so is it orderly for one to pronounce the prayer in the name of the rest, and the rest to pray with him in silence, and to answer, Amen. And again, as it pertaineth to the Pastor to conceive public prayers; so it is the duty of the whole Church, in the name of the whole Church, to join in hart with the Pastor in the same prayers. In this sense, of the consent of their hearts unto Paul and Barnabas prayers, The relation in the text between the ordeiners & the people to whom they ordained the Elders. as the people here might be said also, to have prayed with them: so we grant that in consent of their hearts, they may be said to have joined with Paul & Barnabas, in the ordaining of the Elders. And yet, this were more hardly spoken of the ordaining; sith in the very words of the text, is expressed a different relation, between Paul and Barnabas on the one party, that ordained the Elders: and on the other part, the people unto whom, they did ordain the Elders. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith S. Luke. They ordained them with the confirming of the hand unto them. Unto whom? but unto the people: wherein it is manifest, that the people are clean severed from the ordeyners of the Elders, and were only the correlative parties, unto whom the ordeyners did ordain those Elders. By all which it is most evident, that the word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, hath no reference at all to the people, or to any action of them, but to Paul and Barnabas only, and to their action. For here were as yet no Elders ordained, to ordain the Elders in the people's name, sith the Elders were as yet to be ordained. But the people did not ordain them to themselves with the Apostles: therefore, the Apostles only did ordain the Elders unto the people. As for the use of the word by the profane writers, (as also these words Ecclesia, evangelium, Episcopus, Apostolus, and divers others, have been used prophainely) though Beza hereupon conceive, that this action was here used also in the people by holding up their hands: Nevertheless, sith that we have (and that by Caluins own confession) already seen, that the Eccl. writers do use the word better, for that solemn rite (saith he) of ordaining, which is called in the Scripture, laying on of hands: why should we here in this holy action rather follow the interpretation of the profane use, than of the Ecclesiastical? Why should we rather ascribe it, with the profane writers of the heathen, to the common election of the common people: than with the divine writers of the Church, to the imposition of hands, which was a sacred ceremony of ordaining sacred persons, used only by Gods sacred Ministers? The Etymology of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neither yet, (if we shall etymologize the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a band, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is a pronouncing of the party, on whom the hands are laid, to be made or consecrate the Pastor: or else of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is, The Example of Timothy. to confirm or strengthen) is there any unaptness, why this word may not be as well and much better understood, for confirming or ordaining an Elder in his consecrating, by laying the hand upon him, which was the action of the Minister only: than by holding up the hand to his electing, which was the action of the people, in such places where they were in so great numbers assembled, that their Suffrages could not so well be discerned, by the confused noise of their voices, as by the holding up of their hands, for a token of their liking of the party. But in every Church where Paul and Barnabas went, and ordained Elders, there were not such great numbers of the faithful people, that they should need so to signify their election by holding up their hands, as Beza thinketh. Neither sufficeth it, Calvin. acts. 14.23. (as we have seen also) that Calvin maketh Paul and Barnabas the chief moderators, lest any tumult should arise among the people: I like better of that he said before, upon this 23. verse: therefore Christ did not only send his Apostles to preach the Gospel: but he commanded also that there should be Pastors appointed, that the preaching of the Gospel might be perpetual & in daily use. Paul and Barnabas do mark, that this order was set down by Christ, when as they assigned Pastors to every Church. The assignment therefore of the Pastors, The assigning of the Pastors to the several churches pertained to Paul & Barnabas. was the prerogative that Paul and Barnabas here challenged to themselves. I grant, they did it not by any imposing Elders upon them, against the people's liking and good wills: but that the good people gave their good assent unto those, whom Paul and Barnabas assigned to be their Pastors. And this Calvin himself here confesseth, that Paul and Barnabas are said to choose the Elders. Which if it be truly said, than the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is spoken only of Paul and Barnabas, and not of the people. And so Calvin confutes himself, The people's assent debarreth not the choosing and ordaining from the Apostles. in gathering thereon a free election of the people. For although we may grant, that Paul and Barnabas did not alone so choose and ordain them by their private office, but that it was the consent of them all: yet was not only the moderating, but the choosing, the assigning: and the imposition of hands, (which was the action of the ordaining) was the prerogative that Paul and Barnabas here did challenge and had, even by Caluins own confession. The other example 1. Tim 4. ver. 14. 1. Tim. 4.14. Our brethren's other example. Now Timothy also received his charge, since our Brethren apply it to the example of Pastors, I like it very well, and this withal is to be remembered. For, Our brethren here make Timothy an example of Pastors. when we allege Timothy as an example of Bishops, whom they also do call Pastors: they repel this example, saying; he was an Evangelist, therefore no Pastor: and now their selves allege him as an example for the choosing of Pastors. And this I like also, that they say of Timothy receiving his charge, although it were through prophecy, Supply of the Pastor's room yet was it done by the imposition of hands of the Eldership, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Which words do well expound the other word, being of the like matter and action that that other were; for ordaining of Elders. And was this a lifting up of hands too, or any election by voices of the people? No. But here was such an imposing of the Pastor on the people, as had the imposition of hands: Yea, but (say they) of the Eldership. Not of (say I,) but with the Eldership. And this I grant: but, doth this debar Paul, that he only might not have chosen, assigned, and appointed him, if any other Elders did in the action of ordaining, Though other in the Eldership laid hands on Timothy with Paul, yet might he be the only chooser of him. lay their hands also on him, with the Apostle? Albeit even by Caluins own interpretation, (we have seen, how in this place the name of Presbytery or Eldership, may be aswell understood, for the office of the priesthood or Eldership; as for the persons of the Priests or Elders. By which exposition of calvin, it is apparent, that he might also well be said, to have (in his ordaining) the imposition of hands with the Eldership; although only S. Paul alone (when he ordained him,) had laid his hands upon him. But howsoever it was done there in Ephesus, where there were more Elders, before Timothy was ordained by S. Paul to be the chief Elder and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (as Beza calleth him) the Provost or first slander. or B. of that City and province. Yet in all the places where Paul & Barnabas traveled, Act. 14. there is no likelihood, that they ordained there, first, other Elders to be their Governors, that were not Pastors, & then joined those Elders with them, in the Elections of the Elders that were Pastors: put as calvin expressy saith, Luke speaketh there of Pastors only. But, put the election of Pastors to the people's elections, and not to the Elections in the name of the people, to the governing Elders: and then our brethren straightway cry out; this were to breed confusion, yea, horrible confusion, whereof God is not the author. pag. 83.84. These Examples therefore serve not their turn, but the oftener they turn them up to us, they return upon themselves, with more and more manifest proves against them. The learned disc. pag. 12●. Therefore as it hath been evidently declared before, the assembly of Elders, consisting of grave, wise and godly men, aught to inquire, when the Pastor's place is void, where they may find a man meet to supply his room, and therein to desire aid of the Synod. The man by such godly advise so chosen, aught to be presented to the congregation, & of them to be allowed and received, if no man can show any reasonable cause to the contrary. This is the right Election, and ordaining of Pastors, grounded upon the word of God, and practised by the Primitive Church, two hundred years after Christ, until the mystery of iniquity, grew to work more openly, to the setting up of the tyrannical kingdom of Antichrist. The Governors dealing in election That the assembly of Elders should consist of grave, wise and godly men, they have in deed declared before. But what are these grave, wise and godly men, of whom the assembly of Elders should consist? Bridges. Are they Teachers and Preachers, or are they not: If not: Our brethren excluding of their governors from dealing in these matters except they be pastors then have they no authority to determine any thing in the Synod. For (as they have also declared before. pag. 117.) who should be able to know what order, comeliness and edification requireth according to God's word, but they that be teachers and preachers of the same unto all others? Which rule if it be true in one place, is true in all places, and so in the particular assemblies of Elders. Whereby it followeth, that except the assemblies be of so unwise men, that they be not able to know what order, comeliness, and edification requireth, they must be teachers and preachers, and of consequent Pastors, as likewise they have before declared, and thereto cited even one of their last testimonies: pag. 21. by the name of Elders, the Pastors are called. Act. 14.23. where Paul and Barnabas ordained Elders by election in every congregation. But if now, that they may be able to know these matters (of which the having a Pastor, is an order both of comeliness and edification according to God's word) these Elders themselves must be Pastors: How shall these Elders inquire when the Pastor's place is void, where they may find a man meet to supply his room, when the room is never void of Pastors, so long as the assembly of Elders doth continue: If they continue not, much less can they inquire for one, nor choose him, nor deserve therein the aid of the Synod for him. But, be the assembly of the Elders, Pastors themselves, or not; The Synods find fit Pastors. can they not choose another Pastor to supply his room, when any Pastor's place is void among them, but that they ought therein to desire the aid of the Synod? For, wherein do they mean this therein, but of that they declared before; to inquire when the Pastor's place is void, where they may find a man meet to supply his room; and therein to desire the aid of the Synod? They declared before, concerning the Pastor's election, that it was convenient to be done, by the judgement of the particular Synod, both for better advice in choosing a meet man, and for authority in causing him to accept their election. A Synod to be called when any Benefice in all England is void. And ought they now to have the Synods aid also, to help them to inquire when the Pastor's place is void where they▪ may find a meet man to supply his room? So that, when and wheresoever in all England, a Pastor's place is void, we ought not only forthwith to have a Synod upon that only occasion, except the room shall stand void till some greater occasion of a Synod happen: but the Synodesayde must be craved, before the new election, where they may find a meet man; and in the election itself, their advise also must be had in choosing a meet man; and besides this, their authority must be had in causing him (that is, The Synods dealing in placing past. the elected party,) to accept their election; and finally, it is convenient, that it be done also, even by the judgement of the particular Synod. How much the synod hath to deal in placing of pastors. And then, this meet man, after all this inquiry, both of the assembly of Elders of that particular Church, and of the Synods aid in this enquiry, being at last found out: and the man by such godly advice so chosen; What the congregation hath to do therein. and by this authority so caused to accept their election: and all this being thus authentically done and ratified, by the judgement of the particular Synod: the man ought to be presented to the congregation, and by them to be allowed and received. What? and must a new allowance of the congregation be had, after all this assembling, enquiring, advising, and choosing of the governing Elders of that congregation? Yea, and above them, after all the assembling, enquiring, and better advising, and choosing, and authorizing, and even causing the man to accept their election, and after judgement and all, of the particular Synod? What shall we think hereon? Hath the particular congregation an higher authority of allowing the Pastor? then have not only the governing Elders, whom the congregation their selves have of confidence chosen, and committed unto them their authority. pag. 84. but also then the whole particular Synod, whose aid therein was desired: and must it now be overruled by the allowing or disallowing of every particular congregation? Whether the congregation ought to receive the man whom the Synod appointeth to them. If they say, they mean not, that the man ought so to be allowed and received of the congregation, that he may also of them be dissallowed or not received: but that the congregation must allow him and receive him, after all these allowances of him and authorities. What? and will they impose him upon them, and enforce the congregation to allow him and receive him? Well may they be compelled to receive him: but they cannot compel them to allow him, except from teeth outward. If they say, they mean not to cause them to allow him or receive him: but that they ought only of their duty so to do: do they not say in plain words, of the Synods authority over the elected party; and for authority in causing him to accept their election? What imply these words, but that he must accept their election, be he willing or unwilling to accept it? And have they more authority to cause him to accept their election, than they have to cause that particular congregation, (which have committed their authority to the assembly of Elders, which assembly have desired the aid of the Synod,) to accept the man whom they have thus elected for them? The Synods imposing of Pastors upon the congregation. But they say, that they ought so to do, not simply, but, if no man can show any reasonable cause to the contrary. And what if no man can do this? must they thus therefore impose Pastors on them? And is not this imposing, The Synods imposing pastors. one of their quarrels against the Bishops? & are they now themselves feign to come to imposing of Pastors on the congregations? All their election defeated by any one man. But what now, if any man can allege any reasonable cause to the contrary? must every reason of any one man, overrule all the reasons and authorities, both of all the residue of the congregation, and of all the governing Elders, and of all the Synod? See, what a great stir we have here had, & still must have, about the choosing of every Pastor in that Realm; all the several congregation, all the assembly of Elders, all the Synod of the Province or Shire must meet together with all this ado: and when all is done: in comes any one man, & he alone upon any reasonable (though not necessary) cause, may turn topside turvy all their doings. Our brethren's avouching of the right election and ordaining of Past. And is this the right election and ordaining of Pastors? Yea (say they) this is the right election and ordaining of Pastors. Yea, and grounded upon the word of God, and practised by the Primitive Church 200. years after Christ. This is stoutly avouched, if now they can prove it. But can they show this election and ord●yning of Pastors in any places, yea, in any one place in all God's word? Well, what of that? It is grounded (say they) upon the word of God? Our brethren's election & ordaining of Pastors is not grounded on-Gods word. What? Are they soon grounded? What mean they by grounded? Can they show us any one rule, or but any one example hereof in the word of God? No place that they have yet alleged, showeth any such election and ordaining of Pastors? What Synods assembling, enquiring, advising, choosing, judging, and causing of the party elected to accept their election, was there had in the electing and ordaining Pastors by Paul and Barnabas. Act. 14? Or what electing and ordaining of Pastors was there in the Synod (if we shall properly call that assembly, a Synod,) which was of the Apostles and Elders of jerusalem. Acts. 15? Or doth S. Paul in any of his precepts to Timothy or to Titus, command not only an assembly of the same congregation, whereunto the Pastor should be chosen; but also a Synod either general, or national, or Provincial, or particular, yea be it but of one shire, to be called and holden, at the electing and ordaining of all, and every, or of any Pastors for their particular congregation? And how then dare our Brethren for very shame, so confidently affirm, as though it were most clear and out of all crime: This is the right election and ordaining of Pastors grounded upon the word of God. What a grounding is this, of the which no one place, nor foot of ground can be found, or seen, or heard of? And yet, if this were the right election and ordaining of Pastors: then all the elections and ordeynings of Pastors expressed in the word of God, must either be according unto this; 200. years practise after Christ. or else, they were not elected and ordained aright; or else, this is not so the right election and ordaining of them, but that other elections & ordeynings of Pastors mentioned in the word of God, without these assemblies and Synods for the doing of them, are as right as they. And then, this manner of electing (if ever there were any such) is no necessary prescription unto other. But our brethren not content, thus amiss to father this their electing and ordaining of Pastors, as grounded upon the word of God: they proceed further to this practice of 200. years after christ. But this pretended practice also, we have already sufficiently improved. And albeit, during the said time, The practice of 200. years for this pretended electing & ordaining Pastors. and as long again in many places, the people had voices of consent in the elections of their Bishops. Yet had they not also the like dealing, in electing all the Pastors under the Bishops, unt as for ordaining they had never any part at all theirin, neither for Bishops, nor for any other Pastors, neither during the practice of those 200. years, nor far before, nor after, except they shall find some odd extraordinary example, which I remember not but that were not able to carry away all the practice of the primative church for 200. years after Christ. But, (to call them to the justifying of that they have avouched here) can our brethren be able to prove, that all the elections and ordeynings of Bishops and Pastors, were made by the inquiry, advice, choice, judgement, and authority of Synods, causing the party elected to accept their election? or that Synods were always called, whensoever any Pastor of any particular church was to be elected and ordained? The learned disc. pag. 125.126. & 127. By this we may plainly see, that our presentation of patrons, is both profane and prejudicial: our giving of orders by Bishops, is presumptuous and full of absurdities. First, because they take upon them to do that, which none of the Apostles durst do: that is, without Election of the churches to ordain Elders. secondly, that they give an office without a charge, to make a Pastor and send him to seek a flock, where he can find it: which is as unreasonable a thing, as if one were chosen to be a church warden, & had never a church to keep: or made a constable, that had never a town or place appointed, whereof he should be constable. For the name of Pastor, Elder, or overseer, is the name of an office in act and essc, because it is a proper relative, and not potential ability in the clouds. If Bishops as they be now, were consecrated after the same manner to seek their bishoprics, where they could find them, it were no greater absurdity, than it is to ordain Pastors, and let them proll where they can for their benefices. Thirdly, by this wandering (we may also say vagabound) ministry, shifting from place to place, and in all places, to be counted a minister where he hath no charge, it would grieve a man to think what inconvenience doth follow, but principally how filthily it stinketh of the old popish indelible character, from whence it hath his ground, Patron's presentation. and neither of any reason, or of the word of God. And yet forsooth it is so perfect, that it may abide no reformation. Fourthly, if you will see how well the authority which they claim and practice is used of them, that only have the choice and admission of Ministers: Look over the whole Realm of England, what a multitude of unfit Pastors shall you find in every place? so that jeroboam never made worse priests of the refuse of the people, to serve his golden calves, than they have ordained Ministers, to feed the flock of Christ which he hath purchased with his own blood. By this that we have before perused, we can neither plainly, nor any way see that our presentation of patrons, Bridges. (being used as in right & law established it ought to be) is either profane or prejudicial, which words are very rough and hard, being spoken not so much against such patrons as do profanely, & with the Church's spoil, abuse their interest; as simply against all our presentations of patrons, Prince or whosoever; and against the right and title of them although they choose never so meet a man, or present him never so freely. For since that (to whomsoever the right of Electing hath pertained) the principal end thereof was to provide the Churches of meet Pastors, so that this may be provided for and upholden: The right of electing is not in itself profane. And to whom is this our presentation of patrons prejudicial? Is it prejudicial to the people? Yea rather, (if it be well used) is it not more beneficial to them? there is no simple necessity of the people's presenting, nor example in the Scripture as yet alleged. But if the people had got a right afterward, might they not again have lost their right or interest whatsoever they had (which was rather in Cities, about the choosing of their Bishops, than of all Pastors in every particular congregation) by abusing the same, through their factions, immoderate and tumultuous contentions, oftentimes ended with bloodshed, whereof the Ecclesiastical histories have many examples, and some within the space of the foresaid 200. years? And why might not their interest in electing Bishops have ceased, as did their authority in many other things beside, that they had among themselves before, while the Princes that were in chief authority over them, were as yet out of the household of the faith, and enemies thereto? The Prince's care in providing godly bishops. Which Princes afterwards becoming faithful, this care especially belonged to them, both to provide for godly Bishops, and to restrain their people from factions, and from seditious growing by their disordered elections. And so the people left off by little and little, to deal in those matters when the Christian Princes & the Clergy in the Cathedral Churches dealt therein. And do not our brethren in effect confess, that the people have resigned up what interest they had, unto an assembly of Elders consisting of grave, wise and godly men, to elect for them; and pag. 84.85. in whom they repose such confidence that they commit unto them their authority in hearing and determining such matters, If the people might resign their interest to the Elders: why not to the Prince or to the Nobles: etc. as without horrible confusion they cannot perform themselves: and hereto also may be referred that which is said of election of Pastors, that the Apostles Paul and Barnabas did ordain by election of the congregation, Elders unto many Churches Acts. 14.23. because the name of Elders is common to both: to Pastors and Governors. If then they think, that the people may pass over this authority of election from themselves to a few other: might they not aswell pass it over to the Prince, and repose as great a confidence in his upright doing of the same? But what, if upon any Conquest made, the Prince and the Nobles have reserved among other things, How diverse ways the right of patronage and presentation might have come. this honour and privilege over the people conquered; or in the partitions of Cities, Towns and Parishes, to be kept to themselves, or distributed among the chiefest of the Conquerors? Or what, if for some notable defence and maintenance of the people, or some benefit done unto them, they have granted all such right, title and interest unto the Prince, to the Nobles and Governors of them? Or what, if any Prince, or other of noble or gentle stem, by erecting, founding, or giving some proportion of house, land or revenue, to maintain the Pastor's livelihood; the right of presenting the Pastor to that Town or Village, is devolved to him and to his lawful heirs; and so the Parson descending of that line, do claim and hold by that right, to be ever after called, and to be indeed the patron of that Pastorship, that is, to be not only the donor of his living; but the defender of him both in the exercise of his office, and in the liberties, rights and privileges of his Church? To which ends and purposes, these patrons have only and no further, the interest of choosing a meet man, The ends why patronages were ordained. and then to present that man of whom he hath made choice, unto the Bishop, as to the superior pastor in that Diocese, that upon his further trial and examination by the Bishop whether he be meet or no; he may be admitted, or repelled from that pastorship. And if this patron do not in sufficient time inquire after, and provide a fit Pastor: then the Bishop himself is to provide one. Which matters and the reasons of them, with all other rights and orders pertaining thereto, are now showed and sufficiently provided for in the law, both for the Pastor and the congregation, both for the Patron and the Bishop, or from him to the Archbishop, or from him to the Prince. And should now all these positive laws and laudable customs, grown to the ancient title of any, nay, of so many and so great persons rights and interests of this presentation, be thus defaced as profane, and extorted from them as prejudicial to the people? I defend not, nor excuse the corrupt dealings of any patrons; but rather heartily lament and utterly mislike the manifold abuses of them. Bishop's giving orders. But they may be remedied by far better means, than for the wrongs done by some; to overthrow the right due to all; and neither to spare Gentlemen, This new devised electings and ordeinings far more indiciall than the presentation of patrons. noblemans, Bishops, Archbishops, Prince, nor any, but turn all lose to the people's election. And yet to give them the bob also, to take it runningly away from the people too, and to give the patronage or right of choosing and presenting the Pastor to an assembly of a few, in the name of the whole. And whereto would this come, but to revive these old broils (in every Parish for every Pastor) that had wont to be in Cities, about the elections of the Bishops? And that which is more, to summon Synods and assemble the Pastors and Elders of every Parish at least in the Shire, to intermeddle themselves in this matter, which are all, or the most of them as much strangers (if not more) unto that Parish, as perhaps is the Patron to that Benefice. If our presentation of patrons be profane and prejudicial: verily this election and ordaining by their Elders and Synods, is far more dangerous unto all the state, and manifest injurious unto many. But their conclusion runneth not only against our presentation of patrons: but also, that our giving of orders by Bishops is presumptuous, Our Bishops giving orders. and full of absurdities. Whether our brethren presume not over much in these presumptuous speeches, I refer to other, lest I should also be counted too presumptuous. And yet, though I dare not presume to wage any thing with our brethren on this point; nevertheless, I dare resume this upon me, that, so many absurdities as we have seen already, in the elections and ordeynings of Pastors, by the assemblies of their governing Elders and Synods; they shall never be able to show, Our brethren charge our Bishops giving orders with 4. absurdities and presumptions. in our giving of orders by the Bishops. But here, (whether they be all, or they have more in store) they charge ours with four absurdities and presumptions. First (say they) because they take upon them to do that which none of the Apostles durst do: that is, without election of the Churches to ordain Elders. Our brethren here do not simply deny, but that our Bishops may ordain Elders: but say they) not without the election of the Churches. Our Bishops may ordain Elders, ergo they may gen● orders. But this is the point we stood on before. So that if our Bishops may ordain Elders, than it may suffice for their giving orders. For what is the giving of orders else, but the ordaining? And if they may ordain them to be pastoral Elders, which is the office itself of the ministery, and so, far more principal than is the electing of the party, Bishop's may ordain pastors ergo they may elect them. to be ordained a Minister or Pastor; or than is the electing of him (being a Minister) to a place or living, where he may employ and exercise himself in his ministery: why then may not the Bishops elect also, having more discretion and skill than most commonly other have, to choose a meet man, either to the office, or to the living? The first absurdity and presumption. But they say none of the Apostles durst so do. And where find they this in all the Scripture, that they durst not, or that they had any commandment not to do it? Doth it suffice, if they could allege any example, where the Apostles did ordain Pastors with the election of the Churches? Whether the Apostles durst ordain Pastors without the Church's Election. I think that were no sufficient proof, that they durst not do it otherwise; or that always they did so; or that they had commandment so to do; or that their so doing were a rule and prescription for all elections. But in very deed they cannot show, (or at least, they have not as yet showed) so much as any one example where they did so. All those that they have showed, the oftener they allege them, the more they make against them. There is not one word in them, that inferreth either the peoples, or in their name any consistory Elders election of the Pastors, that the Apostles used or prescribed, in the ordaining of Pastors. Yea rather, both the examples, and the precepts of Saint Paul to Timothy, are either plain (or seem to incline) to the clean contrary. And shall we dare to say on the other side, (finding both the example here alleged by themselves, Acts 14. and Saint Paul's precepts to Timothy and to Titus, of ordaining pastoral Elders to be made without mentioning of the Church's elections,) that the Apostles durst not ordain any Pastors with the Church's elections; no, we dare not say so, but that the Apostles might have done it with them, or without them, as they thought best, having the warrant of God's Spirit, and as the occasion served for their ordaining of the Pastors. And therefore, I marvel how our Brethren durst so boldly affirm, that the Apostles not only did it not, but durst not do it. The 2. absurdity and presumption is the giving of an office without a charge or flock. Secondly, (say they) that they give an office without a charge, and send him to seek a flock where he can find it. Our brethren here begin to descant upon the names of Pastors and office. Neither do we deny, but that the name Pastor, betokeneth an office, whether we understand it as he is only a Minister of the word and Sacraments, and so he is said to have taken Orders, or as he hath a peculiar flock to minister the word and Sacraments in, as we commonly call the Rector, Parson, Vicar or Curate, the pastor of such and such a Church or Parish. The word Pastor in both senses may be comprehended in the name of an office. And yet here if we should go as strictly to work, as our brethren do, (which curiosity I mislike not in them, to find out all the quirks in the world, to beat out the truth more thoroughly) we shall easily see great differences in the proprieties of these names and words of an office, and of an order. Albeit they may well be taken and oftentimes are used indifferently. But the question is here whether any office can be given, Office and Order. and the man truly called an officer, Where to the word Office hath relation. without a charge of a place or a flock given withal unto him, whereof he is and may be called the officer. They deny it, and I say he may, and my reason is this. The word office hath not always relation to the charge of a place only and that specially of a certain place, where, or of persons among whom, the office is exercised: but of the matter itself and duty, whereof the office consisteth, in res●●t of which matter, the other are as it were but accidental, which our brethren here make all, or principal. The Prophets were Prophets before they had any certain places were they prophesied. The Apostles were called, and in office were Apostles, Phophets' apostles having no certain Places. before they were sent into any message of their Apostleship. And Saint Paul calleth all both Apostles and Pastors, Ministers. 1. Cor. 4.1. though all of them had no certain standing places designed to them to minister in, and yet were they all of them in the very office of the ministery full Ministers of the word and Sacraments, if we may so properly call the ministery of the word and Sacraments, an office as an order. In deed Saint Paul saith of an office, Rom. 12. vers. 7. or an office, on the office. That is to say, The difference between Office & Order. he that hath an office let him be diligent in his office. But he assigneth not any certain places and charge of flocks to all the offices that he there reckoneth up. Although, as it is an old saying, so it is not untrue, Priesthood and Knighthood are orders rather than offices. And Priesthood (I mean not the Popish sacrificing Priesthood, but the Pastoral Eldership) may well be called an order, when the making of a Priest or pastoral Elder is called, the ordering or the ordaining of him, and our brethren themselves do well call it the giving of orders. Knighthood now being likewise more properly called an order than an office: when a man hath received the order of Knighthood, The order of Knighthood given without giving lands fee to maintain it. it followeth not that he must be a Knight of this or that place, as were some Knights, namely the Knights of Prussia, or the Knights late of the Rhodes, and now of Malta: neither followeth it, that he that made him Knight must always withal give him lands and living, and yet all the better for the Knight if he so do, and more fit for his order to have sufficient maintenance, and though he had but xl. pound a year, which was called a Knights fee. Howbeit, he m●ght b●e a Knight, though a poor Knight, without any such fee. For the order is one thing, and the maintenance of him in his order, yea his charge to do his duty i● his order, is another thing, and not the order itself. But (say they) this is as unreasonable a thing, as i● one were chosen (not to be a Knight, but) to be a Churchwarden, and had never a Church to keep; or made a Constable, that had never a Town or place appointed, whereof he should be Constable. Ceasing of offices. The fimilitude 〈◊〉 being a Churchwarden or Counst●ble with Church or Twone to look unto. The similitudes of these two offices, and of Churchwarden, and of a Constable, are not a like to the order, or (if they will so call it) to the office of the ministery, for because that these two Offices have a necessary relation in themselves not only to the office, but also to the place where the pa●tie is the officer: so that, if no place be assigned them, there is no such officer made. To which kind of officers, the old distinction serveth, that the office & the place be distincta ratione non re. They cannot in the act of them be separate, though they be distinguished in the reason of them. The difference between these offices and the office or order of a minister. And yet we see, that in some such offices, as in which besides the office, there is joined with all a degree of honour and dignity, though the relation of the office, in respect of the place where the office lay, doth cease; as, either the place being wasted, or possessed by another, and he dispossessed: yet may his degree of dignity not cease or be in him utterly extinguished, so long as the right of the office is in him, though the exercise and action of the office, together with the place, and other appendices of the office, be taken from him, Some offices made in respect of place & charge, that cease not with the dispossessing of the place or charge. as a King, Duke, Earl, or Lord, though he lose, (be it not by his own demerit, resignation, or lawful deprivation) his Kingdom, Dukedom, Earldom, or Lordship, but by an others intrusion or occupation: yet is he still both called, and is in deed●, a King, a Duke, an Earl, a Lord, by reason he still holdeth the right of the office, and capacity to repossess it though he have neither possession, action, nor exercise of it at this instant. Notwithstanding, as it is said in the old verse on fortune's wheel, regno, regnavi, regnabo, sum sine regno. He may be rex sine regno, even the lowest degree of them all, and yet rex still. Yea, to descend to base offices also, not only a professor of liberal sciences, but even one professing mechanical arts, or as we commonly term him a handicrafts man, although he exercise not always the action of his Function, nor occupy in his occupation, or as we may generally call it also his office too: yet the office, occupation or function ceaseth not in him, and if now, it may be thus in so many other offices, which notwithstanding take all their denomination even of the action and exercise of them, and of the charge or duty therein required: why may it not, and much more, be thus in the order or office of the minister? Doth his office cease, if he be put from his place, where he was first appointed to minister. If his office should cease with the place, than could he minister in no other place. Nay, then were he no minister at all any longer, so that, turn him out of his place, A Minister ceaseth not to be a minister, though put from his place where he ministered. and turn him clean out of his ministry, & if he be preferred to an other place, he must be made minister again. And is worse than (as Chancer saith) A Monk out of his cloister, is not worth an oyster; for a monk is a monk still: but the minister is become no minister, and so all his preaching and ministering of the sacraments are a lay man's actions, and not a ministers: and (by their own consequence) no sacraments at all, Entry into the ministry. if he do these things where his charge and flock is not: And in deed some of our brethren begin to be so precise, that think it scarce lawful to preach, except it be in their own proper charges, though they be orderly requested thereunto, but they need not to be squeamish by this rule, for there they are not Ministers at all if they do it. Now if the office of the ministery itself cease not, with the altering of the place, where they had a charge, The ministery itself dependeth not upon this or that Place. much less doth the institution and entry into the office of the ministry, which is the ordaining or giving of orders, depend upon or require the necessity of a place, as it doth in the office of a Churchwarden or Counstable, or in the offices that have local honours and dignities annexed to the degrees, or to the offices of them, as in Kings, Dukes, Earls, Lords, etc. For these offices begin together with the places and charges annexed unto them, but in all the offices of ministry, it is not so. And if our brethren will so urge it, let them look to it their selves. For I suppose, that some of them (if I take not my marks amiss, and those too, whom otherwise I reverence and honour) had not provisions of place and charge of flock committed unto them, How our brethren were made ministers. at their very first receiving of their orders, but perhaps tarried some pretty while after, and yet (I hope) they make account that they were ministers before. Yea had they not been ministers at all before, and that tried, to be both learned, and presupposed to be meet men: they had not been capable of those places and Charges. And if I should go further: what one of our Bre. were not made simply ministers of the word and sacraments, and not ministers conditional, as the ministers of this or of that place, charge, or flock? although it might be some of them were already provides for in that bé●halfe: but their taking of orders or office of the ministry itself, dependeth not thereon: which it must have done, were the place a part and that a necessary part of the office. They say that this their learned discourse, is a brief & plain declaration concerning the desires of all those faithful ministers that have & do seek for the Discipline and reformation of the Church of England. But if this be one of the points they desire and seek for: then they desire and seek for that, which overthrows both their own ministry, and their faithfulness too. For, if this rule be true; then are they no faithful ministers, nor ministers at all, Our brethren overthrow their own Ministry. having received the orders of ministry otherwise, than their selves desire, seek for, and prescribe that other should do. But they not considering this, go forward from their examples of Churchwarden and Constable, to prove it somewhat more Clerke-like. For (say they) the name of a Pastor, Elder, or Overseer, is the name of an office in Act and Esse, The act and esse of a pastor. because it is a proper relative, and not a potential ability in the clouds. The name Pastor not so of act and esse, but that it admiteth also Potential hability. Are all potential abilities in the Clouds? But our brethren were disposed here to speak in clouds, and to tell the people of offices in Act and Esse, of proper relations, and of potential abilities: be like, because they would the world should well understand, that this is (for sooth) a learned discourse: howbeit, all this discourse here, is but of the names of this order or office of the ministry. But, be they relatives as proper as they will, and the relation also in Act and Esse, as they term it: yet doth it not follow that this actual and essential relation, must be so strictly related to a place, where he must be a Pastor, or Elder, or Overseer, that he cannot be made the Pastor, Elder, or Overseer, till he come thither his self, and excercise the office actually: for, if there be no potential ability, but only the very Act and Esse, thereof to be considered in the office of a Pastor, Elder or overseer: then is he not a Pastor, Elder, or Overseer, till he do feed or teach them, govern them and oversee them actually. But, if heée be not the Pastor till he come actually his self to do these actions among them: then is all the action aforesaid in the Synod fustrate, except they go all home with him, and ordain him only then and there, when and where he must do the things in act and esse, that the name of his office hath relation unto. This Position overthroweth all the making of Pastors in the Synods. For (say they) the name of a Pastor, Elder, or overseer, is the name of an office in act and Esse, because it is a proper relative, and not a potential ability in the Clouds. Is not this a proper valiance on the name of Pastor? and to make it a proper relative, do they not make it withal a proper office? Yea, see whereunto by this nice valiance on these names and terms, The gross absurdity of this position. this office will come: and all because it may in no wise suffer a potential ability. And why so: forsooth for fear it would vapour up by and by into the clouds, but admit this to be true; and than it presently followeth, that when soever the officer ceaseth from the very act and doing of his office (as both upon many occasions he may sometimes do, and of natural necessity he must oftentimes do,) so often doth he cease to be a Pastor, Elder, or Overseer. But because they stand upon these 3. names, Pastor, Elder, and Overseer, which they make all relatives alike, and to have like relation unto an office in act and esse. For the Esse, it is an other matter, if they mean the being of the office. For, assoon as the office hath begun his esse or being; then his esse or being continueth still in the office in all these 3. names thereof, although the act in all alike be not in esse or in being, which confuteth so much more our brethren's assertion. But that all these three names are proper alike in respect of the Act: this again is nothing so. For, the name of Pastor signifying a shepherd, Bishop's to seek their Bishoprics. beareth more heardly upon this actual relation, than the name of presbyter, Priest, or Elder doth, which hath more reverence to the office, function, dignity or degree either in itself, or in respect of younger and inferior persons, than it hath unto any charge over them committed unto him. As for the name of overseer inferreth the relation of an office more in act, than doth the name of Elder or of Pastor. Because, he may easiler & oftener actually oversee them, than he can feed them. Yet none of these names are always so related either to act o● to esse, that they debar all potential ability in him, but that he may remit the continual exercise and act of his office, per interstitia, with pausings and ceassing oftentines between, and yet the Esse of his office ceaseth not, nor he to be still an essential officer; and much less, that the esse or being of his office, yea, or the act either of the same, should be limited and tied always to one place, or flock or charge: yea the place, flock, or charge, to be a part of the esse or being of the office. But thus straightly do our brethren drive us, to track them in these harish terms of schoolemens quiddities, into the which, because, I am rather brought by them, than that I have joy to stay the reader in them; I crave & hope for, the easier pardon. For indeed, we strive not there so much for names and terms, as whether the order or office of the Pastor be not compatible to any man, that hath not withal a charge and flock of people committed unto him at the very instant of making him a Minister, or giving him orders: which thing, because our Bishops do not, nor indeed can perform, nor was performed in these faithful Ministers our brethren themselves, nor is necessary always to be performed; while they would thus challenge our Bishops of absurdity for it; they their selves incur all these most gross absurdities, and yet they urge them still, with more and more absurdity. But say they, if Bishops as they be now, were consecrated after the same manner, to seek their bishoprics, where they could find them: it were no greater absurdity, than it is to ordain Pastors, and let them Prolle where they can for their benefices. This merriment here would have done well (among so solemn and subtle relations of abilities, potentialities, actualities, and essenties: Our brethren's resemblance of Bishops to seek their Bishoprics. ) to recreate the reader's spirits, if it were to the purpose. But as before, they would have shifted off the matter, from the order of the Priesthood or eldership, to the office of a Pastor; which yet we see serveth not their 〈◊〉: so, much less both this bold, that is a Minister may be made a Minister, and have no proper place or benefice withal assigned him, where to Minister: that then after the same manner, a Bishop may be made a bishop; & have no place or Bishopric assigned him, whereof to be Bishop. Indeed, if a bishop were all one & nothing else, but (as our brethren have said) an elder, wandering Ministers. pastor, or Minister of the word and Sacraments: then, to make a bishop, Our brethren's drift for Bish. & bishoprics. and after to let him seek a bishopric where he can find it, were no absurdity at all. And I doubt it shrewdly, this be not the least of many of our brethren's drifts, to make Bishops indeed go seek their bishoprics. For even these our learned brethren have told us already, Pag. 54. of dividing the superfluities of some places that have too much, unto them that have too little. And there want not more than enough, to hearken in the wind for such a bargain, and even therefore our brethren may find the more favourites, in these devices. But since that a bishop, besides that he is an Elder Pastor or MInister, hath also an other office, The Bishop office besides Pastorship. in respect whereof he hath the name of Bishop. By which office he hath a superior oversight & higher charge of jurisdiction, over a number of other Pastoral Elders in certain particular Churches, limited and bounded for his diocaeses: and of this we have clearly seen the practice even in the Apostles times; and from the Apostles times, during all the times of the ancient and holy Fathers succeeding: the contrary whereof our brethren shall never be able to prove: who may not then see, that is not blinded with too much ignorance or partiality; what a great difference there is in this point, between a Bishop, and one that is but only a Minister: While the Minister's office respecteth the ministery of the word and Sacraments, in what place soever he shallbe assigned to Minister the same, and Bishops office respecting (besides this ministery the Bishopric, that is, the jurisdiction and oversight of those Churches, that are allotted to his Diocoese. And can our brethren then justify this saying, If Bishops (as they be now) were consecrated after the same manner, to seek their Bishoprics where they could find them, it were no greater absurdity, than it is to ordain Pastors; and let them prolle where they can for their benefices. What mean they by this word Bishops as they be now? Bish. as they be now. For this maketh yet more against themselves. For Bishops as they be now, have livings also more or less, besides the charge of their Diocoese, annexed & appropriated unto them, which all Ministers have not, neither (I think) all our brethren their selves had their benefices when they were first made Ministers. And should we return such unseemly speeches on them, that they went seeking and prowling about for their benefices. where they could find them: No, I do think more reverently of our brethren, but I mislike their terms, and more their argument. thirdly (say they) by this wandering (we may also say, vagabond) ministry, shifting from place to place, and in all places to be counted a minister, where he 〈◊〉 no charge; it would grieve a man to think what inconveniences do ●ollow, etc. We like as ill and are grieved as much, at wandering ministers, Ministers out of their charge. namely such as wander not upon any unlawful cause, but shifting from place to place; as any of these our learned brethren are grieved thereat. The 3. absurdity & presumptions is wandering and vagabund Ministers. Al●●ough again it be no small grief, to hear them thus continue such unreverent and uncharitable terms, as Vagabund ministers, they being their poor brethren, and ministers of Christ, not of Antichrist, ministers of God's word and Sacrament, not Idolatrous nor Massemonging Sacrificers. It were well, there were none but such as were so sufficiently provided for, that they need not wander. And the ancient Canons (as I think) are in force, that whosoever should be made a presbyter, priest, or Elder, the bishop is bound to see him have Titulum (as they term it,) a Title of some stipend or pension whereon to be maintained; or else the Bishop that ordained him to be bound to find him. If this be not executed, that is another matter, No Ministers to be made sine Titulo. and may be remedied, the Eccle. state both for the substance of the bishops, and of the ministers dignities and offices, standing as it doth. And if any bishop were complained upon and convicted. I think he might by order of law be compelled to find his Ministers, or be punished for making of them. But what is this to our brethren's assertion, that a man cannot be counted a minister where he hath no charge: and if not so much as counted; than not be. For if he be a minister, than he ought to be counted a minister. Our brethren said before, it was an absurdity to ordain Pastors, Ministers are, and are to be counted ministers out of their charges. and let them prowl where they can for their Benefices. But is that such an absurdity, as is this? Yea, this is not only most absurd, and includeth all the former inconveniences: but it is clean contrary to all their own positions hereon. For if the office of his ministery have his esse (as before they called it) that is, the essence or being thereof only in that place or congregation, where the Minister hath a charge: than not only (as I said before) being out of his charge or congregation, he is out of his ministery, and so a lay man, and if he preach, his preaching is no preaching: & if he minister the Sacraments, they are no Sacraments, neither the Lords Supper, nor yet Baptism, nor so to be counted by their own rules, any more, than if a woman did minister them. For if those actions of his, be to be otherwise accounted: ●hen is it by reason, that he himself is to be otherwise accounted that did them. And if he be to be accounted otherwise; than it is in respect be is a Minister. And if in that respect; then he is to be counted a Minister, though out of his charge, and how true is then this our brethren's paradore, that he is not to be couted a Minister where he hath no charge? All these absurdities and dangerous inconveniences, with their trains and sequelles do so follow hereupon; The incoveniences of our brethren's position. that many may call into question both their receiving of the Lord's Supper, and their children's and their own baptism too, and so stagger whether they may make full reckoning, that they be Christians yea or no, saving in the profession of their faith. And yet they may begin to doubt in that also, Ministers in Synods since that S. Paul useth this gradation, Rom. 10. verse 14. But how shall they call on him, on whom they have not believed? How shall the●●eleeue in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a Preacher? and how shall they preach except they be sent? And how is the Preacher sent, if he go out of his charge? And so upon calling this in doubt, nay, that is more, upon flatly denying both his sending, and the very being of his ministery; how do we not undo again all the former parts of this gradation? and all because he that preached, (as for example, I imagine it were at Paul's Cross) preached where he had no charge. If these things be no absurdities nor inconveniences with our Brethren; though they and I agree not herein; yet how do they agree to their own selves? When a Synod is called, be it either universal, national, provincial, or particular of any Shire, Our brethren overthrow all Synods. (as they would have it) there to ordain Ministers unto the particular congregations, or to decide a controversy in doctrine, or to determine of discipline, or to decree ceremonies for order & comeliness: as they would have these things to be decided and concluded in Synods: and Synods (at least provincial Synods) to be called often: who are they that should be called thither? Are they not the Pastors, Teachers and Preachers, as (pag. 117.) they said before? Who shall be able to know▪ what order, comeliness, and edification requireth; according to God's word, Pastors and Ministers in Synods. but they that be teachers and preachers of the same unto all others? But now, when all these Pastors, Ministers, Teachers, and Preachers go to this Synod, and are there assembled, they are out of their particular congregation, which they say is their charge: and what followeth, but they must forthwith be counted no Ministers? And being no Ministers, they can neither preach nor teach; they can determine none of these controversies; no, they are not able to know what pertaineth to order and comeliness, so that for that while, they have lost both their ability and their knowledge. But no marvel of that, when they have lost their being Ministers, and so lost themselves and all, so long as they be out of their charges. And now where they come to make Ministers, being no Ministers their selves; how can they make others? and in what a pickle be we now? But they say (and we must believe them) that they must have Synods for the doing of all these things: but the Synod is not the flock, the Benefice or particular congregation of them, and so not their charge: and what then followeth hereupon, but that a man may be counted a Minister where he hath no charge? Our brethren's contradictions which is here the clean contrary to our Brothers paradox, that a man must not be counted a Minister where he hath no charge? Now consider, since they have avowed both these sayings; and both these (being clean contrary) cannot both stand true, one of them must yield, and be packing for a manifest falsehood: Contradictions. which were best to let go? I think our brethren when they have weighed well the poise of both, will rather let go this, th●n the other, and never be ashamed (for all the learning of their discourse) to say, this was but a course overslip, and that a minister is, and must still be counted a Minister where he hath no charge nor flock. But if now to save all upright in both, they will say, he is not out of his charge in the Synod, though it be not his flock: shall they flock us so? Do they not by his charge understand his flock? when they say of the Bishops that they give an office without a charge; and what is that? For forth to make a Pastor and send him to seek a flock where he can find it? And did they not expound this flock also to be his Benefice, in saying, What our brethren mean by a ministers charge. to ordain Pastors and let them prowl wher● they can for their Benefices? Do they not here plainly mean by the charge the flock, and by the flock the Benefice of the Pastor? And will they also make him Pastor there, where he hath no flock? And do they not make a distinction also pag. 111. of his double estate saying, we have declared before that there is a double authority of the Pastor, the one joined with the Elders of the Church whereof he is Pastor, the other with the Synod or holy assembly, whereof he is a member. So that in the Synods he is not present as a pastor, but as a member. No, not only he is not in the Synod as a Pastor, but he is not at all a pastor there, and if no pastor, than no minister. For if minister, than pastor, by our Bre. own reckoning. For they make pastor and minister all one, and that they said before of making a pastor without a charge, here they repeat, to be counted a minister where he hath no charge. So that, Our brethren's position overthroweth all still all comes to this reckoning, that being not minister in the Synod, because that there he is not pastor: and he is not pastor, because it is not his charge, nor his flock, nor his benefice: we are still at the pitch that we were at before, that either nothing can be done in the Synod, and so we shall have no Ministers at all, if they must be made there: or else, ministers be no ministers still, be they in their charge, or be they out of it. But, because our brethren should not be pressed too hard, & that it might be thought, that yet this assertion may hold up his snout, because that, although it be not properly his charge, The charge of the function, not of the place is of the essence of the ministery. nor the charge which indeed they both mean and express: yet because the words run so large, that he is not to be counted a minister where he hath no charge, and hére he hath some charge although not Pastoral: let us see further, what our brethren can get hereby. Set aside the Synod itself; what is he, if he chance to be in any other place? is he neither pastor nor minister, if he be in some other place where he hath no charge, as, beit but in the way unto the Synod▪ is he no minister? The Charge of the Function▪ But perhaps they will say, that they say it not of any or of some places; but, in all places to be counted a minister where he hath no charge. And doth the number of places than make or mar the matter? ver●●y, I see not why, if he ought still to be counted a minister in some place where he hath no charge; but that he may be counted so aswell, even in all places where he hath no charge. And therefore it is not so much the charge of the place, as the charge of the function, that is the material point indeed in a minister. Albeit (I grant) he is ordained to have a charge also, which he must exercise in some place, if he will not altogether be idle, though this place or that place be not assigned unto him. But they say, it would grieve a man to think what inconveniences doth follow, but principally how filthily it stinketh of the old Popish indelible character, from whence it hath his ground, and neither of any reason nor of the word of God. It grieveth me to think, (and I think it would grieve any man, that truly loveth our brethren, Our ministery smelleth not of the Popish Character. and neither hateth them nor flattereth them) that they so much as think not of the absurdities, contradictions, and inconveniences of these their strange opinions that so stink in deed in the smell of all men else; that I marvel their selves are not grieved with it, nor yet think thereon. As for the office and function of our ministery, howsoever there may be cause of grief, either by the foul favour of evil report and slanderous infamy of it, or too evil a smell and stench in deed, by the default of some that are the ministers: yet is not that to be imputed to the ministery; of which function there is no cause to be aggrieved or ashamed, but for us to rejoice; and for other, specially our brethren, if they be (as they say and I wish them to be) faithful ministers, to think of us, as they would have us to think of them: according to the Apostles rule, 1. Cor. 4.1. Let men so esteem (or think) of us, as Ministers of Christ and dispensers of the mysteries of God. So far of is our ministery (whatsoever wretched sinners we are ourselves, and unworthy in our earthen, polluted and brittle vessels, to carry the heavenly liquor, and precious treasure of God's word and mysteries) so far is it off from stinking or smelling of the false ministery, or errors of Antichrist, and from all stench of the old (or rather the late) Popish indelible character: that it is not (God be blessed for it) charactered out, with any such Balaams marks and characters, as the Popish Priesthood was, The function and potential ability remaining till degradation without indelible Character. neither of Dylinge, nor shavings, nor any such order or office, nor any such indelebilitie of the same: but that without scraping or disue●ing of the minister, he may be disgraded, deposed, unordered, or clean deprived of his order or office; (as well as deprived or displaced from his Benefice) for his demerits in false doctrine, or wi●ked life, if he shall so deserve. And yet, till he be lawfully disgraded or deprived, from his order or office of the ministery; yea, though he were deprived of his Benefice. Indelible Character. Nevertheless, he may remain in the function order and esse of a Minister still of the word and Sacraments; and in potential ability to the act and exercise, yea, although he were also suspended for a time, from all the action and exercise of his ministery. Will our brethren never allow suspension, as a gentler correction, than utter depriving or disgrading? when they allow e●en the excommunicated offenders (upon their repentance and amendment) to be received again into the bosom of the Church? The minister not a new ordained after suspension or excommunication. pag. 98. And shall they not be received again, as clearly forgiven, into their former places and offices? Or do they so make him for that while, no Minister at all, that he must be new made Minister a fresh when he is released from that sentence of excommunication or suspension? But why not; if he must be new made Minister do he but once set his foot out of his charge of flock or Benefice? and is he Minister again, when be setteth in his foot again into his charge? The absurdity of our Brothers position. and can he then be minister or not minister when he will? and can he make himself minister a new, as often as he list thus to step in and out, to and from his charge? Or who shall make him minister again, so oft as he thus starteth aside? Truly it grieveth me; and I am even weary to think (and I think the reader also to hear, or to think) what an infinite number of absurdities, do still more and more arise, on these their strange principles. Of which they máy well bestow these their own speeches, that they are indeed grounded neither of any reason, or of the word of God. But whether our ministery be grounded on the old stinking popish indelible character▪ or (besides good reason) even on the word of God: The ground of our ministery hath God's word & good reasons for it. let any godly or reasonable man, whose reason is not forestalled with affection, be an indifferent umpire between us, in God's name. And yet forsooth (say they, in mockery of our ministery) it is so perfect, that it may abide no reformation. We vaunt of no perfection in our ministery. It may be good and godly; and yet unperfect, We vaunt not of our ministries perfection. as we ourselves and all our actions and offices are. Though our brethren boast too much of purity and perfection; we rather tend to it, than that we are as yet able to apprehend it. For (as the Apostle saith, 1. Cor. 13. vers. 9, & 10.) we know in part and we prophecy in part; but when that which is perfect is come; then that which is in part shallbe abolished. Would God, both for our brethren and for us, we were in the better part for our ministery; and more near to perfection all of us, both in that and in all things else, than we be. And for our parts, we are ready to abide all due and true reformation. We are ready to abide all true reformation. But as for such reformations as these are, that these our learned brethren (which call themselves all the faithful Ministers) do desire, Multitudes of unfit Ministers. or rather, do not desire, but prescribe unto us, for the discipline and reformation of the Church of England: they are so far off from any nearness to perfection; that (forsooth, and forsooth) they would rather deform us altogether, than any whit reform us, or amend us. Fourthly (say they) if you will see how well the authority which they claim and practise, The 4. absurdity and presumption is the use & practise of ordaining unfit ministers. is used of them, that only have the choice and admission of ministers: look over the whole Realm of England, what a multitude of unfit pastors shall you find, in every place? so that jeroboam never made worse priests of the refuse of the people, to serve his golden Calves, than they have ordained ministers, to feed the flock of Christ, which he hath purchased with his own blood. It is good to see how well or ill, the authority claimed is practised or used; How we should look on this practice so we see it with an intentive, and yet a single eye; discerning evermore between the authority itself, and the practice: and in the practice, between the use and the abuse thereof. Now, if we shall thus look over the whole Realm of England, which (GOD be praised) is a large circuit, and containeth a very great number of Pastors; it is less marvel if there be many, not in all things so good, as their office and order doth require. Saint Paul findeth fault in the Church of Corinthus, even with all the prophets there, St. paul's fault finding with the prophets of Corinth. (being though not all of them, yet many, the ordinary ministers and teachers of the word) for their great disorders. And how much more (especially in this our more corrupt age) is it less wonder, if we should see a multitude of unfit pastors, in looking over a whole Realm, and that such a Realm as England is? maior est orbis urbe, saith Saint Jerome. And yet in the City where he was at Rome, the multitude of the evil Priests or ministers and their envy, made him forsake Rome and go to Bethelem. How some to severe fathers have fallen into schisms by offence of the ministers lives. Yea, for the envy of the Priests and ministers long before him, Tertullian from growing in malecontentment with the dissolute life of the ministers, fell so far from them, that in the end he became a Montaniste. And the too much disliking of the corrupt lives of the Bishops, the Clergy and the Ministers in the ancient Church, hath made many too austere Ministers, otherwise excellent learned men and straight livers, become Schismatics, as many of the precise novatians and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Puritans were. Not such great multitudes of unfit ministers as our brethren pretend. But now, if we shall look over the whole Realm of England, what a multitude (say our brethren) of unfit Pastors shall you find in every place? And indeed, what a multitude? I grant, more than we would there were, or than there should be. For in duty, there ought none at all to be unfit. But if we shall view the number well without sinister affection: I trust we shall not stude (considering the whole Realm) so great a multitude, as our Brothers exclamation, jeroboams Priests. (grounded on ill will to the state of all the Ministers, and to their ministery itself) would make the world believe, that there is unfitness in so many, that even in every place we should find a multitude of them. Whereas contrariwise, though there be not a multitude of fit Pastors in every place; yet there is some, and some good multitude in many places, God be praised for it, and increase the multitude of them. But they find fault, A slanderous compai●on of our Pastors to jeroboams Priests. not only with the multitude of unfit Pastors in every place, but that also they be so unfit, that they spare not to say: so that jeroboam never made worse Priests of the refuse of the people, to serve his golden Calves, than they have ordained Ministers. etc. Where here they speak not of so odd particular evil persons, either degenerating from their order, or unworthy to have been at al● ordained, or perchance crept into the number by subornation and counterfeiting to be ministers, and are not (as in a whole Realm, such naughty persons may be found:) but speak it generally and of a great multitude in every place: These bitter speeches seem rather to arise from the froth of some sharp choler, if not very melancholy (comprehending in general the good and the bad) to compare not only the poor ministers, that to their abilities feed the flock of Christ which he hath purchased with his own blood, to the Idolatrous Priests that jeroboam made, of the refuse of the people, to serve his golden Calves: but also with like generality of all the Bishops, without discerning who hath made any unfit ministers, and who not (that the fault being personal, might light upon the persons offending): they charge them all alike, that they have all done, as did that execrable Apostata and Idolatrous tyrant jeroboam, who (being though a Prince, yet a mere lay man) took upon him to make Priests and ministers of the rascals and refuse of the people, whereas in deed, neither he (had he been otherwise never so good) could make any Priests at all: nor they (had they been never somette ●●tte, learned or godly) could be made Priests, being not of the stock of Aaron, and so in deed were no true Priests at all. But what do I go about, to repel this so manifest a slander; the indignity whereof, deserveth chastisement rather than answer? save that our brethren v●● a little point of cunning herein, Our brethren use herein the practice of the old Heretics, and the papists by the ministers lives to discredit their ministery. from which they should the rather shun; because as ill men as was jeroboam, even many ancient Heretics used the same comparison. And at this day, it is the common practice of the Papists, when they would breed a misliking of all our doctrine, and our ministery, to undermine it, by finding fault with the ministers unfitness in their lives and learning. And because they dare not openly condemn all, which is their meaning; they make a show to be offended with the multitude of the unfittest ministers. Unfit Ministers. I wisse, if we should thus rig into the unfitness, and that of ministers which are great favourites and vegers of these devices and reformations, we could find (if not a multitude in every place, which God forbidden) yet some numbers, very unfit to be called faithful ministers, that desire the reformation of the Church of England. Which have made such deformation in the ministery, and thereupon being partly misliked of us, and partly either having been punished, or fearing punishment, have fallen to take upon them a great countenance of this our Brothers zeal and practice that they use, to inveigh against the Bishops, challenging them for pride and tyranny; and against all the Clergy and state of Ecclesiastical government now established: The unfitness of many among our brethren to be ministers. and these men get such great credit among many our malcontented brethren; that I am afraid, some of them go in the multitude and name also of these faithful ministers, that recommend unto us this their learned discourse. Qui simulant Curios & Bacchanalia viwnt. But, let such pass as they are worthy: whom I rather lament, than study to decipher their unworthiness. Howbeit, of these our learned (but missezealous) brethren, I think more reverently, as becometh me, and do not condemn them all, for the multitude and number of some among them, and crave that they would afford us the like equity, not for the defaults of some (though a multitude) to condemn all, and withal itself all the ministery too: for so, we may call the doctrine also too near in question, and the whole corpse and substance of our Church. The learned disc. pag. 128. This complaint we confess is grievous, but the indignity of the matter enforceth it. We know that vain excuses shall not be wanting, of necessity, etc. But if necessity compelled them, to take such at the first: what necessity compelleth them, to suffer them to be such still? For, if they would needs admit ignorant persons to that charge; yet should they have enforced them to study, as well as to other things, they have enforced them unto, that in time they might have grown to be meet for their calling. Which if they had done in 10.12. or 13. years space, a great many might have proved excellently well learned and able to serve in the Church with great fruit and profit; and the rest according to proportion of their time, might have come to some mediocrity in knowledge: whereas now, as ignorant and as unfit, as they were the first day, so are they still for the most part, and will so continue to their lives end, if they may be suffered in idleness as they have been hitherto. Bridges. After our brethren have thus bitterly compared, the multitude of our Pastors in every place, to jeroboams Idolatrous Priests: they now go about to excuse themselves of this so grievous a complaint, and withal, to cut off from us all excuses. This complaint (say they) we confess is grievous, Our brothers grievous complaint. but the indignity of the matter enforceth it. It is a grievous complaint in deed (as they confess) and an heinous, both against the Bishops, and against their poor Brothers ministers. Our Brothers confession of their complaint to be grievous. Neither is there any so grievous indignity or necessity, that enforceth them to complain so grievously▪ and beyond not only the verity of the matter, but the bounds both of charity and all modesty, and that in such grievous manner of complaining, The extreme manner of our Brothers grievous complaining. not by lowly supplication, exhibited in writing to her most excellent Majesty, or to her most honourable Council; but to published in print to all the whole Realm, and that without licence to print it, yea against Law and order given in such behalf so to do; and to scatter it abroad in every part of the whole Realm, as much as they may; and that with such reproachful invectives, and notorious slanders: doth any thing, or should any thing, enforce our brethren to complain in this extreme manner? But now from this insufficient excuse of their so grievous complaint on the Bishops & our Ministers: they turn to the taking away from us, the refuge and mitigation of all excuses. We know (say they) that vain excuses shall not be wanting of necessity, etc. That that is amiss, and can be so evicted; The excuse of necessity. if our brethren will needs become so rough, that it may deserve no modest excuse, nor mitigation with them; we will gladly confess it, and study to reform it in good order. And so (God be praised) as we may, we do. And if we ●id not, law would compel us. But they know before hand (as they say) that we will allege necessity. And they also before hand, will reject it, as a vain excuse. For we know (say they) that vain excuses shall not be wanting, of necessity. etc. And how know théy (before hand) that we would allege necessity? Doth their mind (before hand) misgive that there was at the first some necessity indeed? and why might it not then be alleged? But what mean they here, by adjoining this, etc. Do they also know before hand, that we have some other excuses, if necessity would not be admitted? And would they not allege them too, but suppress them, or without all regard, or hearing, or knowing of them, shake them off before hand, as vain excuses to? But, not to stand upon et-ceteraes: let us see what they say to necessity. And yet they have cast off that also before hand, as a vain excuse. And indeed if they mean it, that we should allege, that necessity drove our Bishop to ordain, and us allow such persons, of whom they said before, jeroboam never made worse: then, as he had no necessity, that did or ought to have driven him to make such Priests: The excuse of necessity. so we could not allege an● such necessity, The excuse of necessity but that it should be a very vain excuse, to choose and ordain such (not vain only) but most vile persons. But we are far (God be praised) both from excusing such false and wicked Pastors, (or rather, no Pastors at all) or from excusing any that have made such, as they knew or suspected, to be either an evil person in life, or altogether unfit in knowledge for the ministery. Notwithstanding, if we shall better consider of the matter, how for the need and want of learned Preachers, The occasions of the necessity. especially at that first time, when the Popish pastors were removed, and the learned Preachers of the Gospel were the most of them destroyed, save a small remainder: and few of any towardness in learning endeavoured themselves unto the ministery, but rather to other professions: and since that time also, seeing on the one side, so many hunting and prowlling after those the Clergies livings, or the fleecing of them, which for their better maintenance in learning and hospitality they were endowed withal; and how the Clergy were continually envy, pinched and pulled at; and on the other side, seeing the innovations and garboils of our brethren themselves in the Clergy, to make odious to the people both the Pastors, and also all the Prelates of the Realm; and the people's unthankfulness; and their own uncertainty; whereby the learned sort were the more discouraged, and their friends would hardly permit them, for these and other reasons, to enter into this function of the ministery, so difficult in itself, so envious, unthankful, dangerous and uncertain to the world; except that God even by the mere motion of his Spirit, raised by some, and confirmed them against all these no small temptations to flesh and blood: why may not this now go for a lawful and no vain excuse, that when learned Preachers could not be gotten for Pastors, to furnish all the vacant places: they were even glad and fain to take some such other, (for supply of this general want) as being honest and godly poor men in conversation, found in Religion, zealous and ready to further the Gospel to their best, though not able learnedly to preach unto the people: that very necessity did enforce it, that is to say, this need and want of learned Preachers caused it? Better is half a loaf than no bread. Necessity (they say) is a sore weapon: and will our brethren be so rigorous, not to admit this necessity, but for a vain excuse? But if necessity compelled them (say they) to take such at the first: what necessity compelleth them to suffer them to be such still? If (as now they grant) necessity compelled them: than it is not a vain, but a lawful and necessary excuse. But if it did (say they) what necessity compelleth them to suffer them to be such still? This is not true, that they are suffered to be such still. Orders are appointed, both by the ancient discipline, The occasions of the necessity. and by later degrees, t● see that they exercise themselves in the study & knowledge of God's word. If the capacities of all be not such, as to attain unto the gift of preaching, having not been from their tender years (as was Timothy) trained up in ●earning▪ yet are they not to be deprived of their living, or deposed from their Ministry, The exercise of the ministry to increase in learning. having been lawfully ordained, and by law possessed of their livings. But if any continue in ignorance of the knowledge convenient for him, and so term it wilful, careless, and obstinate ignorance: there are good laws provided to correct him, yea, if his fault or defaults so require, to deprive him. If they say, these laws are not duly practised, but that some are suffered to be such still: Although (I hope) there be not many such, yet i● there were: that is the officers fault, blame not the office. And yet, be officers never so so diligent, some negligence may escape them, and we must not blame all for some. But they still reject all these as vain excuses. For (say they) if they would needs admit ignorant persons to that charge: The Bishops slandered, that they wouldneedes admit ignorant persons. yet should they have enforced them to study, as well as to other things that they have enforced them unto. See how charitably our brethren turn the matter, not as though the necessity were for need of more skilful men: but that the Bishops would needs admit ignorant persons. Is this our brethren's gentliest construction of this necessity? But they say, they should have enforced them to study. That had been vain indeed, if the necessity lay in the Bishop's wilfulness, Enforcing the ministers to study and learning. that they would needs admit them that were ignorant persons: wherefore then should they enforce them not to be ignorant? But the Bishops by all lawful means, do labour that they should not be ignorant. And therefore this is neither true nor likely, that the Bishops would needs admit ignorant persons. I grant they enforce them not with such enforcement as our brethren would have them do; that is, to turn them out of their doors, Harrison against Mr. Cartwrit pag. 23. to go study where they may beg their bread: nor as Harrison that full charitably, would have all the poor unlearned Ministers to be hanged up and that in the churches and public assemblies: but otherwise (according to their capacities and abilities) there are sufficient ordinances for that they should be enforced to study more orderly. But they say they should be aswell enforced to study, as to other things that they have enforced them unto. Enforcement unto other things. What those other things are that they have been enforced unto, because they suppress them, I can give no certain answer, bu● this in general, That I know of no unlawful things that they have been enforced unto. For, speaking hereof the ignorant fort (the most of whom have, 13. years profit. God wots, but final living) they are but very poor men, & therefore are not enforced with any great charge, except it be to buy some few books, & to assemble themselves the oftener unto the exercises of learning, which I take not to be the way to suffer them to live in ignorance, but rather to be a good & tractable means, & if they will so call it, Turrian enforcement also unto knowledge. That in time (say they) they might have grown meet for their calling. The growing of many in the increase of learning. And we doubt not but that many have so grown, and yet many of them, that have and do grow daily more and more in knowledge, have not the gift of utterance to be a Preacher. And many of them, as they grow more meet in knowledge, yet growing withal in years, age makes them stoop, & become unable to be preachers. Yea it oftentimes disableth many that have been able, and that before were good preachers. Besides many infirmities, & the very necessities of poverty itself, The decay by age etc. (which the poets called pondus ●tna gravius) presseth many down, that they can not provide such furniture of books, as were requisite in these controversies, for a preacher not to want. But (say they) if they had done this, in 10.12. or. 13. years space, a great many might have proved excellently well learned, & able to serve in the Church with great fruit and profit. All this hath been done, & not done in hucker mucker, but notoriusly known & that longer space still continuing then 10.12. or. 13. yėres: Yea more than y● space doubled, even the years of all her majesties reign, & much good (no doubt) hath been done by this exercise of the clergy. But to prescribe, that a great many might have proved excellently well learned, & able to serve in the church with great fruit & profit; that, neither I, nor all our Br. can determine, though we wish (with gods will) it might so have been. But we see, that even in the very Universities, the nurseries of learning, & where they are more enforced to daily & to more learned exercises, even of scholars & youths, which are more pregnant; yet among than, & of those also that addict themselves unto divinity; whatsoever they might: I cannot tell, but not a very great many of them, no not in 10.12. or 13. years space, have proved excellently well learned, & able to serve in the church with great fruit & profit. The enforcing the ministers to study this 13. years. Though (God be maysed) there are some that do so prove, god vouchsafe also to increase the number of them. But Mercurius non fit ex quolibet ligno, there are not many of such excellency. Now if it fall out thus among them, in the universities: where notwithstanding are many learned & godly preachers, The number of excellently well learned Divines. & more and more increase:) how much less can we make any promise of this, in the country exercises, among the poor old & simple ministers, that in 10.12. or 13. years space, a great many might have proved excellent well learned, & able to serve in the Church with great fruit & profit, but (God be praised for it) though our brethren will not acknowledge it, some have reaped hereby much fruit and profit, & are become proper scholars and preachers too. And the rest (say they) according to the proportion of their time, might have come to some mediocrity in knowledge. Mediocrity in knowledge. Accusation of crimes. This is better said, & of this sort are (I hope) if not all, yet the most part. Whereas now (say they) as ignorant & as unfit as they were the first day, so are they still for the most part, & will so continue to their lives end, if they may be suffered in Idleness as they have been hitherto. If any such Idle drones be, & so be proved: they may by law be more sharply censured, or removed, without removing of the law for them. The punishments or removing of the idle & hopeless. That an● be suffered in idleness, & so have been hitherto: let the suffrers answer it; & suffer the shame or smart thereof, when the accusers have proved it, but let our brethren here take heed of slanders. Then it is a torment to think what ambitious suing, what e●uio us labouring, what unseemly flattering, what prodigal bribing, The learned disc. pag. 129. is used to attain to great dignities in the church, too far unmeet for the modesty & gravity, that should be in christian preachers. & as for the inferior benefices, from the fattest Parsonage to the poorest Vicarige almost, if it be worth 40. pound by the year, what Simonical bargains of Leases, annuities, reservations, exhibitions: yea notwithstanding the Act of Parliament Anno. 13. by Antidates & other subtle conveyances, what Christian heart can think of them, without detestation of such horrible abuses. Bridges The crimes here heaped up together, are all personal, Our Brothers undermining the law and authority by the persons defaults. & neither the faults of the law itself, nor approved by any law established in the church o● England. How soever any party is acquitt, or guilty, the authority of the law remains entire, & where it findeth such horrible abuses, clearly proved, it severely punisheth them, if it be duly executed. & therefore thus to aggravate these crimes, & to reason from them, to take away the B. & pastors lawful authority: containeth a number of fallations ab accedente, ab ignoratione elenchi, a non causaut causa, & a secundum quid ad simpliciter. & it may as easily be retorted on our Bre. that when they had done all that ever they could; except not only they would clean take away all the great dignities, (which is their drift, and which some be glad to barken after) but take away withal the inferior benefices from the fattest Parsonage, to the poorest Vicarige also; After all our brothers spoils▪ we should have as great or great●● faults. yet would ther● be corruptions and abuses still in divers persons, though their might be the less ambitious suing, when the livings were so horribly spoiled, which indeed were a worse spoil, than any is made, and more detestable. And yet would there be ambition still, & far peradventure worse in another more perilous sort, than any now there is. Diogenes when he said that he trampled down Platonis fastum, the pomp of Plato: it was well answered, sed maiore fastu, but with a greater pomp than Plato had. The learned disc. pag. 120. Shall we speak here any thing of the popish Priesthood, the greatest blasphemy that ever was: how long was it allowed for a lawful Ministry, until by the godly meaning of the said parliament, some brande-marke of shame, was set upon it? But how pitifully that authority was abused, The popish priesthood. whereas by the same statute committed to the Bishops, in allowing of Priests that came to do their penance, by negligence of the bishops, and bribe●ye of their officers: the country crieth out of it, and the state of the Church, is little amended by it. Old sir john lack latin, that had not seen some of his Benefices, a dozen year before, was carried about on his mare, and sometimes on a cart: first to the Bishop whom he chose, if he might for his purpose, such a one as had been a priest of his own order, and cared least what Ministers serve in his diocoese, and then from shire to shire, one distant an hundredth mile from another, mumbling up his Articles in his morrow mass voice in every Church where he had living, and returned as very a beast as he came. Bridges. We account the Popish priesthood as great blasphemy, as our brethren do. The popish priesthood never allowed of us though some parts thereof be not utterly disaloshed. But, how long say they was it allowed for a lawful ministry? Never allowed at all amongst us▪ say we. For even when the mass was abolished, their blasphemous sacrificing ministery, was abolished, for an unlawful ministry. And yet as unlawful as that blasphemous ministry was, in respect of most horrible blasphemies that it was corrupted with all, especially their unbloody sacrifice: yet can we not say, that it was in all respects merely no ministry at all, nor had any lawful actions in that unlawful ministery. The Pharises, though otherwise sectaries, and maintaining blasphemous errors, and were the deadly enemies of Christ and his Gospel, yet did not Christ utterly condemn their ministry, but that he said, they sat in Moses chair, and had the key of knowledge. And so, now and then some of the popish priests preached the truth in some things. For if our brethren will make them but mere lay men, then are neither they nor we any ministers at all, but mere lay men also. For who ordained us ministers, but such ministers as were either their selves of their ministery; or at least were made ministers of those ministers? except they will say, the people can make ministers: and that which is more, we must either grant, that he which is no minister but a mere lay man, may baptise, (which our brethren utterly have denied:) or else, that all those which were borne in the time of that ministry, The whole ministery of the Papists not condemned but the bad distinguished from the evil therein. were not at all baptised, and so, not only a great many both of us and of our brethren, are not yet baptized; but that also baptism utterly ceased in the churches. Yea, that so, the Church and all ceased, when there was no other ministery. And therefore we must not utterly condemn the whole ministery but distinguish between it & the good therein on the one side, & the blasphemies & all the bad therein on the other side, which did corrupt it. This corruption is to be taken from it, and then the ministery itself, which is, the office of teaching or preaching of the word of God, the Ministration of the Sacraments of Christ, the making of public prayers, and the governing or executing of those things that pertain to the public government and discipline of the Church; is good and lawful. Neither were any of these so excellent Ministers, Luther, Suinglius, oecolompadius, Caluine, Bucer, Peter Martyr, & many others, made Ministers a new: but disclaimed only and renounced all the errors, corruptions, and blasphemeiss in the ministery which before they had received, ●s we have heard Caluines prescription, Epist. 373. and so continued still in the office or ministry thus repurged. And therefore, since the mass was taken away, and all ●he other corruptions of the ministery, that were used in the popish priesthood; & an other Ministration appointed as is set down in our book of public prayer, by the godly laws of the realm and Church of England established, which was done so soon as conveniently it could be done, forthwith after her majesties most happy entrance into this kingdom: this is not truly said, that the popish priesthood being the greatest blasphemy that ever was, was allowed for a lawful ministery, until by the godly meaning of the said parliament (Anno. 13.) some brande-marke of shame was set upon it. As though the sacrificing Priesthood had continued with allowance thereof, for thirteen year together of the Queen's majesties reign, The Parliaments brand mark of shame. which was as long a time, as before they mentioned, for the enforcing of the ministers to study. Yea, by this rule, it continueth still, though disallowed: or rather (as they say) but noted only with a brand-marke of shame set upon it. So that this is not the taking of it away, but the continuing of it with more shame to the parliament and to all the states of the Realm●, that have marked it with a brand-marke of shame, and yet shame not to continue it, though we disallow it. And this withal is but a shameful and unreverent term that here they use, in calling either the statute, or the book of articles agreed upon by all the clergy of the Church of England, and approved in the high court of parliament by all the states of the realm, and by the statute commanded to be read, a brand-marke of shame. But our brethren to mitigate the matter, say the parliament had a godly meaning in making that statute, The godly meaning o● the parliament. for Priests (that had been made in the time of Popery) to profess their consent to the true doctrine, agreed upon in the book of articles, by their public reading of the same book in their benefices. Yea verily, the parliament had therein a very godly meaning, and it was also as godly an act ●s meaning of the parliament. The Statute anno 13. Eliz. But (say they) how pitifully that authority was abused, which by the same statute was committed to the Bishops, in allowing of Priests that came to do their penance, by negligence of the Bishops and bribery of their officers, the country crieth out of it, and the state of the Church is little amended by it. There is no such crying out in the country, as are these outcries of our brethren. If it be but little amended: yet little is somewhat. But if it be not great: that is not to be unputed to the good law, but to the evil and indirect accidents. The committing to the Bishops the authority for the statutes execution. For it was not pitiful, that that authority was committed to the Bishops in allowing of Priests, that came (not as our brethren here say) to do their penance, or to have a brand-marke of shame set upon them: but the statute itself more reverently and rightly, setteth down the cause and order of their act, saying. That the Churches of the Queen's majesties dominions, may be served with Pastors of sound religion, be it enacted by the authority of this present Parliament, The words of the Statute anno Eliz. 13. cap. 12. that every person under the degree of a Bishop, which doth or shall pretend, to be a priest or Minister of gods holy word and Sacraments, by reason of any other form of institution, consecration or ordaining, than the form set forth by Parliament in the time of the late King of most worthy memory King Edward the sixth, or now used in the reign of our most gracious Sovereign Lady, before the feast of the Nativity next following, shall in the presence of the Bishop, or guardian of the spiritualties of some one diocoese, where he hath or shall have ecclesiastical living, declare his assent, and subscribe to all the articles of religion, which only concern the confession of the true Christian Faith, and the doctrine of the Sacraments, comprised in a book imprinted, entitled: Articles whereupon it was agreed by the Archbish. & bishop of both provinces, & the whole Clergy in the Convocation holden at London, in the year of our lor● God, 1562. According to the computation of the Church of england, for the avoiding of the diversities of opinions, and for the establishing of consent touching true Religion, put forth by the Queen's Authority: And shall bring from such B. or guardian of Spiritualties, in writing under his Seal authentic, and testimonial of such assent & subscription, & openly on some Sunday, in the time of public service afore noon, in every church (where by reason of any Ecc▪ living he ought to attend) read both the said Testimonial & the said articles, upon pain, that every such person, which shall not before the said feast, do as is above appointed, shall be ipso facto deprived, & all his Eccl. promotions shallbe void, as if he than were naturally dead. These are the very words of the statute. Wherein, what could they better have provided, than (whatsoever they should ordain, for the bringing of those persons to the more sure confession and consent of sound Religion, first, Negligence & bribes. to come before the Bishop or the Guardian of the spiritual jurisdiction in the Bishop's vacancy, Before whom the things ordained in the statute should best be done. in some one Diocoese where he had any ecclesiastical promotion, or living, and there before him, declare his consent and also subscribe to all the articles of religion, which only concern the confession of the true Christian Faith? etc. Before whom should he have done this, if he should do it authentically, than before the Bishop or the bishop's guardian, being the public officers, that have competent authority over him in those matters? which withal, confuteth our brethren's equal authority of all Pastors. If the bishops were negligent, or the officers take bribes: The Bishop's negligence & the officers bribes. this was the bishops & the officers fault, not any default in the laws. Wise men should not do like William Summer, strike one for another. But if the bishop's negligence and the bribery of the officers be so great, that the country crieth out of it, and the state of the Church is little amended: it is then so much the easier to be known, who are the offenders that so pitifully abused this godly meaning of the statute, & that authority committed to them and not they to be thus disorderly cried out upon, The disorderly proceeding of our brethren. and that in this uncharitable manner, by invective libels, under the title of learned discourses, to be thus discoursed upon, & with taunts & slanders defamed to all the world, so much as lies in them. If the matter be little amended, this is not to amend it more, but to make it worse, for this is nought worth, but to nourish malice, suspicion, & slander, & yet the fault not known, much less amended. Let the negligence & briberies (with true desire of reformation, as the title of this learned discourse pretendeth) be judicially in form of law complained upon, the parties being named, (if alive) called, accused, heard, considered, & convicted thereof, before their lawful magistrate: Our brothers orderly proceeding. & then we & all the country, would commend therein our brethren's just & more charitable dealing, then might they better think of our brethren to be in true meaning such faithful Ministers as indeed desired the reformation of the Church of England's discipline. At leastwise, whatsoever the country would think or speak, both the party and the matter that were proved faulty, of little might be much, and much sooner amended. But on this fashion to deface B. & their officers, & spread about such slanders & suspicions on them: all sober and godly affected may mislike it, and all the country may cry out thereon, that it is not the part of faithful ministers & brethren, that it procéedth neither of true zeal, wisdom, faithfulness, justice, or charity; nor tendeth little or much, to any amendment of the right reformation or true Church's state, or of the persons, or of the ma●ter. But now, if we shall consider the matter better (I speak as they do, The unlikeness of our brothers accusations. in general till some instance be orderly produced to the contrary) that they should herein so heighnously accuse the bishops of negligence, though the lesser fault, and the officers bryberye for this matter: whatsoever the neglience of the one, Sir john lack latin. or the bribery of the other might do hurt in other matters: there is no likelihood in the world, either of the one or of the other in this matter, neither could the Bishop with his negligence, or any favour or the officers with their bribes taking, hinder the proceeding, or relieve the person, or abuse the authority, or defeat the penalty of the statute. For it is so providently provided for, by the authority of the same high court of parliament, that the party must not only bring from the Bishop, or guardian of the spiritualties, in writing under his seal authentic, a testimonial of such assent and subscription: but also openly onsome sunday, in the time of public service afore noon in every Church where by reason of any living he ought to attend) the party shall read both the said testimonial and the said Articles: and all this to be done, upon pain of losing all his Eccl. promotion ipso facto. So that here, no negligence or any corruption of the Bishop, nor bribery of the officers could any whit help the party, but that he must needs do the things, that are thus prescribed, to be so openly in the face of all the Church performed. Wherein the Bishop and his officers are, or are not to be blamed. Which things now if the minister did not (as he ought to do) unfeignedly, and with all his hart, but hypocritically: that is not the Bishops nor the officers fault; his own sin be upon his own head. But if his sin be found out, and be not further punished, so far as the Bishop by his superior authority may do: then hardly blame the Bishop and his officers, if the fault thereof be in them. As for poor old sir John lack latins lack of latin, Sir john lack latins traveling to read the articles. that fault is not to be laid to any of our Bishops, that made him not priest, howbeit many of our most zealous brethren, (which take upon them not only to be faithful ministers, but to be preachers also) need not much to insult upon old sir john for lack of latin. But, what an old mumpsimus have they here raked out, to make their wonderment and spectacle of example upon, to level all those priests by, for whom the statute in the words above cited, was enacted. Here is drawn out (as it were an owl out of an ivy Bush, for all the birds to how'wt at) an old sir john lack latin, though he had his orders from room a porta latina, having as it were a tot quot of benefices on his back in a number of divers shires, one benefice distant a 100 miles from another miserably carried about in a cart or on his mare bestia super bestiam, to go mumble up his articles in his morrow mass voice, in every church where he had living, and return as very a beast as he came. What mean our brethren to bring forth such a beast as they have here described or did they know of any such in all England: and if they did, & the cry of all the country ran● upon him, and that he was by negligence of the bishop and bribery of the officers borne out and unpunished: then may he the easier be known, and the other parties also (if living) to be punished all in, time. And not for this one odd palinody; all the Bishops & their officers to be thus burdened with such crimes and outcries, for abusing that authority of the statute committed unto them. But if that, knowing no such old crust, yet in the person and description of such an hypocrite, they would insult on all thos● Ministers, that had before been popish priests, especially upon the poor, old, and simpler sort of them: they offer a great many honest men, that are neither beasts nor Papists, too great and too contumelious an injury, that are now God bethanked Good & sound converted protestants. But let us take this old sir John, as they have here set him out. If now he had so many benefices that he saw not some of them in a dozen year before: there is express statute to have abridged his number, and laws to limit his circuit too. But if he held them by any law or privilege, and saw them not before in a dozen years, nor were by necessary impediment detained from them, & provided not the better in his absence for their instruction, and the divine service, with the administration of the sacraments, & the preaching of the word of God, to be orderly set forth unto them, by some other to supply that, which by his infirmity, absence and ignorance he could not do himself: then indeed the Bishop and his officers may partake the blame with him, contrariwise, if he did all these things: what could the Bishop do against him? But if now upon this statute for fear he should lose his benefices, this old sir john lack Latin, were carried about on his mare, and sometimes on a cart, so it were to do his duty, either then, or before, or after, if he were so carried about, either for poverty, or infirmity: our brethren should not have objected that unto him. Every one that cannot have a horse to ride on, poverty may make him glad that he hath a mate, or else he might perhaps troth on bayard a tentoes, and he that could neither ride nor go, by reason of great age, or other weakness, if he could neither have horselitter, couch, nor wagon, he must have been carried in a cart, or else tarry at home & lose his benefice, for any remedy he had, that I know of, but howsoever his case stood, poverty and infirmity are rather (me thinks) to be pitied than upbraided, yea though the man otherwise deserved no pity. But say they he was carried, first to the Bishop whom he chose if he might, for his purpose, such one as had been a priest of his own order, & cared lest what ministers serve in his diocoese. From the disdaining of poor sir john, our brethren mount up again to another slander of the Bishop, Slander of the Bishops. burdening him also not only with the popish priesthood, and so to be one for the popish priests purpose, as a favourer of popery; but also to be careless what ministers serve in his diocoese. But till they name and prove any to have then been, or yet to be such evil Bishops: this again may go for so a foul slander, that it deserveth for answer, a due reward of so great an obloquy. But to come down again, from the Bishops to old sir john lack Latin, that was carried about on his mare or in a cart: if he was so poor to be carried thus basely about: how is it said, that he had not seen some of his benefices in a dozen year before, and that he was carried from shire to shire, one benefice being distant from another 100 mile, mumbling up his articles in his morrow mass voice, in every Church where he had living? It might have been, that this old popish priest sir john lack latin, might have served some small cure, No likelihood of this devise of Sir john lack latin. or perhaps in some odd corner have got a benefice: but if he had so many, it is not likely that he was but a sir john lack latin, if not rather, (had he had withal grace and truth,) that he had latin enough, and silver enough also, (if not too much) so that he needed not, to be carried about on his mare, or in a cart for the matter. There is no probability in this tale. But what livings soever he had, or having livings, how beastly soever he spared his money, and road thither on his widge beast: when he came there, if he mumbled up his articles in his morrow mass voice; meaning hereby, Sir john's not satisfying the act. that he did it also in such a beastly sort, that the people did not understand him; or that he did it not in the best reverent & hearty manner he could, but that he showed himself to do it against the hart, and for fashion sake only to save his living, and so returned (if he came such a beast thither) as very a beast as he came: this was no sufficient satisfaction, to the intendment and godly meaning of the law. And therefore if any godly disposed persons, were justly offended at his mockery, and manifest eluding of the godly meaning of this act, & cried out upon him for a counterfeit, or but orderly complained on his misdemeanour; they might most easily have had him punished, & the matter amended, even with the loss of all his livings, for so apparent mocking of the statute. But now, howsoever this old sir john lack latin shifted, since our brethren here cite this act of parliament anno. 13. And withal do so greatly commend the godly meaning of the said parliament, Whether our brethren themselves satisfy the godly meaning of the statute. and pity that the authority of the same statute was abused, and would have the priests made by the popish Priesthood (and with good reason) to have been severely looked unto, in the full accomplishment of that, which the said statute of so godly meaning did enact: sith I hope our Bre. also mean as they speak; may it please them, to consider with me, or with their pillow, a little better of this godly meaning of the act; & of the words thereof, & then tell me, whether that some, if not all of their own selves, might not have been shrewdly touched, & yet may be, by their manifest breach thereof. And for, to begin with the entendment & godly meaning of the act, to repeat the words again & mark them better. The words are these. The Statute Anno 13. That the churches of the Queen's majesties dominions may be served with Pastors of sound religion, The godly meaning of the statute fl●● against our Brothers discourse. beit enacted by the authority of this present parliament, that every person under the degree of a B. which doth or shall pretend to be a Priest or minister of gods holy word & sacraments by reason of any other form of institution, consecration or ordering, than the form set forth by parliament in the time of the late king of most worthy mermory king Edward the 6. or now used in the reign of our most gracious sovereign Lady, etc. Do these words and the godly meaning of them, reach only to the popish Priesthood? do they not plainly reach also to any form of institution, consecration or ordering of any other never so much reform churches beyond the sea●●, or in this realm, other than the form set forth by Parliament, in the reigns of king Edward, & of our now most gracious sovereign Lady Queen Elizabeth? so that the form of institution, consecration or ordering ministers, Priests or Elders which our brethren do pretend and urge in this learned discourse, & the form that they have prescribed in their new book of common prayer, these words & godly meaning of the statute comprehend them. And what now if any protestation were ordained in any reformed churches beyond the seas, according to their forms of institution, consecrating or ordering, or according to that our brethren desire, & yet read not the articles, nor were deprived: will our brethren cry out, how pitifully that authority was abused, which was by the same statute committed to the B. by the negligence of the Bishops, and bribery of their officers? And although, that branch touch not so much, these our Bre. now, because it saith: which doth or shall pretend, How our brethren overthrow their own ministry to be a Priest or Minister of gods holy word & sacraments, by reason of any other institution, consecration or ordering: sith our Bre. (as I take it) do not pretend to have been ordered or made ministers by any other form, but only; that they should, or would be made ministers by another, that is, by the form following the Geneva order set out in their communion book (so that withal, it have the additions of this learned discourse, and be in a Synod) & so escape the danger of the statutes words: yet therein they both do much discredit themselves, in holding by that ordaining which they desire to leave: writing against it, & yet retaining it & calling themselves faithful ministers, & are made ministers by the very same form, of a B. ordaining them, How our brethren are in danger of losing their livings by the godly statute. which they condemn to be an unfaithful form of ordaining ministers, or rather no ordaining at all, except Antichristian, being done by the authority of one man: besides that, they manifestly oppose themselves to the godly meaning of the statute. But how soever for that point of the Statute ordained as is aforesaid, they will flee (for holding their Benefices) from the meaning thereof, which nevertheless they confess to be godly, Our brethren impugning the book of articles. to the words of the statute, that they pretend not to have been ordained by another form that is allowed in the statute: notwithstanding, in that part of the statute that followeth, how can our brethren excuse themselves, that they be not in danger of this Act, if they have benefices? or have they not done and do clean contrary to this their learned discourse, in agreeing to the statute that they might hold their livings, if they have not lost them again, by setting out this their learned discourse, and by their maintenance of these opinions, and assertions, that are so direct against the statutes, mark the words of the act, and (as they call it) the godly meaning of the parliament. And that if any person ecclesiastical, or which shall have ecclesiastical living, shall advisedly maintain or affirm any doctrine directly contrary or repugnant to any of the said articles; and being convented before the Bishop of the diocoese, or the ordinary, or before the Queen's highness commissioners in causes ecclesiastical, shall persist therein or not revoke his error, or after such revocation eftsoons affirm such untrue doctrine, such maintaining, or affirming and persisting, or such eftsoons affirming, shallbe just cause to deprive such persons of his ecclesiastical promotions. And it shallbe lawful for the Bishop of the diocoese or the ordinary, or the said commissioners, to deprive such person so persisting, or lawfully convicted of such eftsoons affirming, & upon such sentence of deprivation pronounced, he shallbe indeed deprived. Now if we shall withal consider how our brethren have advisedly, that is to say, of deliberate and advised purpose, directly in this their learned discourse, pag. 135 challenged the doctrine of the said book of Articles, saying. As was practised in the convocation of the foresaid parliament, unto divers Godly and learned preachers, that offered to speak against divers gross and palpable errors that had escaped the Bishop's decrees, Our brothers advised impugning the articles and maintaining doctrine contrary thereunto. as, for the distinction of Canonical and apocryphal books, for explication of the clause in the article of predestination, where it is said, the elect may fall from grace, and such like matters: how truly this is spken of that convocation, and how truly also they have in these words, burdened both the Bishops and the articles, of no less than gross and palpable errors, and that in principal points of doctrine: I reserve that, till I come to the proper place, where it is to be answered. But how have not our brethren advisedly affirmed and (if they will stand to it) maintained doctrine directly contrary and repugnant, to some of the the Articles of the said book? For to affirm and maintain that, that which is good doctrine, is a gross and palpable error: what is that, but to affirm and maintain the doctrine that is directly contrary and repugnant thereto: and what remaineth. But that if the Bishops will not pitifully abuse that authority of the statute▪ that was committed unto them; they or the ordinary, or the Queen's majesties high commissioners in Ecclesiastical causes, aught to convent these our learned discoursing brethren before them, (if they had any names, that they might know them) and if any of them shall persist and not revoke his error &c: that this shallbe just cause to deprive such person of his Ecclesiastical promotions. And besides these Articles aforesaid that they challenge for gross & palpable errors: how do they not also impugn the 34.35. & 36. articles of the said book. Yea diverse of them have been also convented before the Bishop, the Ordinary, or the Commissioners aforesaid, and have persisted in the contrary to those articles▪ and these our learned discoursing brethren have gone further, to put their contradictions forth to the world in print. The words of the 34. article, which they inpugne, are these. Who soever through his private judgement willingly and purposely, doth openly break the traditions of the Church, The 34 article of the traditions of the church. which be not repugnant to the word of God, and be ordained and approved by common authority, ought to be rebuked openly (that other may fear to do the like) as he that offendeth against the common order of the Church, and hurteth the authority of the Magistrate, and woundeth the consciences of the weak brethren. If our Brethren would agree unto this article, there should not be such troubles as there are, amongst us. The 35. article is of Homilies. The 35. article of homilies. The second book of homilies, the several titles whereof, we have joined under this article, doth contain a godly and wholesome doctrine, & necessary for these times, as doth the former book of homilies, which were set forth in the time of K. Edward the 6. & therefore we judge them to be read in churches by the ministers diligently & distinctly▪ that they may be understood of the people. Our brethren say, pa. 49. that a prescript form of reading of prayers, of homilies, & such like, when they are alleged to maintain the ignorance of unskilful pastors (as though that were the use they are alleged for) are but the instruments of foolish & Idol shepherds, which have a certain pretence of Pastoral office, but in effect, are altogether unmeet for the same. The 36. article is for Consecration of B. & ministers: The 36. article of consecrating of Bishops & ministers. The book of consecration of Archbishops, B. & ordering of priests & deacons lately set forth in the time of Edward the 6. & confirmed at the same time by authority of parliament, doth contain all things necessary to such consecration & ordering: neither hath it any thing that of itself is superstitious or ungodly, & therefore, whosoever are consecrated or ordered according to the rites of that book, since the second year of the aforenamed king Edward, unto this time, or hereafter shallbe consecrated or ordered according to the same rires, we decree all such to be rightly, orderly and lawfully consecrated and ordered. Two pastors in every congregation. And is not now the greatest part of this our brethren's learned discourse, for the consecrating, ordering or ordaining of Archbishops B. Priests, or Elders and deacons, directly contrary and repugnant to the doctrine and decree of this article? How directly our brothers learned disc. is against these articles. and what followeth hereupon? but that either our brethren must renounce this their learned discourse; or must deny the authority and godly meaning of this act Anno. 13▪ which here they have approved: or else, if the B. and other officers shall not pitifully abuse that authority which by the same statute is committed to them; they must by the godly meaning and words of this act, pronounce them to be justly deprived; The learned disc. pag. 130 & 131. yea theirselues have pronounced sentence against themselves. But this and all other inconveniences before rehearsed, should utterly be avoided, if we might once establish the lawful election of Pastors, according to the word of God. It were also greatly to be wished, that it might be brought to pass, that in every congregation, there should be two Pastors at the least, both because the charge is great, and also for supplying the lack of the one, if the other were sick, or absent upon necessity, or any such like case. Which thing were both agreeable to the example of the Apostolic church, and also very profitable for the congregation. We do not mean this in every parish, as they be now distinguished, but in every congregation as they may be disposed, both for best edifying, and also for sufficient living for the Pastors. Bridges. The inconveniences that they have objected, and the inconveniences that they have incurred: the election also of Pastors that they would establish for lawful, against the law established: and how they have not yet proved it by any example or rule, to be according to the word of God: all this I remit to the indifferent readers weighing of that we have both of us before spoken. As for this other point, concerning the number, which they say, were also greatly to be wished, that it might be brought to pass, that in every congregation there should be two Pastors at the least: it is neither necessary, nor in many places can well be brought to pass. Not, but that we grant also, it may be well and very fit in some places, where the charge is great, and if it could be also in all places we mislike it not, & in many places it is so already, where the Pastor hath other inferior Ministers or Curates, which in the propriety of that living are inferior to him, as the Vicars under the Parsons, or as the Curates having stipends under either of them, and yet in the order of the ministry, all are equal. But there is no necessary precept nor example of the Apostles, that there were or should be no Pastors than one ordained in every congregation. Two Pastors at least in every congregation. And although it might be in some respects very profitable (I grant) for the congregation; yet in other respects not very profitable not only for that these two having equal authority, will the hardlyer agree: but also even for the charges and profit of maintenaunces, to have at least too learned Preachers, which they also make to be Bishops, besides the Doctor, one also at least in every congregation, as they have said, pag. 15. that certain men should be appointed in every congregation, whom he hath endued with gifts meet for the same purpose which should employ themselves either wholly or principally to the study of the holy Scriptures, One Doctor also at least in every congregation. thereby to learn to avouch the principles of true Religion, and to repress and beat down all false and strange opinions, etc. Whose office is only to teach true doctrine and to confute all heresies, etc. Without applying their teaching, etc. Pag. 17. so that, The Number of the governors and Deacons not determined. they must not be any of these two Episcopal Pastors. And besides these, there must be a Signior of Ecclesiastical governors, that are Elders not teaching, and of what number these must be, they set down no stint, nor of the Deacons. And all these must be maintained, At whose charges all the●e must be maintained. especially and altogether the doctors and Pastors, of the Ecclesiastical living in that parish, or if that will not stretch, then either the Parish must be at the charges of their maintenance, or the Bishops, and Cathedral Churches, and Colleges lands, wheresoever they lie in other congregations, must be brought thither for their maintenance. But they except, that they mean not this in every Parish, The factions arising by 2 equal pastors. as they be now distinguished, but in every congregation as they may be disposed, both for the best edification, and also for sufficient lining for the Pastors. What edification, or rather emulation and faction, this may breed, to reduce every congregation, to I hold of this Pastor, and I of that Pastor; when both the Preachers in a Parish must be in all authority equal: Jerome testifieth (as we have heard) that the Churches in the very apostles times, did find the inconvenience. But our times have later and fresh examples, even among our own brethren in their congregations. As for sufficient living of the Pastors, which here they remember, when they have remembered their Doctors also, and all their other Ecclesiastical Officers: it may hap to prove as small a sufficiency, as he that said of the two kinds of enough; there was much enough, and little enough. But which enough should be a sufficient living, that is not yet determined. No, we cannot yet see that, till the Parishes be new disposed. A new disposing of all the parishes in England. What? and must all the Parrishes and congregations through out all England not be distinguished as they be now, but be altered and new disposed, for these new devices, and for these new Episcopal Pastor's maintenances? New disposing of parishes. They may be, say they. They may be? what a saying is this? are they disposed to dally? for if all the other things and officers must be thus disposed: then must all the parishes be so disposed too, for else, if the parishes new disposing hath no must be but may be; then let them say of the other things and officers also, that they may be, but not, they must be, yea, all things considered, they must not be, for if we stood but even upon this, that every parish should not remain as it is now distinguished, but be newly disposed: what a danger might this breed, not only in titles of inheritancies and other points in ●awe (for this would make work for lawyers indeed, more than did all the altering of Abbey lands) but such an universal innovation, and altering of all parishes and congregations in the realm, might bring such dangers to the whole state, as I am afraid but to think on them. It will be objected, when we have all things at our pleasure, concerning the election of Pastors, The learned disc. pag. 131. yet will there creep in many abuses. We answer, they shall not so soon nor so easily, nor so many abuses creep in, as now at wide windows, yea, great port gates do throongin. But if as many or more abuses (if more could be) were crept in, yet were the case better than it is now; for we should be sure, that GOD approveth our order, though he condemn the abuses, because it is grounded upon God's word, whereas now he abhorreth both. Bridges. They term it right for themselves, in saying: when we have all things are our pleasure: Our brethren having all things at their pleasure. for in very deed, set their pleasure a side, and all their reasons, examples, and authorities, when they are throughly considered, serve not their turn. Only this is the strongest argument that I can perceive, they have yet made, that it is their pleasure thus and thus to have it. But, if it will be objected (as they say, it willbe) that when they have all things at their pleasure, Abuses creeping in after our brethren have all things at their pleasure. hath concerning the election of Pastors, and their pleasure also in all other things beside, that they contend for; ' yet will there creep in many abuses: what will it please them now to say to this objection? We answer, (say they) they shall not so soon, nor so easily, nor so many abuses creep in, as now at wide windows, yea, at great portegates, do throong in. And we demand what warrant and assurance of this? is there any thing here, but their bare answer, and mere promise? which may be as sure (for aught that yet we see) as sealed with butter, and we may believe it, if it pleaseth us also to afford them so much credit, as it pleaseth them to pawn so free a promise: but for any reason to move us, here is none, but that they give as here three promises together, that abuses shall not so soon, nor so easily, nor so many, creep in as now they thrung in at wide windows and port gates. Grounds of God's word. Indeed considering well of all that pro & con, hath passed between us in the examining but of this their learned discourse: we need not doubt that abuses would thrung in at wide windows and port gates (as they say) now they do: for when all the walls are beaten down, what infinite abuses, and worse than abuses, may not most soon come in not only creeping, but come tumbling in, fay●e and easily, if not rather foul and most confusedly? howbeit, we fear not beating down the walls, or one port gate or but portal, or but window opened, or any hole made, by all the battery of these our learned brethren, except we will let them (as we do too much) discourse and take their pleasure indeed, to dispose and transpose, to pull down, ●nd set vy, all things as they please to frame them. Now, whether they fear this objection to be too true, or in security they will grant it us, for their further pleasure: But if (say they) as many, or more abuses (if more could be) were crept in: yet were it better than it is now; for we should be sure, that God approveth our order▪ though he condemn the abuses, because it is grounded upon God's word, whereas now he abhorreth both. And can our brethren at length confess this difference, betwixt the order grounded upon God's word and the abuses rising upon man's corruption? Difference of the order grounded upon god's word, and abuses rising of man's corruption. how chance then, they have grounded all their former so bitter invectives, against the orders of our ministery, upon the abuses of the Ministers? and all to blear the people's eyes, to make the orders odious, because of the offensive abuses that they pretend against the persons. But it is well, that yet they here confess, that their own orders which they would have, are not free from abuses; yea from as many or more abuses, than are the orders that we have. They do well to grant this, before hand, for if their orders were admitted, we should find it too true afterward, that there would be as many or more abuses. Nevertheless, they set a good face thereon, that for all there were more abuses: Tush, what of all that, yet should our case be better, when it should be worser, than it is now. Yea? how can that be? For we should be sure, that God approveth our order. And how should we be sure of this? Because it is grounded upon God's word. But can they tell us in what part of God's word this ground lieth? What grounds of God's word our brethren allege. they have oftentimes told us, it is grounded on God's word, but when we come to seek for the words, we can never find them, nor any necessary consequence that they have led us unto, in all the word of God, either for any example or commandment, that we are charged or bound to follow: and therefore this is but their own confident presupposal. When they can prove such a ground in God's word for them; The pastors members of the synod. then we will, yea we must yield, will we ●ill we, to God's orders. But till then; we crave leisure, that removing the abuses as well as God will give us grace, we may keep our orders still in God's name, except we might be better assured of better orders, and less subject to abuses than these be. The learned disc. pag. 132. But of the authority that Pastors have as members of the Synod, we have spoken hitherto sufficiently. By which it is evident, how all things have been corrupted in Popery, which had at the first, any good institution, which corruptions we also retain at this day, without desiring of any reformation. Bridges. To that they say, they have spoken hitherto sufficiently of the authority that Pastors have as members of the Synod, whether it be also answered sufficiently, to that they have spoken thereupon; I yield it to the indifferency of the Reader. But what is this they say here, that Pastors have as members of the Synod? What the pastors have as members of the synod. Indeed they used that term before, pag. 111. of the Pastor's double authority, the one joined with the Elders of the Church whereof he is Pastor: the other with the Synod or holy assembly, whereof he is a member. But after that, they said pag. 117. who should be able to know, what order, comeliness and edification requireth, according to God's word; but they that be teachers and preachers of the same unto all others? What then mean they by these terms, that they have authority as members of the Synod? If they mean, as all the members, and so, as the whole, that none be members or parts of the Synod but only they: then hold they tack indeed to that their former claim; who should be able to know those things but they? But in so doing, they not only quite exclude the Prince; but their governing Elders also, and their Deacons, whom if they will not exclude from some authority, as members also of the Synod: then was that not sufficiently spoken, or rather they gave their Pastors more than sufficient authority in the Synod. The corruptions in Popery, The reformation of the corruptions in Popery. our Bishops and such as acknowledged their Episcopal authority, found out (God be praised for it) before our brethren came, and reform the same; and they now unthankfully reward the reformers of those corruptions, to afford them this good word for their labour, that we retain those corruptions at this day, and that without desiring of any reformation. If in saying we, they speak of themselves; they are their own judges, if, of the Queen's most excellent Majesty and of all the Prelates and Pastors, and whole state of the Church and Realm of England: it is too evident and too foul a slander, that we retain at this day all things that have been corrupted in Popery, and that without desiring any reformation. Neither helpeth it that they say, Retaining corruptions. all things which at the first had any good institution: they have not yet been able to prove, that by authority of any law established, we retain so much as any one such corrupted thing; How we retain anyething that hath been corrupted. but, either have rejected it, if it could not b●● scoured from the rust and ranker of that corruption; or if it could, we have so cleansed and reformed the same, to his good institution; that we may well and safely retain it without desiring innovation. If any persons retain the corruptions still; that is contrary to the reformation of the law, and punishable upon the lawful proof in the retainer. And sith they do here confess, that the institutions were good, of those things, whereof they say, we retain the corruptions: howsoever we retain them, the institution of them, was not nought (if good) but laudable. And therefore, they are not utterly to be condemned; but contrariwise, may be well retained, being reduced to their first and good institution. For, to begin first with our particular Synods, good Lord what a mockery they are of lawful Synods, The learned disc. pag. 132 ●33 and 134. being holden for no other end almost, but to gather up fees, both ordinary and extraordinary, with daily new devices to poll the poor Priests of their money, which they extort for seeing the letters of orders, for dinners and such like matters. And yet a new invented pillage, whereby they compel men to buy books of them for 4. pence, or 6. pence, which are too dear of a penny or two pence, & not only such small ware, but also great books, being such as every Parish is appointed to buy, must be bought of them for two or three shillings in a book dearer, than it may be bought in Paul's Churchyard: yea otherwhiles though the Parish be furnished of them already, they are not authentical, except they be bought at master Chauncelors and Official, at master Registeas hands. As for reformation of any thing in the Church, there are indeed many presentments, and men sworn to present matters, but little or none amendment at all doth follow. So that it is a common saying in the country, when the presentment is once received they shall never hear more of it. Soon after the visitation or Synod the petite bribing Sumner rideth forth laden with Excommunications, which he scattereth abroad in the country, as thick as hailshot, against this Parson, or that Vicar: this Churchwarden, and that Sydeman, whom he himself when he came to summon him to the Synod, for a Chief or a gammon of Bacon, had undertaken to excuse for non appearance. But when he is once excommunicated, there is no remedy, but he must trudge to the Chancellor or Official for absolution, who after he hath once absolved his purse of a few groats▪ giveth him his blessing and sendeth him away. And this is the Image of our little or particular Synod. Particular Synods. To begin first with our particular Synods, good Lord what a bold and open slander is this, Bridges. that (whatsoever these corruptions are, which here they heap up against the officers) they dare not shame to say; that the particular Synods are holden for this end, Corruptions of particular Synods. yea for no other end almost, but to gather up fees both ordinary and extraordinary, with daily new devices to poll the poor Priests of their money? Ordinary fees of officers. It cannot be denied but that in such Synods there are, and must needs be, where there are ordinary officers, some ordinary fees, except there be ordinary stipends provided, that the officers may be otherwise allowed for their acts, their payves and charges, if they would have any officers at all, to enact or record the things done or decreed in their Synods. Yea, the very Pastors themselves must have (as they said before) a sufficient living. And were it well said of any envying the same, because the Pastors must even of ordinary have sufficient livings, that therefore a sufficient living is the end, The ends of livings, offices, and fees. or there is no other end almost, but that, of having Pastors? whereas indeed that is no end at all of the Pastorship, but a necessary or convenient concurrence and appendix annexed thereunto. And even so is it in the fees of the officers both in Synods, and all other public actions of the officers. For if there were no other ends of them; both their fees and the offices could not continue, nor ever had begun. Neither helpeth it the matter, that they say not simply, Synods are holden for no other end at all: but that they are holden fo● no other end almost: for, although almost never reached home; and so, it appeareth, that they are holden for other ends, if they had been as willing to show them, as to show these things that here they pick quarrels withal: yet, if they had so done, they should have showed, that the gathering of these fees, in very deed were no ends of Synods at all, but allowances assigned unto them, that traveled in the Synods, to the ends that Synods were and are ordained for. The fault of the officer and not of the office. And if any officer (as I grant many officers do) shot at other ends, and made his fees his end: so also may any other officer do, Pastor or whosoever. But this is the fault of the man, and not to be imputed to the matter. Our brethren's pity on the poor ministers. But it is a good hearing (if they mean good sooth) that our brethren yet now at the length begin to have some pity on the poor Priests, whom for the greatest part of this their learned discourse, they have coursed and recoursed, withal the most despiteful reproaches that they could devise; and some would have them hanged, and some would have them turned out a begging: and now forsooth, they begin to smooth them, and pity the poor Priests, that they should ●ee polled of their money. Shall we cry, good Lord what a mockery is this? But there is no Priest so poor nor simple, that may not perceive their mockery both of him, Our brethren's mockery. and of the good laws and lawful orders of the Synods? Yea, Faults in Officers. how they would mock them even with that Sophistical deception, which their selves last noted, of not discerning, between the lawful order and the abuse thereof. And here (to make the Synod the more odious, Extorting money for ●e●ing letters of Orders. they begin with the accusation extorting money for seeing the letters of orders. But for plain and simple answer hereunto: for the ordinary and ancient accustomed fees of ●egisters, or other fees by law rated and set down, as are thought reasonable; there is great reason, that without all scoffing, grudging or detracting, they should be paid unto them, seeing that the office of a Register in making and keeping authentic records, is a good and necessary office. And even this among all other things, that our brethren here first begin to be offended withal, to call for, to see, and to record, yea, The duty of lawful fees in Registers etc. even at every Synod, such of the Ministers letters of orders, as they shall think requisite, which is a matter of no small importance. If any Registers do abuse themselves therein, Our brethren loath to show their letters of orders. namely by extortion (as here they are burdened) name the Register, prove the extortion in time, place and manner competent; and the Law hath provided ready remedy. This general complaint on all, we know not by whom, is not lawful. But belike they would either have no Registers, or they should have no fee, or above all things, the letters of orders must not be called for, nor scene: for in that, tangis ulcus, if our brethren must be driven to show how they were made Ministers, by authority whereof they take themselves for Pastors. This is even as when the Pharises Math. 22. were driven to show the penny that convinced them, either they must clean overthrow all this their learned discourse, and disclaim all these devices of their Pastorshippe; or else they shall show themselves to be no faithful Ministers nor true Pastors, yea to be utterly no Pastors or Ministers at all, nor to have any lawful authority to teach or preach, nor to be capable to hold any Ecclesiastical function or living, which would be a shrewder loss unto them, than all the Registers fees (for all his extorting) amounteth unto. But by their leave, the Register must not leave still to call for the letters of their orders, both to see that they have them, and that they be recorded, and that in their still presenting of them, they still acknowledge, that they hold all the lawfulness of their entry into their calling and function by the testimony of them: so that if they shall now pretend to be Ministers, and teach and preach and hold living, by that order that themselves cry out upon, and yet retain it: all the world may see this great unfaithfulness perpetually remaining in record against them. I speak not this to approve the manner of ordaining in the Popish time (of the which sort the most of our Brethren are not) the corruptions in which orders they have publicly renownced & disclaimed: & yet the exhibiting of them also, for the good part in them, is necessary, & thereby they also are known, how they were called into the ministery. Buying of Books. From letters of orders they come to dinners, and (say they in general) such like matters. For dinners & such like matters. If they be no worse matters than di●ners, they are no ill matters. But if they were no better, they might have dined at home. And is it not good reason, if their dinners be there provided, they should pay for their dinners, or provide otherwise, or kiss the post, for aught that I perceive, except any wi●sbestow their dinner on them. What a toy is this, to help to furnish up their learned discourse, to pick a quarrel at the Synods, for the Priests paying of money for their dinners? Let them go reckon rather with the Tapster or the Host, than trouble their learned discourse on Synods, for dinners and such like matters. From dinner they come to selling and buying of books. Selling & buying of books. Neither is this worthy their learned discourse, nor yet can be much amiss, if ought amiss at all, so that the buyer have ware worth his money. Call they this pillage? Yea, say they, whereby they compel men to buy books of them. I do not think that they compel any: for if they list, they may buy them in other places. So that this is but a gentle compulsion to buy the books of them. Although, to appoint some books meet for them, and to compel them to have such books, is both lawful and convenient. If they may have them there, it is their more ease that buy them, and if they pay a penny or two pence more for the reddinesse of them, and for his charge that provided them, let them look to that, a fool and his money is soon parted. And must this also be inserted into this learned discourse? No marvel if they forget not the greater and dearer books, when they remember a book of a groat or two pence? But belike, some of these our brethren met with a hard hukster, or else they are over hard handed, if not worse affected, to any of those books, of which, if they might set the price, though the book were well worth two or three shillings, would they not yet think it too dear of a penny or twopences? Lo, how easy a matter it is to find a stick to beat a dog; to pick a quarrel at every small offence, when one is disposed to cavil. If the book be necessary for the Parish, or for the Pastors, why should they not be compelled to have it? If they have it already; this is not true, that they can be compelled to buy it again, of these or those men. If they think they may have it cheaper in Paul's Churchyard; they may send thither for it, none can let them. If any compel them, or extort more than it is worth: their complaint may be hard in other places, and the party offending, (be he master Register, or master Official, or master Chancellor never so much) may be punished for it. The present●e●●s not ●eformed. From the books, they come to the presentments, with the which they seem to find no fault, Presentmē●●. that there are many presentments and men sworn to present matters, but they find fault with this, that fo● reformation of any thing in the church, little or none amendment at all doth follow. And I confess, that here they say some thing, for little amendment, but not, for none at all. But still, this fault is not in the Law, nor in the Synod, but either in the people that ware worse and worse, or in the Officer that is negligent, and perchance also corrupted. And if the fault be found to be in him: there are laws also provided to reform him. As for the common saying in the Country, The presentment no more heard of. when the presentment is once received, they shall never here more of it. It may be, that some may say so, and it may so fall out in some matters and in some persons, but in all, it cannot be true, nor for the most part. Let them inquire after it, and they shall find it far otherwise. But I will defend no man's fault, nor yet mine own; and by some negligence or ignorance, without any corruption, Reformation of faults. some faults perhaps may not be reformed, that have been presented, or all men's humours are not satisfied, in the manner of reforming the same. Some count it no reformation, if it be not reformed as they imagine it should be. But, id possumus quod iure possumus. As for the reformations which our brethren would have (in the conteyte of many other, that are as godly learned and wise as they, and of great experience in the sequel of such matters) where little amendment is now; would bring a great deal less amendment, if not rather, it would clean mar all. Next to the presentments, they fall a quarrelling with the Summoner, The Summoner carrying forth the citations and excommuications. for giving warning to the parties presented to appear and answer, or for their not so doing, and for giving notice to them, that they hau● incurred the censure of excommunication. But here, howsoever the Summoner also may abuse his office, with petit bribing (as they term it): yet is not his office all unnecessary. And even by the poor Summoner they may perceive, that the common saying in the Country, is not very true, that when the presentment is once received, The presentment heard of. they shall never here more of it. For belike they hear somewhat more, when they hear of Citations, and perchance hear themselves summoned, and again after that, when they hear other news, that for their contumacy besides their other notorious crimes, they stand excommunicated, and if the excommunications be scattered abroad as thick as hail shot, the country were very thick of hearing, if they heard not of them. And if the Summoner (notwithstanding all his promises for a Cheese or a gammon of Bacon) could not excuse the party for non appearance: then bribes avail the less, Bribes not prevailing. and Master Chancellor and the Official are the less corrupted and more commendable, when that the offender being once excommunicated, General co●●●●●ions. there is no remedy but he must trudge to the Chancellor or Official for absolution. Neither doth his absolution consist (as they, to make it odious and contemptible, scoff out the matter) in absolving his purse of a few groats. It was marvel they raised it not from few to many groats, and yet good reason, if he be able, that he should smart so far, even by the purse also, as to satisf●e the duty of the fees, that are by law appointed to the officers? But this is most untrue, that his absolution and releasing from the bond of excommunication, that in mockery, they call, the giving him his blessing (which term they might as well use, if it had been the action of their whole signory) is the absolving of the purse, or consisteth on paying of money. Whereas indeed, he was neither excommunicated, nor is absolved, for money: but as he was excommunicated for the increasement of his fault with disobedient contumacy; Absolution not for money. and contempt, for the which lesser sins deserve this correction as our brethren pag. 39 confess: so is he released of the same, and restored to his state, upon his humble and penitent submission, and serious request. Yea, if the case so require, upon his public acknowledgement and declaration of his hearty repentance, with some demonstrances and notes, of humbly sustaining open rebuke and shame, in the face of all the congregation. With what conscience now, The learned disc. pag. 123.125.136. & 137. can our brethren (against their own knowledge, in things so manifest) knit up this matter, saying: and this is the Image of our little particular Synod? and is this the Image also, of our great faithful Brothers, little faithful and sincere dealing? Our general convocations having a more show of good order, but in effect little better. For first they are stuffed full of Popish & profane chancellors, and other Lawyers, which being mere lay men, and unlearned in divinity, Choosing of clerk of the convocation house. by their own law ought to be no members of the Synod: and yet these will bear the greatest sway in all things. The Bishops, as though they were greater than the Apostles, must have their several conventicle, whereas the Apostles and Elders came together with the whole multitude. Acts. 15. and as they are severed in place, Act. 15. so will they be higher in authority. So that whatsoever is decreed among them, that must be called the determination of the whole Synod. So that no man must be suffered to speak any thing against it, be it never so reasonable or agreeable to the word of God: yea, whosoever will not subscribe to all such things as they decree, must be excluded out of the convocation, as was practised and threatened in the convocation at the foresaid Parliament, unto divers godly and learned Preachers, that offered to speak against divers gross and palpable errors, that had escaped the Bishop's decrees. As, for the distinctions of Canonical and Apocryphal books, for explication of the clause in the article of predestination: where it is said, that the elect may fall from grace, and such like matters. If this be not to practise Lordship over our faith: to set down decrees of Religion, which must be accepted of all men, without either reason or testimony of the Scripture to prove them, and no man permitted to show any reason or Scriptures, that enforceth his conscience to the contrary, but only to hang upon the authority of Bishops: let some other declare what Paul meaneth, 2. Cor. 1.4. where he denieth, that he would exercise any Lordship, 2. Cor. 4. over the faith of the Corinthians. For although their decrees were never so perfect, yet it were an example of Tyrannical dominion, neither to give reasons to satisfy the ignorant themselves, nor to hear or confute that which might be alleged against them by others; but for a few Lordbishops in comparison of all the Convocation, to sit by themselves and order all things at their pleasures, as though the Gospel sprang first from them: or had come unto them only; if savoureth nothing so much as of Popish tyranny: whereas otherwise it is well known they are not all of the best learned, nor all of the longest study, nor all of the soundest judgement, nor all of greatest zeal, nor all of best example, and therefore not meetest to be the only determiners in Ecclesiastical matters, to the prejudice of the whole Synod. Wherefore it is greatly to be desired, that our Synods also, which are so far out of order, may be reformed according to the Scripture, and the example of the Primitive Church, that all things may be done with such modesty, gravity, and judgement, as they were by the Apostles and Elders. Acts. 15. From our little or particular Synods, Bridges. our brethren come now to our general convocations, Our general convocations. of which they yet confess, that both they have a more show of good order, and are in effect though little, yet somewhat better. And here to prove this little better, they say: For first, they are stuffed full of Popish and profane chancellors, and other Lawyers. Is this their little better good order in effect, that they spoke of? Our brethren's contumelious speeches of Chauncelors & Lawy●●s. If this were true, it is much worse, than before they made the little Synods to be. Before we had but trifles, here is worse stuff if the convocations are stuffed full of Popish and profane chancellors and other Lawyers. And if they be stuffed with them, than belike there is some store of them. But can they name and prove any such chancellors or Lawyers, as be admitted to be members of the Synod, to be popish and profane? If they can; it had been very well none, that at such times as the Convocations were holden, they had (by these our Brothers intimation) been detected and examined, that if they had been so convinced, they might have been avoided, removed, or punished. If they can name none, nor prove any to be such persons, Chauncelors and Lawyers. then is this too profane, too uncharitable, too unprotestant-like a slander, and the more at random that these foul speeches are thus cast forth, so much the worse and more suspicious. Or is the very name and office of Chancellor or Lawyer, accounted of them to be profane and popish? Or do they mean it of chancellors only, and not jointly of Lawyers? And are all chancellors then popish and profane? These speeches (saving our Brothers reverence) are not only ras●, but dangerous, against many worshipful and right honourable personages, that have the name and office of chancellors, and are yet neither profane nor popish, but godly, sincere, religious, and very great favourers of the Gospel. Chauncelors or Lawyers in our convocations. As for our Convocations, are so little stuffed full of chancellors or Lawyers, that we have there very few of them. And if we have some of them for their counsel and experience in the law: I think it no such matter of offence, but rather expedient, they being such, as are known to be of sound Religion, and not popish, or infected with any other known error: and not profane but virtuous and holy in life and conversation. Me thinks rather, we might be glad, to have some such chancellors or Lawyers amongst us, because of their better experience in Ecclesiastical regiment, and in devising laws, orders, and decrees, than we ourselves are so well able to conceive, whose only or principal profession is Divinity. But say they, of these chancellors and other Lawyers: which being mere lay men, and unlearned in Divinity, by their own law ought to be no members of the Synod. Whether our Chauncelors or Lawyers in convocations be more lay & unlearned in divitie then our brothers governors. If they spared not before to call them popish and profane, no marvel if they call them mere lay men and unlearned in Divinity. But see here the indifferency of these our learned brethren. When they speak of their governing Elders in every congregation, they forsooth are not lay men, but persons and officers Ecclesiastical. Although they be Gentlemen, Merchants, Artisans, Farmers, Husbandmen, or what trade soever. These are forsooth, no mere lay men, but Presbyters Priests or Elders. And who made them so? The Pastor and the Parish have chosen them to this office. And can their choice make a mere lay man, not to be a mere lay man: and cannot the choice of all the Pastors in a whole shire, nor the approbation of the whole provincial Synod, make a Chancellor or other Lawyer to be no mere lay man, in respect of the Ecclesiastical office that they chose him unto, as well as could that particular Parish or congregation? Yea, but (say they these chancellors and other Lawyers) they are unlearned in Divinity. our brethen● objecting to chauncelors & Lawyers I marvel that our brethren even for very shame, would have ever objected this unto them; knowing what great learned men many of their seniors must needs fall out to be, in many Parishes, whom their late old sir john lack latin would soon appose, The Bishop's several place. for he yet at least could read his Articles, but they could not read a letter on the book. And yet these men because they be seniors, must be counted learned in Divinity, that th● 〈◊〉 learned 〈◊〉 ninitie. and how got they on a sudden, all this learning, by inspiration with the election of them to the signory? or came it by virtue of their Eldership? As though learning in Divinity were even tied to their Consistory. As for chancellors and other Lawyers Civil or Canon (for I take it that they speak not so much of the Temporal Lawyers) these are mere lay men and unlearned in Divinity. What a strange and high conceit is this of themselves, still boasting in the top of every leaf of their learned discourse, and often of their grave wise and godly seniors, with contempt of others, if they favour not their devices, be they never so learned men? If they say, though they be learned men; yet in other things, not in divinity. Is it not more likely, that they be or may be, far more learned in Divinity too, professing the study that is even next unto Divinity, and in a great part consisteth on Divinity, than those Temporal men, that are altogether or for the most part trained up in worldly matters and in mechanical occupations, and have little mind or leisure and less helps of fearing to employ themselves in any deep study in Divinity, yea many of them utterly unlearned? What a great vanity is in this dealing? And yet these (say they, meaning Chauncelors and other Lawyers) will bear the greatest sway in all things in our Synods. These bear little sway (GOD knows, and it is apparent) at most, Chauncelors & Lawyers bear not the greatest sway in our convocations. no more than doth any other particular man in them. But in their Synods (though they speak clean contrary therein unto themselves) yet these their lay rather than Ecclesiastical Elders, either should bear the greatest sway of government, or let them lay aside the prerogative of this name of Governors, which title they make more peculiar to them, than either to the Doctors or to the Pastors. But now after the chancellors & Lawyers, which in our Convocations or general Synod are very few amongst us, except withal they be Ministers of the word and Sacraments, or else Deacons: our brethren must here (there is no remedy) have yet another fling at the Bishops. The Bishops (say they) as though they were greater than the Apostles, must have their several conventicle. If the Bishops have a lawful superior dignity, more than the other Priests or pastoral Elders have, The Bishop's several place in the convocation. as before at large is proved: why may they not also have a superior place several by themselves, to consult upon matters, that are meetest to be propounded in the whole Synod? Doth it therefore follow hereupon, that they take upon them to be greater than the Apostles, or but comparable to them? Several place. What a frivolous argument is this? but what reason have they for it? Whereas (say they) the Apostles came together with the whole multitude. The Apostles example Act. 15.6. Nay, soft (brethren) put up these words again, for this time and place, with the whole multitude, in your purse. Add not to the text. The words are these, Act. 15. vers. 6. Then the Apostles and Elders came together to look to this matter. I grant, he nameth afterward, all the multitude, ver. 12. And yet it seemeth that he meant there, none other, but all the multitude of the Apostles and Elders, that he said before, vers. 6. did come together. Although afterward for the sending of chosen men to carry their decree, The Apostles were several by themselves and yet joined with the Pastors and the multitude. it is said, vers. 22. that it seemed good to the Apostles and Elders, with the whole Church; although the whole multitude of the whole Church came not together about that controversy. But it may appear, the Apostles and the other Elders with the multitude were so in one place together, that nevertheless Luke testifieth, Acts. 5. vers. 13. saying: and of the other (meaning, besides the Apostles) no man durst join himself to them. And therefore if our Bishops have their several conventicle, or place of coming together by themselves, what have they therein that the Apostles also had not: and yet it followeth not, that if the Apostles had no several conventicle or meeting together, that they make themselves greater than the Apostles; or make any comparison of greatness with them. But they acknowledge themselves far inferior, as in gifts, so in dignity also of their function. Yea, in the order of their Pastoral Eldership or Priesthood itself, they acknowledge themselves to be but equal and and all one, even the greatest of them, not only with the meanest in the convocation; but with the poorest Priest in England. Albeit, in respect of their lawful superior dignities, they may well have a superior and several conventicle or meeting place, notwithstanding oftentimes, both they and all the residue of the convocation, do jointly also in one place assemble altogether. And as they are severed (say they) in place, so will they be higher in authority. The Bishops higher in thoritie. And good reason too, sith (as we have seen) it is, not in respect of any higher authority in the order of the Eldership: but of their higher authority of jurisdiction in the Ecclesiastical regiment. So that whatsoever (say they) is decreed amongst themselves; that must be called the determination of the whole Synod. I marvel that our brethren shamed nor feared not, to stuff their learned discourse, The decrees ar● of the whole synod not of the Bishop's ●●lie. with so many manifest untruths. It is most evident, that nothing is or can be decreed in the name of the whole Synods determination, without the whole Synod (comprehending at least, the greatest number for the whole) have decreed and determined the same. Speaking in the convocation. So that (say they) no man must be suffered to speak any thing against it, be it never so reasonable, or agreeable to the word of God. This is another most great and manifest untruth, slanderous to the Bishops, and reproachful to the whole Convocation. There is none of the house, but that may in any matter, that is propounded to be debated upon; yea, any other though not of the house, being known to be a reverent, How every one of the house may speak in the convocation. godly, wise and learned person, either of the ministery, yea in some cases, though he were not any Ecclesiastical person, yet might he also, be freely admitted (according to the ancient Canons) to speak before the house, in such sort and manner as the order of the house requireth, for those that be or should be learned men, to speak their mind in the Latin tongue (for fear some young Sir john lack latin would be over busy) and so to reason freely pro & contra, observing always that modesty and reverence, which beseemeth the assembly of grave and learned men. And in this manner, many have propounded, and reasoned upon divers matters; as those that are ancients in the Convocations heretofore, can witness. Yea (say they) whosoever will not subscribe to all such things as they decree, must be excluded out of the Convocation, as was practised and threatened, in the Convocation at the foresaid Parliament, unto divers godly and learned Preachers, that offered to speak against divers gross and palpable errors, that had escaped the Bishops. Our brethren having so often broken the squire of truth in these matters, do here wax bold to rap out untruths now by huddles. What one Preacher hath been excluded out of the Convocation, for this, that he would not subscribe to all such things as the Bishops among themselves have decreed? None excluded the house for not subscribing to the Bishop's decree. Or can they bring any instance but of such one threat made unto them? And albeit a threat differeth from the putting it in practice: yet this also is a notorious slander. There was no such thing either practised or threatened at any time in our Convocations, namely at that time they mention (which I remember well, and so do many others) when some speaking in English began to be over busy, and to use disordered behaviour with unreverent terms, they were by the Prolocutor as moderator commanded to silence, or else to depart and not to disturb the house, nor alter the laudable orders thereof, except they would, and that in seemly modesty speak in Latin: which these godly and learned Preachers that our brethren commend, liked not to do. Nevertheless, other being indeed godly and learned Preachers, did very reverently and with great learning discuss those matters. And so with general consent either of all, or (which sufficed) of the most and best part, Subscribing to the articles. those Articles were condescended upon and approved for good and sound doctrine. And so I hope will stand, for any thing that our brethren, or any other shall ever be able to say against them. Whether the book of articles contain any errou●. As for any (and much less) divers gross and palpable errors that escaped the Bishops: I remember none, nor can learn of any. The Decrees contained in the articles aforesaid, are published to the open view of of every man, if our brethren as yet can burden them with any gross or palpable error, or with any error at all, though not gross nor palpable, or but with appearance or suspicion of error, it were worth the hearing. But if there be no such error in them, who are then worthy the punishing, or at least worthy to acknowledge with repentance and revoking this so great a slander? Our brethren's own acquittance for the truth of our religion. For it toucheth not our Bishops and the Convocation only; but, being established also as is aforesaid by act of Parliament, and so the professed doctrine of all the Realm and Church of England: how are we not all hereby defaced, to maintain gross and palpable errors, and that in no small points of doctrine? If Papists had said this, it had been less marvel, which hate our doctrine and count it stuff full of errors and heresies too. But they never were, nor are, nor ever shall be (God willing) able, to prove that we maintain any one error in any one article of doctrine, but agree in all the substance of Religion, with the true and sincere word of God. Yea our brethren their selves bearing us witness, who in the Preface of this learned discourse confess, that for the substance of Religion it is resolved, and now publicly maintained for our true and holy faith. How could this be true, if those articles, namely these which here they note, being matter of faith, and publicly maintained and resolved, by all the Church of England to be true and holy, were gross and palpable errors? But to show both unto them, and to all the world (lest the Papists should take hold hereon, when they hear of this our own Brothers accusation, which will be even meat and drink to them, being glad to feed upon such slanders, that as we are sound (GOD be blessed for it) in all other articles of doctrine; so in these we maintain no error at all, but a most sure and sincere truth: let us come to the view of these two Articles, that here they mention for example. The distinction of the Canonical and Apocryphal boots. As for the distinction (say they) of Canonical and Apocryphal books. Although this be a matter wherein good and godly Fathers have had some difference: yet for our Bishops and Convocations decree thereon, I see not how our brethren shall be able to find, that we hold any error in that matter. It is the sixth Article, the words whereof are these. Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: The book of articles not erroneus. so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby; is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation. In the name of the holy Scripture, we do understand those canonical books of the old and new Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church. Of the names and number of the Canonical books. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numeri, Deuteronomie, joshua, judges, Ruth. The names & number of the Canonical books. The first book of Samuel. The 2. book of Samuel. The first book of Kings. The 2. book of Kings. The 1. book of Chroni. The 2. book of Chroni. The 1. book of Esdras. The 2. book of Esdras. The book of Hester. The book of job. The Psalms. The proverbs. Ecclesiast. or preacher. Cantica or songs of Sal. 4. Prophets the greater. 12. Prophets the less. And the other books as Jerome saith the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners, The numbe● and nam●s of the Apocryphal books in the old testament. but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine. Such are these following. The 3. book of Esdras. The 4. book of Esdras. The book of Tobias. The book of judith. The rest of the book of Hester. The book of Wisdom. jesus the son of sirach. Baruch the Prophet. The song of the 3. children. The story of Susanna. Of Bell and the Dragon. The prayer of Manasses. The 1. book of Machab. The 2. book of Machab. All the books of the new Testament, as they are commonly received, we do receive and account them for canonical. This is the whole article, especially for the distinction of Canonical and Apocryphal books. And is there any gross and palpable error, or any error at all in this distinction, that any godly and learned Preacher should have offered to speak against in the Convocation? Well, if he could not be suffered to speak then: let him do it yet, doing it in seemly order. Yea, if it be a gross and palpable error that all we grossly maintain in this distinction he is bound to show it orderly, comiter monstrarier viam erranti, if he will be a faithful Minister. And if we cannot be able to defend this distinction, we will then (by God's grace) yield it to be an error and forsake it. But I marvel, if it be so gross and palpable, that we cannot yet feel nor understand it, which were indeed a great grossness in us all. But because, I confess myself to be but gross, that cannot so quickly find out this palpable error: nevertheless since that it is palpable or may be groped (and yet out learned brethren will not vouchsafe to set it down) I will therefore grossly grope after it, if perhaps I may find it, and give others warning of it. For (by the grace of God) we shall not be so gross, as defend any error, if we may find it, and perceive that it is indeed an error, that is to say, a wrong and false opinion. The canonical scripture Is this gross error in these words: holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation, so that whatsoever is not read therein nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation? In what words this gross error should lie. I trust, they will acquit this part of the article from all error. Neither is it properly of the distinction of Canonical and Apocryphal books, which are to be accounted of the one sort, or of the other; but of either's validity or invalidity in the articles of faith, and matters requisite or necessary to salvation. What then? Is this gross and palpable error, for the distinction of Canonical and Apocryphal books in the words of the article following? In the name of holy Scripture we do understand those Canonical books of the old and new Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church. What gross and palpable error, or any error at all is in these words, that we do understand those books in the name of holy Scripture, of whose authority there was never any doubt in the Church? Is there any reason to the contrary, why we should not understand these books for holy Scripture? The books that were never doubted of If they reply, that is true indeed, for those books: but not for those books only: then are these words also of the article acquit by their own mouths. As for the so understanding of them only, to be accounted in the name of holy Scripture, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church: this article hath no such word, as this word only, nor any such meaning. Yea, lest their meaning or words might be misconstrued, they go also particularly to work, and book by book till which is to be understood for the holy or canonical Scripture, and which not, in the old Testament. Some of the canonical doubted of. And in the new Testament, they have reckoned all for Canonical. If they yet reply, that divers books of those which the articles name and understand for the holy and canonical Scripture, have been doubted of: I grant it, and the articles do confess as much in these plain words. All the books of the new Testament, as they are commonly received, we do receive and account them for canonical. Do they not here plainly enough infer, that there hath been some doubt and not receiving of some of them, when they say, as they are commonly received, so do we receive them, though some do not so receive them? And will our learned brethren be so peremptory, that if they had not so fully or clearly expressed their meaning in the former words, they will not give them leave to be their own expositors, but be so cutted and short with them, that they may not tell out their own tale, but a word and a blow, or ever they have told half their tale, to cry out by and by, error, error, yea, gross error, and palpable error? Ha brethren, ye are a little to hasty to be parish Priests: The apocrphas. ye give too short and too sharp a judgement in this matter. Our brethren's to quick censure. Take the whole article together, to confer the later words with the former, and if a word escape incommodiously: What? my Masters, will ye take vantage of every syllable? or if ye will needs pry so narrowly: go to it then hardly and spare not. I mislike not your industry therein, spy (a God's blessing) èuery mote in your brothers eyes, and note every tittle in their writings, and weigh their words even in the Goldsmiths' balance. Yet, when ye have all done, ye confess yourselves, it is but a escape, whereas indeed, weigh it well and truly, it is not so much. But admit it were a escape, will ye make a mountain of a mole hill, that it is a gross and palpable error? Verily, whether we shall weigh the words with grave and indifferent judgement, as we ought to do: or but even grossly or slightly consider of them, except our opinion be too grossly forestalled against them, we could never give so gross a judgement of them, as, for a gross and palpable error to condemn them: for in very deed, there is no error at all in them. But it may be (such is my gross pate) that yet we have not light upon this gross and palpable error, indeed there are other words also, especially these after the catalogue of the Canonical books in the old Testament. And the other books (as Jerome saith) the Church doth read, for example of the life and instruction of manners, jeronimus in prefarionem in libros Salamo. but yet it doth not apply them to establish any doctrine. Is there any thing here that our brethren can challenge of error? Is the sense of Jerome cited amiss? Or is Hieromes sentence itself Erroneous? The words of Jerome in his preface on the books of Solomon are these: as therefore the Church readeth indeed the books of Judith, Toby and the Machabies, but receiveth them not among the canonical Scriptures: so also it may read these two volumes (he speaketh of jesus the son of sirach, and the book of wisdom) to the edification of the people, not to confirm the authority of Ecclesiastical opinions, or decrees. Or are they offended that yet thus much should be given to the apocryphal Scriptures, that they should be read at all in the Church, for a dification in example of life and instruction of manners: but to be utterly neglected or defaced, as some have not spared to bestow, very gross speeches on all the apocryphal Scripture? The e●●●matiō of the ●poc●phall books. but because this again, is not so much for the distinction of Canonical and Apocryphal books, as for the estimation of them, I think they mean not of any gross or palpable error in these words. If they do (by the grace of god) we shall the earlier clear them, by the testimony of many, whom our brethren (I hope) will not burden with so gross speeches. Especially when the whole French Church in their confession, goeth as far forth herein, as we do. where having reckoned up the whole Canonical Scripture of the old Testament and the new, In 〈◊〉 confession 〈…〉 1 de sc●iptura pag. 10. agreeing in all the particular books with us; in the fourth article they say. These books we acknowledge to be canonical, that is, we have them as the squire and rule of our Faith, and that not only by the common consent of the church but also much more by the testimony and inward persuasions of the the holy ghost, by whose suggestion we are taught to discern them from other Ecclesiastical books, which as they may be profitable, nevertheless they are not of that sort, that any article of the faith may be established out of them. To whom accordeth the confession of the churches of B●lgia, or the low Countries. Who after their like enumeration of the canonical books in the five and six articles, say on this wise. These only books we receive as holy and canonical, upon which our faith may stay, be confirmed and established, etc. Moreover we make a difference between these holy books, and those which they call appocryphas, that it to wit, because the appocryphall may indeed be read inthe church, and it is lawful also so far forth to take instructions out of them, A●t. 6. as far as they agree with the canonical books. Howbeit, they have not that authority and force, that any opinion of the faith and christian Religion can be certainly builded on their testimony. So far is it off, that they can infringe or diminish the authority of others. And if after these, I may allege any private man's confession; I commend the Reverend Zanchius. Who in his confession, chap. 1. Aphorism. 4. after the like particular rehearsal, that our Articles make, of the books canonical and not Canonical in the old Testament: he saith. Thus much of the old. But out of the new Testament we except none. For although there be some of them, of which it was doubted in the old time: notwithstanding even they also were afterward no whit less acknowledged than were the other, to be the writings of the apostles, unto whose judgement we also subscribe. Of the former sort, are the Gospels, after Matthew, Mark, Luke, john: the acts of the apostles, the Epistles of Paul, the former of Peter, the former of john. Of the later sort are, the Epistle to the hebrews, the Epistle of james, 〈…〉 the later of Peter, the second and third of john, the Epistle of Jude, the Apocalypse. For although they may seem after a kind of sort, to be of a certain greater authority, of the which it was never doubted, than those of which sometimes it was doubted: notwithstanding, we believe as well the one as the other, even as the certain word of God. As for the Apocryphal books that are contained in the Bybles volume: we give them the first place after the Canonical. And therefore we use only the Canonical books, Aphoris. ●. to prove the opinions (or decrees) of Faith, and with the Fathers we teach that they are to be used: as for the other, we think that they have no small authority to confirm afterward, those things that already are proved. Thus writeth Zanchius agreeing with our articles▪ And hereto also he quoteth, Jerome in Praef. in Salo. Cyp. in Symb. pag. 377. conc. Load▪ cap. 59 But what need I labour thus, to clear our Article hereupon: when the Geneva Bible itself, hath as much as this comes too, saying: the books that follow in order after the Prophets, unto the new Testament, are called Apocrypha, that is, books which were not received by a common consent to be read and expounded publicly in the Church, neither yet served to prove any point of Christian Religion, save in as much as they had the consent of other scriptures called canonical to confirm the same, or rather whereon they were grounded: but as books proceeding from godly men, were received to be read for the advancement and furtherance of the knowledge of the history, and for the instruction of Godly manners. Is not this as much here as is in any thing contained in these words of our books article, for the use and credit of the Apocryphal books? and wherein then for these words, doth lie such gross and palpable error, as they burden this article withal? The 1. & 2. book of Esdras. for nothing remaineth now therein, not examined, but the enumeration of the books themselves, which are counted of us for Canonical, which for Apocryphal. And do not these Articles keep the same account, both for the number and for the Books of both sorts, that all these aforesaid, and the very Geneva translation doth? except they will take advantage herein, Hieronimi p●satio in 1. Esdras. that where the Geneva calleth Ezra and Nehemiah (as Zanchius calleth them the two former of Esdras) our article retaineth still the usual calling of them the first book of Esdras, the second book of Esdras, because it treateth also much of Esdras, But I trust that our brethren will not in any wise account of that for a gross and palpable or any Error at all, considering how ordinarily it hath gone by these names, and in Ieromes preface he saith, Neither let it move any body that one book is of us set forth, nor let him be delighted in the dreams of the third and fourth book, Because also among the hebrews the speeches of Esdras and Nehemiah are straightened into one Volume, etc. As the books & matter we keep just reckoning if their offence be, because we count none Appocryphall in the new Testament: what do we otherwise, than Zanchius doth? Than the Geneva Testament doth? yea than the French, the Helvetian; and the Dutch reformed Churches do? 〈…〉 and therefore, where these gross errors and palpable should be in this article, they are so gross and palpable, that we can yet neither see nor feel them. When our brethren can show and prove them, I for my part (will by God's assistance) wilfully defend no known error. Now since we cannot find this, let us come to their second instance, which is, as they say: Our brethren's 2. challenge of of the book of articles for gross and palpable errors. For explication of the clause in the article of predestination, where it is said, that the elect may fall from grace, and such like matters. Whether it be negligence, or wilful perverting, that I know not, but I construe it rather to the gentler fault: notwithstanding, for those that profess themselves to be faithful Ministers, and to set forth a learned discourse, and thus grossly to burden the articles, yea one of the chiefest articles in doctrine, agreed upon by all the learned clergy of the Realm, and approved by all the authority and states of the realm, with gross and palpable error, and to charge the Article with an evident untruth: if this discourse may vaunt of learning, yet I would with that the learned discoursers were a little more faithful Ministers, least this part thereof might of any be termed, not a learned, but a lewd and undiscreet discoursing. The 17. article of predestination & election. Where it is said in the article of predestination, which is the seventeenth article; that the elect may fall from grace, or any such like matter in that article, the words of the article are these. Predestination to life is the everlasting purpose of GOD, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he hath constantly decreed by his Counsel secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation, those whom he hath chosen in Christ of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honour. Wherefore they which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God, be called according to God's purpose by his spirit working in due season: they through grace obey the calling: they be justified freely: they be made sons of GOD by adoption: they be made like the Image of his only begotten son jesus Christ: the walk religiously in good works, and at length by God's mercy, they attain to everlasting felicity. As the Godly consideration of predestination and our election in Christ is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons, and such as feel in themselves the working of the spirit of Christ, mortifying the works of the flesh, & their earthly members, drawing up their mind to high and heavenly things, aswell because it doth greatly establish and confirm their faith of eternal salvation, to be enjoyed through Christ, as because it doth fervently kindle their love towards God: so, for curious and carnal Pastors, Election. lacking the spirit of Christ, to have continually before their eyes the sentence of god's predestination, is a most dangerous downfall, whereby the devil doth thrust them either into desperation, or into recklessness of most unclean living, no less perilous than desperation. Furthermore, we must receive gods promises in such wise, as they be generally set forth to us in holy scripture: and in our doings, that will of God is to be followed, which we have expressly declared unto us in the word of God. This again is the whole article of predestination and election word by word set down. as it is in the book. And now, what one sentence, or but one word is here, that our brethren can prove to be erroneous; not gross and palpable (as they say) but to have any spice never so covertly conveyed, Nothing in this article of Predestination and Election but sound doctrine. of any the least error in the world: if our brethren be of sound judgement in this article, (as I hope they be) Or what doubtful speeches are there in this article, that need explication, for fear they might be understood erroneously: But where are here these words, that our brethren have by name burdened this article of predestination withal: saying, for explication of the clause in the article of predestination: where it is said, that the elect may fall from grace, and such like matters? May not our brethren be ashamed, so grossly and palpably to fall from this grace of telling the truth so oftentimes before, but specially here, in so great a matter, challenging one of the principal articles of our religion for gross and palpable errors or untruths, and their selves to fall intoso open, so untrue and foul a slander: But to help our brethren as much as we may, with the true cleared of ourselves, from so great and dangerous a slander, (for our brethren harp here about some thing) they mean be like in the 16 article, which is not (as they say) of predestination, but, of sin after baptism, where it is said thus. Not every deadly sin willingly committed after baptism, is sin against the holy ghost, and unpardonable. Wherefore, the grant of repentance is not to be denied, to such as fall into sin after baptism. The 16 article of sin after Baptism. After we have received the holy ghost, we may depart from grace given, and fall into sin, and by the grace of God (we may) arise again, and amend our lives, and therefore they are to be condemned, which say they can no more sin, as long as they live here, or deny the place of forgiveness to such as truly repent. Here indeed this article saith, that after we have received the holy, ghost, we may depart from grace given, and fall into sin, and by the grace of God we may arise again and amend our lives. And is there any error, or any darkness, or doubtfulness, or suspicion, or inclination to error in these words? Departing from grace. for, although they speak here generally, and mention not the elect, of whom they speak in the article following, which we have already perused: yet neither speak they of falling from grace, which word, falling, might perhaps be construed of them in the harder sense, as though they were destitute of all grace and clean void of the spirit of God: neither the words nor the sense tendeth to any such matter, but are only these: that after weehave received the holy ghost, we may departed from grace given, How we may departed from grace. & fall into sin, etc. Now, whether this be understood of the Elect, or not: may not such as are not of the number of the Elected, be truly said also to have received the holy Ghost, in the gifts of some graces of the holy Ghost given unto them? The Apostle saith, 1. Cor. 12. No man can say jesus is the Lord but by the holy Ghost. diverse graces of the holy ghost may be given to those that are not elected. And yet saith Christ. Matthew 7.21. etc. Not every one that saith unto me, lord Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of Heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father that is in Heaven, and many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not by thy name prophesied, and by thy name cast out devils, and by thy name done many great works: And then I will profess to them: I never knew you, depart from me, ye that work iniquity. And yet those that received these gifts of working miracles, etc. They were graces given them of the holy Ghost. And Saint Paul calleth them Charismata and spiritual gifts, the administration, operation, and manifestation of the spirit, the diversities of whose gifts he reckoneth up, as we have seen, 1. Cor. 12. And did not divers of the Corinthians depart or fall from the true use of these graces of the holy Ghost? As we may also say of Demas and others. And even of the apparent reprobate, saith Saint Paul, Hebrews, 6. vers. 4. For it is impossible that they which were once lighttened, and have tasted of the heaue●lye gift, and were made partakers of the holy Ghost, and have tasted of the good word of God and of the powers of the world to come, if they should fall away, should be renewed again by repentance, seeing that they crucify again to themselves the son of God, and make a mock of him. So then, understanding these words even for those that are not of the number of Gods elected; nevertheless they may be such, as God hath imparted great graces of the holy ghost unto, and yet they depart and fall from grace. But now (which is the better and plainer sense) because the Article mentioneth rising again: understanding these words for the Elect of God so far as man can gather by outward tokens: How the elected may departed or fall from grace. yet may the Elect depart from grace, though not wholly and finnally, as do the reprobate. For example, David and Peter departed from grace, and fell into grievous sins: yet not so, but that some sparks of grace, though overwhelmed for the time still remain in Gods elected, till God by his spirit reclaim them to repentance. Saint Paul writing to the galatians, to whom as to gods elected. chap. 1.3. he wisheth grace and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord jesus christ saith unto them, vers. 6. I marvel that ye are so soon removed away unto another Gospel, from him that had called you into the grace of christ, and chap. 3.1. etc. O foolish Galathians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, to whom jesus christ before was described in your sight and among you crucified? This only would I learn of you, received ye the spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith Preached? are ye so foolish that after ye have begun in the spirit, ye would now be made perfect by the flesh? have ye suffered so many things in vain? etc. Had not these lost the grace of God, and S. Paul reclaimed them to repentance; And so christ saith to the Angel (or B. of the church of Ephesus, apoc. 2. I know thy works, & thy labour; & thy patience, and how thou canst not forbear them which are evil, & hast examined them which say they are apostles & are not, and hast found them liars, & thou hast suffered & hast patience, and for my name sake hast laboured and hast not fainted. Here are the great graces reckoned up. But what followeth. Nevertheless, I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love, remember therefore, from whence thou art fallen, & repent, & do the first works, or else I will come against thee shortly; & will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent. And is not this even as much as here is said in this article; after we have received the holy ghost we may departed from grace given and fall into sin, and by the grace of God, we may arise again, and amend our lives? And therefore, there is no error, nor any suspicion of error in this saying: nor (as though it were doubtfully spoken) any need of further explication: except our Bre. would even seek to pick quarrels at words, to make them seem suspicious, that are sound & plain enough: or except they be of a contrary opinion to this article, thinking that if they once have received the holy ghost & his grace, they be so pure & sure ever after, that they can never sin: at least, they can never fall into any notorious sin. But although I pray both for them & us, that we may not departed from grace, by falling into any such grievous, & notorious sin: yet much more, that we fall not into that presumptuous sin, that we should be so puffed up in co●●●it of our purity, as to think we cannot departed from grace, & fall into sin, & notorious sin also. For so our Bre. should themselves, maintain a most gross and palpable, The state and confidence of the elected. yea a most dangerous error & condemned heresy. For although we must not waver in doubt betwixt fear & hope, distrust & faith, for our salvation, but have a firm hope & full confidence, in ye●ternal good purpose promises & mercies of god in christ (as the very first words of the article of predestination & election witnesseth that we are of th● number of his Elected to salvation, whereof god hath vouchsafed us good tokens, besides the pledge of his spirit, certifying our spirit, that we are the sons of God, and if sons, heirs: etc. yet except the spirit help our infirmities we should quickly fall into great temptations and enormities. And therefore we are willed for our part to work our salvation with fear and trembling, to pray that we enter not into temptation, and ever to check our presumption with these & such like sentences: If we shall say we have no sins, we deceive ourselves and there is no truth in us, yea, that the just falleth seven times a day, and yet riseth again, etc. But I hope our brethren are not sotted in this gross error of the anabaptists, neither we (God be praised) do allow of the other gross errors o●●he papists, that the elected can finally & utterly departed from grace. But, firmum stat fundamentum, deus novit qui sunt sui. Neither is there any error in any of these our articles, nor any of the other articles of the book. And therefore, I marvel that they say, divers godly and learned Preachers offered to speak against divers gross and palpable errors that had escaped the Bishop's decrees. Our brethren's slander of the Bishops for divers gross & palpable errors. If there were any so gross, that they were palpable; and so many too, that there were divers of them: and that (naming for example, these two matters) they conclude with this generality, saying, and such like matters: though we have cleared ourselves sufficiently herein, and are (by the grace of God) ready to enter, either into the apology of ourselves, or to make the acknowledgement of all those divers errors, and disclaim them, when they shallbe specified and so proved: yet is not this well done of our brethren, to burden us with any, especially with gross and palpable errors, and those divers, and not so much as name them, that we might see them, and forsake them. For this leaveth in the reader's mind, a shrewd suspicion, of further errors in these articles. But we crave (in the fear of God and in the testimony of a good conscience) all men's good opinion, in this behalf towards us, till our brethren, or any other, be he Papist, Anabaptist, or whosoever, shall burden us expressly with this or that error by name: and then, if we cannot throughly clear ourselves, let them condemn us, but till then, christian charity ought to hold us guiltless. And of these (I trust) we have sufficiently acquit ourselves; as for other, we are to answer in our defence, when we shall have heard their accusation. But and they be such as these, (because they tell us before hand, & such like:) I hope in God we shall do well enough, and had those matters that they suppress, been worse than these, I suppose they would not have opened these▪ and folded up those on this fashion. But if they be forth coming, we need not long to here of them we shall have them, I warrant you, with a recumbentibus, all in time, in the mean time, welcome be the grace of God. But let us now see, how our brethren conclude, and rattle up our Bishops for these articles, and for all the other matters that they have charged them with. If this (say th●y) be not to practise Lordship over Faith: The articles with proves. to set down decrees of religion, which must be accepted of all men without either reason or testimony of the scripture to prove them, The learned disc. pag. 136. and no man permitted to show any reason or scripture, that enforceth his conscience to the contrary, but only to hang upon the authority of bishops: let some other declare, what Paul meaneth, 2. cor. 4. where he denieth that he would exercise any Lordship over the Faith of the Corinthians. Our brethren show here a manifest proof▪ how true that Article is, which they say, was set dow●e by the Bishops and the convocation, that the elect may depart from grace, For I account of our brethren, Bridges. as of the number of Gods elected. Yet, if they had not in this their learned discourse departed or fallen to much from grace, would they, or could they have so fallen from the truth herein by such untrue and notorious slanders, thus to seek the utter disgracing and defacing of the Bishops? have they proved, or can they prove any one article or decree of Faith and Religion, wherein the bishops have taken upon them any such Lordship, or any Lordship at all over our Faith? doth not even the very former article of these two last, cited by our brethren themselves against the Bishops, for the distinction of the Canonical books, fully discharge the Bishops of this slander? that holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation, so that, whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an Article of Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation. Do they, which with their brethren in the convocation do set down this decree for faith and Religion, practise Lordship over our faith, Article 6. or set down decrees of religion which must be accepted of all men, without either reason or testimony of the Scripture to prove them, and no man permitted to show any reason or Scripture, that enforceth his conscience to the contrary, but only to hang upon the authority of Bishops? When the Bishops in most plain words renounce all such authority, and refer it only to the canonical Scripture? who may not see, (if he will not wilfully, of too too much affection blindfold himself) the appearance of this slander? But our brethren say, The articles briefly set down without their proves & testimonies. they have set down the decrees without either reason or testimony of the scripture to prove them. I grant it, that for some, they have so done, neither is it the nature of brief & summarie Articles which in Synods are agreed upon, after that they have been by reason and Scripture clearly proved, and are apparent: to have them set out with their proves annexed to them, which is another point beside the Articles. In the ordinances Ecclesiastical of the Church of Genena, and the orders of the school of the said City, set out in french An. 1578. of the which many are of faith and religion, and in their summary of the Christian Doctrine annexed, do they still adjoin their proves by reasons & testimonies of the Scripture. Articles not erroneous. And have not all the most ancient counsels (which are greater than our convocations) in all their articles and decrees, kept the self same order, most briefly and plainly, to set down the naked article by itself? & so thus have they set down also the articles of their creeds. And so is the summary of our Faith commonly called the Apostles Creed, set down in most short, plain and simple words and sentences, without annexing the reasons or testimonies of Scripture that confirm them. For when these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or principles, gathered as capital conclusions, and resolutions of the scripture are thus set down, if they be not such, nor have the clear proof and ground of Scripture for them, they will quickly appear in this their nakedness, and quickly show their shame to all the world, as do the Papists decrees which they set forth, so soon as ever they come to the touchstone, to be examined and proved by the Scripture, they molter away, and resolve to vanity. Let our brethren now (a God's name) take this our book of articles, and whet all their wits, and with all their learned discourses set upon it, examine and try it piecemeal thorough and through every sentence word, syllable and title in it, if they find any thing contrary to good and sound reason, yea, contrary too our dissonant from the Canonical Scriptures: then say, our Bishop's practice Lordship over our Faith, and set down orders of Religion which must be accepted of all men, without either reason, or testimony of Scripture to prove them, and no man permitted to show any reason or Scripture, that enforceth his conscience to the contrary, but only to hang upon the authority of Bishops. But if they cannot find any thing in these decrees, orders, and Articles, nor any could find it then, nor could ever since, nor ever shallbe able (and there was then in the convocation, liberty enough, and hath ever been since, and still is, being used in that lawful and reverent manner that is requisite for, the treaty of such matters) which yet could never, nor, I hope, shall ever be convinced of error: then let our brethren (for very shame or rather for love of truth) yield, and revoke these soul slanders on the Bishops, and indeed on all the convocation, and on all the realm and Church of England, that hath established the allowance of these articles: or rather on the Articles themselves, which they slander to be decrees of Religion without either reason or testimony of the Scripture to prove them, and that they only hang upon the authority of Bishops, and so are mere doctrines of men, and that they are Errors gross and palpable. Thus through the sides of the Bishops, are these Articles and our Faith and Religion wounded by these our brethren, as though not only our Bishops, but all the Clergy, the realm, the doctrine and all, were as ill or worse than the Papists, Satisfying the ignorant. so far hath this immoderate beat of their inconsiderate zeal, inflamed their passions and patience against the lawful authority of the Bishops. Now, when our brethren have thus in their eager pursuit of the Bishop's authority, raised up this soul slander on the decrees: yet at length beginning to think better of the matter, and that it might be, some body would perhaps take the pains, to search these Articles, since they were defamed of so gross and palpable errors, and to be without reason, nor grounded of the word of GOD: and in perusing of them might find them, (as they are indeed) to be most clear and sound from all Error, and many of them (where reason is required) having excellent reasons also annexed, and all to be altogether grounded on the word of God, whereof they were but sums and Capital principles: so that, if this their slander, upon the present view of them would vanish away▪ though it would cast a gross and palpable mist of error, to him that would barely on their credit believe them: Well, yet for all that, have at the Bishops one fling more, and it be but for a parting blow, or for a friendly shaking hands at the farewell. For (say they) although their decrees were never so perfect. Then, say I, their slanders were very shameful. Yet (say they) it were an example of tyrannical dominion, neither to give reasons to satisfy the ignorant themselves, nor to hear or confute that which might be alleged against them by others, but for a few Lord Bishops, incomparison of all the convocation, to sit by themselves, and order all things at their pleasures, as though the Gospel sprang first from them, or had come unto them only; it savoureth of nothing so much as of Popish tyranny. This is no less notorious a slander, than the other? There is none of the Convocation house, How any in the convocation house may be heard. but in the debating of any matter propounded, may be throughly heard, behaving himself in such order as i●●oresayd. Neither would the Bishops disdain either then, or at any other time, their selves to satisfy the ignorant. But whom mean they by this ignorant, that should be brought into the convocation house, or come before the Bishops there assembled? would they have it that every ignorant person of the common people, should come before the Bishops, and desire of them the satisfaction of their ignorance? or do they mean themselves the faithful Ministers, that have in this their learned discourse, How our brethren offered to be satisfied. made a brief & plain declaration (as they called it) concerning the things that are their desires? and will they then acknowledge their ignorance in these matters? & desire the Bishops to satisfy them with reason, this were a good hearing if they would thus do. Though they were not chosen to be any of the house, yet and they would so do, as they were never denied; so would I undertake they should be easily admitted, Satisfying our brethren. to come even to the Bishops themselves & there in due manner to acknowledge their ignorance, desiring to be satisfied with reason given by the Bishops unto them. They should find the Bishop's reasonable enough, without any tyrannical dominion over them: or if the Bishops would use any insolency or tyrannical dominion, they should not be suffered, upon due complaint, and proof thereof. But what reason would satisfy them, that cannot so much as speak of these matters, without vaunt of every speech of theirs, to be a learned discourse: yea, that cannot speak in print upon advised deliberation, but in such a choler, and with such intemperate speeches as these are? Is it likely these learned men would acknowledge their ignorance, and would desire to be satisfied, or be satisfied indeed with reason, as they ought to be, if they might have reasons by the Bishops themselves given unto them? Yes, that they would, if the Bishops would hear them, or confute that which might be alleged against them by others. Ah, than I perceive, there is a further drift in this desire, than to acknowledge their ignorance, & desire to be satisfied with the Bishop's reasons given unto them? For now on a sudden, their ignorance is turned to knowledge & to such knowledge, that they profess beforehand, the Bishops must hear them what? to confess their ignorance, or to desire to learn the Bishop's reasons? No, but the Bishops must hear, or confute that which might be alleged against them by others. So that, they must needs dispute with the Bishops themselves, and with no meaner persons of all the convocation house, and if the Bishops will not hear or confute that, whatsoever it be, which might be alleged against them by others; then the Bishops use tyrannical dominion. But would they be contented, if the Bishops would confute them; yea, if they confuted that, that might be alleged against them by others? But when would these others say, they were confuted? they reckon before hand to confu●● ●uen whatsoever it were without all exception, which might be alleged, be it never so strong reason, or never so firmly grounded on the word of God, by the bishops or by any others: were they never so many or never so excellently learned, if they be against them, they believe they will allege that against them that will confute them quite & clean. And all this they must be heard thoroughly, till they have done it. Must they so? and what if they were never able to do it? Not able quoth he? doubt ye of that? that they were not able to confute all the Bishops? if they be but heard till they have done speaking, their very sayings a●e confutations of all that might be alleged against them by others, either the Bishops, or all the whole convocation. What? do our brethren mean to be heard thus: they challenge here the Bishop's hard, for sitting by themselves, and ordering all things at their pleasures, as though the Gospel sprang first from them, or had come unto them only: Confuting the Bishops. but howsoever the Bishops would attempt thus to order all things, which if they would, could not be suffered, neither indeed do they, nor attempt to do; yet if we shall look better into the matter, how far of are our brethren from playing all these parts? they have hitherto urged many things, and some upon their own mere conclusions and bare words: How ●ar●e of our brothers are from those parts wherewith they burden the bishops. yea, we have not hitherto in all this learned discourse, heard one true and substantial proof out of God's word alleged for the Doctors to be debarred from preaching; for the Pastors to have no superior among them, in any standing dignity, authority and government of jurisdiction; for a consistory of Ecclesiastical Seniors, that may not teach but govern only, to be elected in every congregation: for the Deacons not to meddle with teaching, but only with the care of the poor and of the collections and distributions: for the excommunications to be made by this consistory of not teaching Governors: for the Pastors to be made in Synods only, after they are elected by the people with holding up their hands: and that they cannot be made Ministers but of this or that place; & cannot be counted Ministers being out of that place. And that where such preachers are not, there can be no public prayers nor sacraments administered, etc. What one of these points; and a number more, hath been proved by any one clear testimony, or necessary consequent of the Scripture, or by any one substantial reason for the proof of them: and what else in effect is this, than but to order all these things at their pleasures? And when they take on with all the Bishops, as though by their former industries and labours, they their selves had not received this light of the Gospel, which God be praised we have, if we can use it thankfully: or as though they were not by the Bishops made Ministers of the Gospel, if they have any ministery at all thereof, and be not mere lay men: is not this, even as though the Gospel (so far as the light of these controversies cometh (unto and their ministery thereof, sprang first from them, or had come unto them only, if not to our Bishops, nor to any of our convocations, nor to all the clergy of our Church of England but only to them that set these things abroache? and what now? shall we conclude on them, as they do on the Bishops; it savoureth nothing so much as of popish tyranny? whereof savoureth this? first, to put back the Prince's supremacy in Ecclesiastical causes, till all their Eccl. tetrarchy be parted among them, in such manner as we have already heard; and then, to pull down all the dignities and authorities of Archebishops, Bishops, and all other Ecclesiastical superior Prelates. And to set up themselves, every one to be a full Bishop in his own several congregation; The state of our brethren's new pastorship. what though not Lordship in name, but M. Bishop, yet in rule and authority over all in his congregation to be even a Lordship: to suffer no superior Pastor over him in his jurisdiction, but each one equal to the best: and he, as though he were in his territory even another new little Pope sitting in his pontificalibus, The true pastors description. with his consistory of governors, as though it were a College or Senate of a new kind of Cardinals, as the hingins that hold up the doors of Ecclesiastical regiment and discipline: with a new mixed kind of governors semi-secular, and dimi-ecclesiasticall Seniors, to sit by the themselves round about this Episcopal Pastor, over ruling all the congregation, yea, whosoever were inhabiting in the parish, Knight, Lord, Earl, Duke, Prince, Queen, King, or Emperor; they must all of them, for all discipline and Ecclesiastical regiment, be overruled by him, & by these his Governing Elders sitting about him. Of what savoureth this? Of dominion? of Popery? of tyranny? of confusion? of pride? of ordering all things at their pleasures? beside what dangers else, or worse than yet we see not? if our bishops should thus retallie these things unto our brethren, would they not (trow you) pay home the reckoning? But as though they were not yet on even hands, but that there were a great odds in this reckoning; Our brethren's accusation of our Bishops. and as though the Bishops were not to be accounted comparable; nor for Learning, Study, judgement, Zeal, Example, they were so worthy of their authority, as these our brethren are, to have this new kind of Eccl. government: they object unto the bishops their non sufficiency in these things. Whereas otherwise (say they) it is well known, they are not all of the best learned, nor all of the longest study, nor all of the soundest judgement, nor all of the greatest zeal, nor all of the best Example, and therefore not meetest to be the only determiners in Ecclesiastical matters, to the prejudice of the whole Synod. As for this conclusion, we shall come to it in his turn. This comparison in the antecedent, is somewhat odious, to upbraid to the Bishops, that they are not all of the best in these things, as though there were some other in the Synod, better herein than they. Belike they mean those diverse godly and learned Preachers, Our brethren's commendation of themselves that they said before before, offered to speak●; or else some other of themselves, that they would have to be also of the Synod. For, although it were a pretty policy, to commit us together among ourselves, with an emulation against our bishops, as not so learned, etc. as they would have us of the Convocation house, think ourselves to be: yet they lightly give not this to ●●y of us, to be counted either learned, or studious, or sound in judgement, or of great zeal, or of best example. But they oftentimes commend themselves for all these things, to be godly, wise, grave, and zealous men; they are those that Preach most diligently, pray most fervently, and minister the Sacraments most reverently: they are the faithful Ministers that seek the Church's reformation; and still, look up to the top of every leaf, and there hangeth up this ivy Garland to tolle on the reader, A Learned discourse of Ecclesiastical government. As for our Bishops, tush, for them, it is well known, Defacing our Bishops. they are not all of the best learned, nor all of the longest study, nor all of the greatest zeal, nor all of the best example. I pray you brethren, of what savoureth this? Surely it savoureth not all of the best learning neither, (in my judgement) if not rather of that learning, whereof Saint Paul saith, scientia inflat. Well (how unsound soever they shall account my simple judgement) would God their learning savoured a little more of lowly humility, and of Christian charity than it doth; to think better of other their brethren in these qualities, namely of their betters, than of themselves. And yet, if one shall examine these qualities particularly; Learning. what cause have they to upbraid their Learning to the Bishops? Iwisse, they may easily enter comparison with many of these our brethren. And if they should all be measured by this Learned discourse, might not these words return to their Masters? that neither they are all of the best learning: except they have better learning, that they keep yet in store for an after reckoning. And as for long study in the most of them, Long study. there need no long study for an answer. All the world may see that, in the years of the students do not their selves in their preface confess? If any shall object, that the grave authority of Archbishops & Bishops, shall receive a check, whilst they are brought to deal with those, whom they judge few, young, unlearned, & not comparable to themselves: but now they dare compare both in long study & in learning too, with the B. and give the check too, as young as they be, yea (in their opinion) to give them checkmate, and that with a pawn. But what said they there to this objection? did they not say: let us grant the great difference which they make of years and learning▪ yet the speech of Elihu, giveth them sufficient answer, that this understanding is not tied to such outward respects, but to the revelation of God's spirit. Here (as it were) they renounce they vaunt of long study, in which they could not for shame, make any comparison, & therefore they fly to the example of young Elihu, & to the revelation of god's spirit; as though their learning, and these platforms, came by revelation to them on a sudden. and do they now upon the smattering of a little learning; or for the small time, beit of their earnest study, come in as it were vying withal the B. making exception of none, but object to them all, that they are not all of the best learned, nor all of longest study? But what need long study, for great or best learning among them, when their governing Elders in every congregation, shall go for men learned in divinity, that have little leisure to study long, or perhaps at all? and every Pastor holden for a learned divine andfor a learned Preacher, although he were but new made a Pastor? And as for sound judgement, they measure that, after their own judgement and conceit, Our Bishop's accusation. esteéeming every man's judgement, albeit he be of never so long study or great learning, Sound judgement. to be no sound judgement, if it sound not soundly in their forestalled judgement. As also their over great & preposterous zeal condemneth all the Bishops, and all us their brethren in the Gospel of Christ, to be but Popish and without all zeal, if we yield not strait way to them, in all the devices of these new platforms. And no marvel then, if the shove in this among the residue, that the Bishops be not all of the best example. Would God, both they and we, and all our brethren were, if not of best, yet of better example than we be. For to say the truth, The best example. the better of both, yea the best of us all therein may be amended. Nevertheless though it be an offence unto the weak, and a steyne unto the authority: yet not so, but that the authority itself is good, and may stand even in those persons, that are not all of best example; no, nor all of the greatest zeal: nor all of soundest judgement: nor all of longest study: nor all of the best learned neither: but, if the Bishops were in these things inferior to some other, or to them, or any of them have any defect therein: yet ought not out brethren thus to insult upon them, being their fathers that made them Ministers of the Gospel, and having authority over them in the Church: were it but for the reverence and dignity of their authority, except indeed they were open enemies to the Faith, or manifest wicked in the example of their conversation. It should better (me thinks) beseemeour brethren, to follow the shame fastness of Sem and japheth, than the shamelesseness of Cham, in deriding and revealing his father's shame. But what do I speaking this of those Children that are grown into such disdain, that they will not acknowledge them to be their Fathers? If they say, that in these words they do not thus accuse them all, in saying: they are not all of the best learned, nor all of the longest study, nor all of soundest judgement, nor all of greatest zeal, nor all of best example? What then do they mean by these so intricate speeches? because they still place this word all so cunningly in the middle, that as it may be called in question, whether they referred it to these matters as when we say a thing is not all of the best, that is to say, it is but mean or base; not all of the soundest that is to say, rotten or corrupted; not all of the longest, that is, but short; not all of the greatest, that is but little: or else, that they refer the word all, not to the matter, but to the persons; as they are not all of the best, that is to say some of them are not of the best: and so for the residue of these qualities. In which later sense if they shall mean it, that though they be not all of them of the best learned, yet some of them are of the best learned, of the longest study, of the soundest judgement, of the greatest zeal, Determining in Synods. and of the best example: as it is apparent, & they cannot for very shame deny these things, or the most of them, in some of our Bishops: why then do they not follow those fewer some, than thus for some not so good in these things, to shake off all. And yet it is well known also, that there are many other (God be praised) besides the Bishops, that may compare with any of these our brethren the learned discoursers, in any, yea in all these things. But their quarrel is here pretended only, or chief at the Bishops, concluding against them upon these premises: And therefore not meet to be the only determiners in Ecclesiastical matters, to the prejudice of the whole Synod. This conclusion we may safely admit, Determining Ecclesiastical matters. were the Bishops never so excellent. It is not meet, neither do they, nor can they, take this upon them, which were indeed to the prejudice of the whole Synod. Nor the Synod receiveth this prejudice by them, nor giveth such authority to them, to be the only determiners in Ecclesiastical matters. For, every one that is any particular member of the whole Synod hath both his deliberative and determinative voice, except we shall speak of such determination as recollecting all their several determinations, pronounceth publicly the sentential and final determination of the matters, in the name and authority of them all, as james did, being Bishop of jerusalem. And yet neither so, all the Bishops do it: but one and the chiefest among them, as the full resolution of the whole Synod. But how will our brethren clear themselves of this, whereof they accuse our Bishops? for they pretending to be Pastors, and that Pastors and Bishops be but all one: they will then be Bishops, every one that pretendeth to be a Pastor. Now, though these Bishops admit their governing Elders to come to the Synod, and to be parts also of the Synod with the Pastors, saying, that the Synod consisteth principally of Pastors, Elders, Teachers, and men of wisdom, judgement and gravity, as it were of necessary regents: pag. 113. And hereto they urge the assembly, Act. 15. the Apostles and Elders came together to consider upon this matter, &c: yet when they come to the determination even where they say pag. 117. the Synod hath to determine what shallbe observed in particular charges, as of the time, place, and form of preaching, and praying, and administering of the Sacraments: they so make themselves to be the only determiners in all Ecclesiastical matters, that disoayning any other should so much as know them, they say. For who should be able to know what order, comeliness, and edification requireth, according to God's word, but they that be teachers and preachers of the same unto all others? for it is absurd that they should be taught by such in these small things, as aught to learn the truth of them in all matters. The Pastors determining. Do they not here (make their Ecclesiastical Governors and Elders to be no teachers, and yet principal parts, whereof the Synod consisteth, and necessary regents; How our brethren deal in synods with their own governors. & yet when it cometh to the regency indeed, to be clean excluded from all regency and determining of these matters, except they should determine that they know not: What shall we say then? whatsoever is decreed amongst them, that is to say, among these Bishops, that must be called the determination of the whole Synod. So that no man must be suffered to speak any thing against it, be it never so reasonable or agreeable to the word of God. pag. 135. Tush, what reason you any longer of reason, or of agreeableness to the word of God? Have ye not your answer already? Who should be able to know what order, comeliness, and edification requireth according to God's word, but they that be teachers and preachers of the same unto all others? Our Brethren● words returned home. What? and will you take upon you to be teachers and preachers, because ye are Ecclesiastical governors, and because ye are parts whereof the Synod consisteth? or are ye so crank that ye be necessary regents? What of all this? we tell you again, that since ye be not teachers and preachers, and so no Pastors nor Bishops: It is absurd that they should be taught by you, which ought to learn the truth of us the Pastoral Bishops in all matters. And therefore, whosoever of you all will not subscribe to all such things as we the Bishop's decree, must be excluded out of the Convocation. If this be not to practise Lordship (though not over the faith (yet over all the Synod, and over all the Churches, in these matters, no man being permitted to show any reason or scripture that enforceth his conscience to the contrary: no not their Governors themselves to quitch, for fear they should here be snatched up for halting: but only to hang upon the authority, of these new upstart Pastoral Bishops: let some other declare, what this meaneth, and how far this differeth from tyrannical dominion, & from ordering all things at their pleasures, as though the Gospel sprang from them, or had come to them only. It savoureth of nothing so much as of Popish tyranny: (except of somewhat worse) whereas otherwise, it is well known that they are not all of the best learned, but many of them very simple scholars: nor all of longest study, but mere children (or no students in Divinity) even the other ●ay: nor all of soundest judgement, nor able to judge of many controversies, nor to judge of or sound to the depth of these, nor all of them sound, nor sound agreeing together in judgement of them. Nor all of the greatest zeal, though it be the greatest thing in them, but according to knowledge not so great as testy: Nor all of the best example, but some good, some bad, and one with another as all other men, and what followeth? And therefore not meet (how fain soever they would, Preiua●ce●● the synod. and take it hereupon them) to be the only determiners in Eccl. matters, to the prejudice of the whole Synod, and of all the governing Elders, Whether our Bishops or these Pastors do more prejudice the synod. that are parts of the whole Synod with them. So plainly in all these things do our Brethren even in their own words, with a very little windlasse turning them home again, while they would power out all these reproaches on our Bishops, reaching short of them, spill them by the way, and all to defile and bewray themselves therewith. As for our bishops, as they neither take any such authority in the Synod upon them, over the Pastors, as these Episcopal Pastors take upon them over their governing Elders; and so our Bishop's prejudice not the whole Synod, nor any part thereof, as they do theirs; nor our Synods find themselves prejudiced or aggrieved with the authority of our Bishops: but both our Bishops and our whole Synods find themselves slandered, injured, defaced, and so, much prejudiced by these speeches and devices of our brethren. As among other, this conclusion following is a great slander of them: Wherefore, it is greatly (say they) to be desired, that our Synods also which are so far out of order, may be reform according to the Scripture and the example of the Primitive Church. That our Synods are so far out of order, as our brethren pretend, (except they have some fresh proves to come) they have not yet proved it. This is but an apparent untruth and infamy of them. The reforming of Synods according to the Scripture and the example of the Primitive Church, so far as the Scripture giveth either rule or example of them, is already in practice, if our brethren would be thankful to God for it. As for the particular abuses, they may much more easily be reformed, than by such Synods and Counsels as are here devised. That all things (say they) may be done with such modesty, gravity and judgement, as they were by the Apostles and Elders. Act. 15. Yea forsooth, this at length, is a good final conclusion and determination of this matter. I am glad our brethren yet after all these ruffling storms, Our brethren● conclusion. end thus caulmelie, with this wholesome advice of modesty, gravity and judgement. Which three points if they had all this while set before them, at least wise, if they had followed them: they would never thus lavishly have defaced all our Synods and Convocations, with all the Bishops, the Pastors and other officers in them, albeit there had been some defects or abuses of them, which might with modesty, gravity and judgement be well reform, the laws, and orders of them already established (with the Bishops, Pastors and officers authorities reserved) remaining entire and still continuing. The argument of the 16. Book. IN this last Book (after their profession, that they have now set forth the whole Ecclesiastical ministery, with all the duties and authorities pertaining to these four tetrarchs) they here grant, that the place requireth, to treat of the Civil Magistrates authority in Ecclesiastical matters. First, of the right understanding the title of the Prince's supremacy, and how far forth they will move no controversies thereof. Of their grant to the Prince's supremacy over the Ecclesiastical persons, with their cautions of the Pope's supremacy, and of Princes casting off the Pope's yoke. Of the Prince's supremacy also in the matters Ecclesiastical, and of the Pastor's supremacy therein above the Prince, and of the Pope's presumption in these matters. Of the Prince's authority in making laws of Ecclesiastical matters, and of their exception for not confounding the Princes and the Pastor's offices, and of the Pastor's consent. Whether the Prince's authority reach no further, than to make civil laws for Ecclesiastical matters. And how far the Pope also allowed Princes to make such laws. Whether the Prince's authority stretch not to their dealing in the making of Ecclesiastical laws, but only for the charge to observe them, that by the Clergy are already made, and for the bodily punishment of those that violate them: whether this be any more than the very Papists and the Pope granteth, and whether even this also do not touch these learned discoursers. Of the authority and dealing of the ancient Prince's before Christ's coming, and of the Christian Princes since his coming. Of our Brothers reverence to the ancient Christian Princes in the Roman Empire, and in the Kingdoms of France, Spain, and of this our Brittany. Of the emperors authority & dealings in Ecclesiastical matters in the greatest Counsels, and of their Ecclesiastical sanctions. Of the French Kings authority and dealing in the same. Of the authority and dealings of the Kings in Spain. Of the authority and dealing of the Kings in England, and of t●e Ecclesiastical laws of the ancient Saxon Kings. Of the Princes dealing herein by the advice of their learned Clergy, and whether their advice infer their sole superior authority. Of the Prince's service of God their father, and serving the commodity of the Church their mother. Of the testimonies of Esa 49.23. Psalm. 2.11. 1. Tim. 2.2. and of the Papists and our Brothers applying the same. How far the ends and benefits of a Prince do stretch: and how the Prince is both a child, and yet withal a foster father or Nurse unto the Church. All which being declared for the authority of the Prince: our brethren make their Epilogus of all this learned discourse. First concerning their own persuasion for this prescribed form of Ecclesiastical government, to be agreeable to God's word, and consenting to the example of the Primitive Church. And of their avouching that they be able so to prove it: and of their promise that when occasion shall serve, they will prove it so to be. Of their solemn protestation why in the mean time they set forth this learned discourse, and what they seek herein. And of the true way to reformation. And of their moving them that be in authority, to put this prescribed form in practice. And of their offering up their books hereof unto the Parliament. And how this doing is clean contrary to the chiefest positions in this learned discourse. And of renewing again these controversies by disputation. And of the event of this form if it should be embraced. And of their desire that either this form prescribed, or if not this, yet the like may be received: and how uncertain this desire of theirs is: and how we may or may not see and judge what is the uttermost of their desires herein. Of their slanders of the present state, and that we are the adversaries of God's truth, and how we be hinderers of their proceeding to reformation. And of this learned discourse to be their public testimonial to the present age, and that the posterity may know that the truth in this time was not unknown, nor untestified, concerning the right regiment of the Church, and whether this can be known hereby, yea, or no. Of their disordered speeches against our regiment of the Church, and whether it be received of the most part of Popery, and how this redoundeth on our brethren. How they accuse theirs and our godly fathers of neglecting in this point for delivering our Ecclesiastical regiment to their children without contradiction, and how prejudicial they complain that this is unto them. Last of all of their conclusion by prayer to God, for the pacification of these matters. AND now that we have set forth the whole Ecclesiastical ministery, The whole ministry. according to the word of God, The learned disc. pag. 137. with all the duties and authorities that pertaineth unto it: the place requireth that we should also entreat of the authority of the civil Magistrate in matters Ecclesiastical. thanks be given to God, that now at length our brethren here confess (for I hope they say it not for a vaunt) that they have set forth the whole Ecclesiastical ministery with all the duties and authorities that pertain unto it. So that, Bridges. if now either they themselves or any other among them, add any thing, or alter any thing, The whole ecclesiastical ministery and all the duties and authorities pertaining. of the duties or of the authority of the Ecclesiastical ministery: then is either this or that convinced, not to be the whole Ecclesiastical ministery, nor all the duties and authorities that pertain unto it, as here they say this is. But we have seen in perusing this their learned discourse, in how many things, and those of moment materially pertaining to the Ecclesiastical ministery and to the duties and authorities of the same, how they have often altered and varied one from another, and run into plain contradictions, besides a number of other, and other manner of points, that I could gather and set down, and (GOD willing) shall at large, The diversities of our Brothers disc●●ries. if our brethren shall call for them: only now I note a few of those, that this learned discourse hath led me unto: And therefore, either their other discourses, or this their learned discourse is not altogether as here they say according to the word of God. And now, sith that they have discoursed and set forth the whole, and all that they could or would, for their Ecclesiastical ministery, and all the duties and authorities pertaining unto it: I beseech thee which art the Protestant reader hereof, in the fear of God, bearing thyself even indifferently (as to those that on either part, though dissenting in these matters the one from the other, yet in the substance of Religion and unity of faith, are both of us thy dear and true brethren in Christ, The re●ders duty in these controversies. because we on either hand may favour too much our own parties, and be carried away in the heat of our disputes) that thou wilt vouchsafe (so near as God shall give thee grace and an understanding heart, to be a true judge, and an upright umpire, between all them (God knows who and how many) that call themselves, all the faithful ministers that seek for the discipline and reformation of the Church of England, on the one party: and even poor mine own self (God wot) in this action, on the other party: and between their learned discourse (as they entitle it) of Ecclesiastical government, and my unlearned (as I confess) and course answer thereunto: The treatise of the princes authorithie. setting aside (for the while) all favour and partiality, (which disturb a clear judgement) even as GOD shall help thee, and be thy true judge, and so I commit and commend it to God's good speeding, and to thy indifferent reading, weighing, and judging of it. Our brethren's entry into the treatise of the Prince's authority. And here now, when our brethren have thus to the full, discoursed on the whole Ecclesiastical ministery, and all the duties and authorities that pertain unto it: at length they begin to find some leisure, to bethink themselves of the Christian Prince, and to give him yet some remainder at least, in the last lapping up of all this learned discourse. So that, if the Christian Princes have not the blessing before hand so plentifully powered forth, as upon jacob, to have the dew of heaven and fatness of the earth, and to be Lords over their brethren and honoured of their mother's children: yet as one borne out of time (as they say by three hundred years) and coming later, they shall not yet be clean forgotten, but shall have at least a portion of Esau's blessing so far forth, that they shall have also a dwelling place in the fatness of the earth, and somewhat also of the dew from heaven above. Yet they shall have their living by the sword: but they must serve their Brothers, Our brethren's dealing with Christian princes in these matters. till they get the mastery, and break their Brother's yoke from their necks. And if they hold not themselves content with this blessing: let them go further and far worse, they get no more here. For, their brethren have come before them, and gotten away the blessings from them. All the whole government of Ecclesiastical matters, is given and parted into four parts, and is made a fair tetrarchy, of Doctor, the Pastor, the Governor, and the Deacon, these four have forestalled in their several shares and jurisdiction, the government, and ordering of all Ecclesiastical matters. But yet since there is a fift part of something left, and reserved for the Christian Prince: let us see what that portion is, and how our brethren will also ordain and dispose thereof. And now (say they) that we have set forth the whole Ecclesiastical ministery, The learned disc. pag. 138. etc. The place requireth, that we should also entreat of the authority of the Civil Magistrate in matters Ecclesiastical. The place required this long before. But let us now take it while it is offered, lest no place at all be left to the Christian Princes. Of the title of the Prince's supremacy, if it be truly understood, we move no controversy, but that it doth properly appertain to the civil Magistrate to be the highest governor of all persons within his dominion, so that the sovereign Empire of GOD be kept whole. If the authority of the Christian princes supremacy be good; God's sovereign Empire. the title expressing the same authority, is good also. And so, vice versa; if the title be good, the authority of the prince's supremacy is likewise good. Bridges. But what mean they by this caution, that they say, The title of the Prince's supremacy. of the title of the Prince's supremacy, if it be rightly understood? For if they deny the understanding of it, as her Majesty & her predecessors, and the Parliament, and the whole Realms and Churches both of England and of Ireland do understand it, then do they flatly deny that supremacy which her Majesty claimeth and hath; and that both her Predecessors, her majesties most renowned Father claimed, recovered, and had: and which also her majesties most godly Brother claimed and had: The understanding of the title of supremacy. and that the Parliament and the whole Realms & Churches of England and Ireland do owe, acknowledge and yield unto her Majesty, as they did before to her foresaid most noble predecessors. And how then do they move no controversy of it? Which to call in question, considering withal (besides the manifest right in the law of God) the danger of the penal laws of this Realm provided by statute, were very dangerous for them to do: besides the evil offence and example to the Papists, that would gladly lie in the wind for such advantage, that some of the Protestants themselves should now begin, to move controversies, first of the title, and then of the authority of the christian Princes supremacy in Eccl. matters, and then of the understanding of it, as though it had been all this while not rightly understood, or but ambiguously, which is so clear, both in the matter itself & by the statutes thereon, & by diverse that have written & set forth the same plainly against the wrangling Papists, and by open declarations in arraignments of those that have worthily suffered for their obstinate denial of the same: that almost no controversy is made more clear & plain than is the understanding thereof. And do our Br. come in now at length (after all their putting back the speaking of it) with granting to it, with this exception: If it be rightly understood? Then I perceive they move controversy also of it for the right understanding thereof. Well, what then? For we would not have them yield to it otherwise. If it be rightly understood (say they) we move no controversy of it, but that it doth properly▪ Our Brethr. exception of God's sovereign Empire. appertain to the civil Magistrate to be the highest governor of all persons within his dominion, so that the sovereign Empire of God be kept whole. This is a very good understanding of the caveat, so that the sovereign Empire of God be kept whole: God forbidden that should be violated, invaded, or any jot thereof diminished by the Prince. Neither doth her Ma. or did her most worthy father or brother, take upon them, or we acknowledge any other supreme government. And therefore, for our Brethr. her Ma. loyal subjects, to cast forth such exceptions unnecessarily, and where no cause is, God's Empire entire. thereby although to move no controversy, yet to engender suspicion, that her Majesty, her Father, and her Brother, claimed the title of supremacy otherwise, than that the sovereign Empire of God might be kept whole, this being one of the chiefest causes of their and her claim, even that the sovereign Empire of God might be kept whole: or that we do otherwise yield to any supremacy of the Prince: this is neither here in them, or in any other dutifully done, but injurious both to her Majesty, and to all her obedient subjects that do yield it. But since they will needs here make this exception, protesting that they move no question of the title of the Prince's supremacy, if it be rightly understood, and that this right understanding is only this, so that the sovereign Empire of God be kept whole: go to then, and let us also have this rightly understood withal, so that, none of all these four Tetrarcks, Doctor, Pastor, Governor, nor Deacon, for whom they contend, be understood to be God: nor their Empire, for God's Empire. If they say, this can not well be granted; because, though they be not God personally, God's empire kept whole by the Prince's supremacy. nor so their Empire God's Empire, yet they be God representatively, as God's Ministers, and deputies over his household, and so their Empire or authority is God's Empire, because it is God's ordinance, and therefore, God's Empire is still by them kept whole: doth not all this fit the Prince also? are not Princes in that representative sense called Gods? as David saith, Psalm 82. God standeth in the assembly of Gods, and judgeth among Gods: and, I said, ye are Gods: and so God himself said to Moses concerning Aaron, He shall be as thy mouth, and thou shalt be to him as God, Exod. 4. ver. 16. and Rom. 13. It is said of the Prince, he is God's minister, and his power is the ordinance of God. Our Brethr. grant of the Prince to be highest over the persons. But our Brethren have yet another restraint, for they will grant all this in manner aforesaid: howbeit, they go no further here than for the persons, for which they will move no controversy, but that it doth properly appertain to the civil Magistrate, to be the highest Governor of all persons within his dominion. And do they here acknowledge then, in this understanding the title of the Prince's supremacy, nothing else but that it doth properly appertain to the civil Magistrate (meaning the sovereign Christian Prince) to be the highest governor of all persons within his dominion? Well, this is yet far more than the blind and rebellious Papists will grant: Howbeit in some respect they will grant thus much also. But shall the Prince be governor likewise of them, that properly must be called Governors? And why not, if he must be above the Pastor also, which is above them? Howbeit, all this is granted here, as yet no further than for the persons. No is? This is but half of the title of the Prince's supremacy. The Eccl. Governors. Where is the matter wherein this supremacy doth consist, that is to say, in all matters or causes so well eccl. as temporal? How far our Brethr. grant the Prince's supremacy over their Eccl. governors. This is the material part of this title, & no less necessary than other of the persons, & is the chiefest point of this controversy betwixt the Papists & us. And do our Br. now begin to stay here another while at this? Then we may make a fair piece of work. What, is this part forestalled up already by any of the former tetrarkes? Indeed they said very suspiciously to the matter, pag. 84. Therefore there ought to be in every Church a Consistory or signory of Elders or Governors, which ought to have the hearing, examination, and determining of all matters pertaining to discipline and government of that congregation. Yea (but say they) that sentence goeth further: which authority of theirs, nevertheless, aught to be moderated. Or else (say I) farewell clean the Prince's supremacy in all eccl. matters; if these governors authority in all matters, pertaining to discipline & government of that congregation, be not moderated, and the well moderated. Yes (say they) it ought to be moderated, that their judgement may be rightly accounted the judgement of the holy Church. Yea but (say I) how is it moderated, that it do not debar the supremacy of the Prince in all these matters? Which thing (say they) consists in these 2, points, first that the Elders be elected & chosen by consent of all the congregation, men of godliness & wisdom, in whom the whole church reposeth such confidence that they commit unto them their authority in hearing, & determining such matters, as without horrible confusion they can not perform themselves. Why, but all this while, what is this to any point of the Prince's authority in all this matter? Is there no better proviso, for the Prince, in the 2. point of moderating the authority of these governors in Eccl. matters? The 2. point (say they) for moderation of the Elders authority in such sort, that their sentence may be the sentence of the Church, is this: that when the Consistory have traveled in examining of causes pertaining to Eccl discipline▪ & agreed what judgement ought to pass upon the matters, they propound it to the whole multitude, that it may be confirmed. Yea? is all the wind in that door? Still▪ the whole multitude? The whole Church? The whole congregation? As though all the authority in Eccl. matters cometh from them, as from the spring, and floweth to them, as to the Sea. They make the governors, which governors must with the Pastors make all the laws, must hear & determine of all matters pertaining to discipline & to government of that congregation: and when they have so done, all must be again referred to that congregation, & to the whole multitude of them, that it may be confirmed by their consent. Supremacy over all persons. What, and must it not come a little higher after them, to be at least propounded also to the Prince, that it may be also confirmed by his consent? No, no, no, beware that of all things: if it be once confirmed by the multitude of that congregation, it hath passed all his confirmations, and can have no more godfathers, except it come to a Synod. But there we have already heard how the Prince hath sped, except that now we shall hear of any more. For there are some matters yet left to the Prince for his supremacy to consist in, or else (besides a bare title it is mere nothing, no not of the persons neither, unless withal it be in some matters. Our Brethr. reservation of the Prince's supremacy in the matters. Well, but they will not yet tell us of these matters till afterwards. But thus far they have acknowledged for the persons, that the Prince is the highest governor of all persons within his dominion. Would not this have been very well & necessarily joined together unto it, to know in what matters he is the highest of all the persons? Or else they may move what controversy on the supremacy they shall please, or clean deny it. But since they will stay a while upon the supremacy over all persons in the Prince's dominions, & that with this proviso, if it be rightly understood, so that the sovereign Empire of God be kept whole: let us stay also to go together with them, and consider what stop or limax this is that stays them here in their proceeding from the persons to the matters. But herein resteth all the doubt, how this is truly to be understood, & that shall we best understand by the contrary: The learned disc. pa. 138. & 139 namely, by the usurped tyranny of Antichrist. For Antichrist did challenge unto himself all authority both that which is proper to God, and that which is common to men. Therefore that the Pope claimed to be the only head of the Church, from which the whole body received direction, and was kept in unity of faith: this was blasphemous against Christ, & therefore may not be usurped of any civil Magistrate, no more than by the pope. Likewise, where he challengeth authority to alter, change, & dispense with the commandment of God, to make new articles of faith, to ordain new Sacraments, etc. This is also blasphemous & ought not to be usurped of any civil prince: on the other side, where he challengeth authority over all princes, and so over all the Clergy, that he did exempt them from the civil jurisdiction, this is contumelious, and injurious against all Christian kings. And therefore every prince in his own dominion, aught to cast off the yoke of his subjection, and to bring all Eccl. persons unto his obedience and jurisdiction. Here have we the first part of the title of supreme government over all persons. If all the doubt resteth herein, how this is truly to be understood, that the sovereign Empire of God may be kept whole: Bridges then is the supremacy that her Ma. holdeth, and that we acknowledge, due, & properly appertaineth to the Prince, without all doubting of the matter. The Clergies temporalties. And if our Brethren will acknowledge all that supremacy unto the Prince, save that supremacy, which is proper to God, and save that supremacy, or rather tyranny which the Pope challenged and usurped, The Christian Princes supremacy far different from the Popes. or which is agreeable thereunto: we should soon agree herein without moving any controversy or doubt of this matter. Yea this should soon decide all our other controversies. For first we confess with our Brethr. that this Antichrist the Pope did, and doth challenge unto himself all authority both that which is proper to God, and that which is common to men. But so doth not her Majesty challenge, nor acknowledge any other authority, but that that is due and properly appertaining to the Prince under God, & common only to those persons, or rather peculiar to them, that under God are the chief Sovereigns in their Dominions: We confess also with our Brethr. that this Antichrist the Pope, claimeth to be that only head of the Church, from which the whole body received direction, & was kept in unity of faith: this his claim was (& is) blasphemous against Christ, & therefore may not be usurped by any civil Magistrate, no more than by the Pope: Neither doth her Majesty, or ever did, neither did her foresaid most royal Father & Brother, claim or usurp any such authority over us, or we acknowledge any such authority in them. We confess with our Brethren likewise, where he (meaning this Antichrist the Pope) challengeth authority to alter, change, The blasphemous challenge of the Pope. & dispense with the commandments of God, to make new articles of faith, to ordain new Sacraments, etc. this is also blasphemous and ought not to be usurped of any civil Prince: Neither doth her Majesty, or did her foresaid most noble Father and brother usurp, or challenge any such authority, or we yield it. calvin indeed did at the first so mistake it, that the most noble Prince K. Henry the 8. took upon him the like authority, and therefore wrote against it very inconsiderately. But afterward both in K. Edw. & in her Ma. perceiving no such authority given or taken: he took no such offence at the claim of their authority, but approveth the same, and in all due manner writeth to them. We confess also with our Br. on the otherside, where he (to wit, this Antichrist the Pope) challengeth authority over all Princes, & so over all the Clergy, that he did exempt them from the civil jurisdiction, this is contumelious & injurious against all Christian kings. Neither doth her Majesty, or did her foresaid most noble Father & brother challenge any such authority over all Princes, nor over all the Clergy, except a due authority over all such inferior Princes (because some states in the Realm may be included in the name of Princes under her Ma.) & over all those of the clergy, which are within her Ma. dominions, & are her lawful subjects: neither exempteth she the Clergy from all the civil jurisdiction, 〈…〉 and these Tetrarkes' yoke. nor offereth in this her authority any contumely or injury, to all or against any christian Kings, or against other Sovereigns in their Dominions: neither do we acknowledge any other, than such as is a lawful authority in her Majesty. And here as her Majesty is free, & her title and authority right & due, in her own dominions over all under & vassal Princes, in or of the same dominions, The Clergies holding their temporalties of the Prince. and over all the Clergy also, in or of all her majesties dominions aforesaid, concerning the civil jurisdiction, whereof so far as the Clergy hold any portion, or any other civil privilege, prerogative, franchesse, or immunity, they hold it & reacknowledge it, in all due obedience and thankfulness, as derived from the munificence of her Ma. and her royal Progenitors. So let our Brethren herein take heed, how they & their new Clergy of consistory governors in their Sanedrins, under pretence of inquiring, examining, determining, judging, and punishing all offences in their several congregations, encroach not upon the Prince's civil jurisdiction. Our Brethr. governors encroaching on the Prince. For this also is contumelious and injurious both against her majesties authority, & against all christian Kings & Princes, and against the most of the civil Magistrates, judges, justices & officers, under the chief and sovereign Princes, besides the Eccl. Prelates & their officers. And therefore (we conclude as our Brethr. here do) every Prince in his own dominion, aught to cast off the yoke of his (to wit the Popes) subjection, & to bring all Eccl. persons unto his or her obedience & jurisdiction. And we conclude a little further, that in the number of these Eccl. persons, Every prince ought to cast off the yoke of the Popes and of these new tetrarks subjection. the Prince ought to bring in (presupposing there were any such) all this new kind of Doctors all these new Bishops in every parish, all these new Governors, and all these new Deacons in every congregation, in his or her dominions, under his or her obedience & jurisdiction, and to cast off the yoke of their subjection: which if they ought to do, then let our Brethr. again take heed, how they impugn the obedience and jurisdiction of her Majesty, and her laws established, and cast among her subjects such repugnant discourses as this is, vaunt they never so much therein of Learning. Here have we (say they) the first part of the title of supreme government over all persons. And thus far both our Brethren & we agree, concerning the persons. In matters or causes Eccl. likewise, the Pope doth not only presume against God, The learned disc. pa. 139. & 140 as we said before: but also against the lawful authority, given by God unto men. For he forbiddeth Princes to meddle with reformation of Eccl. matters, or to make any laws pertaining to causes of religion, answering them, that those things do appertain only to him and the general Counsel. But when he cometh to debate any thing with his Clergy, than all laws and knowledge, The Prince's supremacy in Eccl, matters. are enclosed in the closet of his breast. When any general Council must be holden, all that they do receiveth authority from him. For except he do allow, it is nothing. And he is so wise, that neither with the Council, nor without the Council he can err or think amiss in matters Eccl. when as it is not only lawful, but also necessary for Princes, if they will do their duty, to look to the reformation of religion, and to make laws of matters Ecclesiastical. But so that we confound not the offices of the Prince and Pastor. For as it is not lawful for the prince to preach nor administer the Sacraments: no more is it lawful for him to make laws in Eccl. causes, contrary to the knowledge of his learned Pastors. For as these three parts of the pastors duty are granted to him by God, preaching, ministering of Sacraments, and Eccl government: he may no more take from a Pastor the third, than he may the two first. They are now come from the persons, to the matters or causes Eccl. wherein and how far forth, Bridges. they will acknowledge the title and authority of the Prince's supremacy. The Prince's authority for Eccl. matters. All this that our Brethr. say here against the pope's claim of supremacy for matters or causes Eccl. the same say we. And we gladly accept that which our Brethren do condemn, in the pope's presumption and usurpation both against God and man, and his forbidding princes to meddle with reformation of Eccl. matters, or to make any laws pertaining to causes of religion, answering them, that those things do appertain only to him, and the general Council. And here we beseech our Brethren, confessing thus much against the pope, Our Brethr. speeches against Princes dealing in eccl. matters. (as it becometh good subjects to their prince) to advise themselves withal, of their former unadvised speeches. pag. 9. 10.84.85.117.1●8.119. in which places besides their hard terms of Christian princes, do they not give (under the name of the Church & her authority) the knowing, the hearing, the examining, the determining, the judging and the punishing, of all matters and causes pertaining to discipline & government of the Church, either to their pastors and teachers, or to the Seignories of their governors? And what differeth this from forbidding princes to meddle with reformation of Eccl. matters, or to make laws pertaining to causes of religion, answering them, How our Brethren incur the l●ke dealing that they rep●chende in the Pope for n●i●sing Princes and the Cl●●gie. that those things do appertain only to them, and to their consistories, and to their particular Synods, or general Council? But when he (say they meaning the pope) cometh to debate any thing with his Clergy, them all laws and knowledge are enclosed in the closet of his breast. And is this any more, than to say not only to the Prince, but also to their own consistory governors, of whom their Synods consist, as well as of themselves, pag. 117. who should be able to know what order, The Pastor's supremacy in Eccl. matters. comeliness, & edification requireth according to God's word. but they that be teachers & preachers of the same unto all others? For it is absurd that they should be taught by such in these small things, as aught to learn the truth of in all matters. This authority therefore can not be granted unto any civil Christian Magistrate, that without consent of the learned Pastors and Elders, yea against their consent, of whom as in some respect, he is a feeling member, he may lawfully make ceremonial constitutions, whereby the Church must be governed in mere Eccl. matters. Sith therefore they turn all this against the Prince, is not this as much, as when they come to debate any thing with their Clergy Governors, that then all laws & knowledge is enclosed in the closet of their breasts, both from the Prince, and from their own Clergy and Eccl. Governors? Is not this as much, as when they hold their general Counsels, or Provincial, that all the authority must come from them? For except they do allow it, it is nothing. And how far differs this from the Pope's conceit, that they also are grown so wise, that neither with counsel, nor without the Council they can err or think amiss in Eccl▪ matters? Had they a general Council of all those, that they call the faithful ministers, that composed this Learned discourse of Eccl. government? Well, yet there is here some good hope, that when our Brethr. shall have better bethought than of these things, which they mislike in the Pope, debarring the right & interest of Christian Princes: the very ugly sight thereof will be as a glass unto them, to see & mislike their own speeches and doings, in taking upon them, though not the very same, yet so like presumption and usurpation, especially so many, and so little states, as they are, far inferior to the Pope, and at the very first peeping out of them, yea before they are come to that they would have, thus to insult not only on the Bishops, and to come and set out laws, before themselves are called unto such authority: but also thus to blemish and deface the Christian Princes authority, to abase and debar it, to examine, and determine, yea to encroach upon the right and interest in these matters of all Christian Princes, and of their own most godly and gracious Sovereign. But since the sight of their own description of the Pope's presumption & usurpation, doth begin here to make them stoop somewhat to the Prince's supremacy, Our Brethr. own sayings rightly returned on themselves. let them now in good time likewise remember their own sayings, pag. 77. & 78. where speaking also of the Pope: whose intolerable presumption (say they) as we have long since banished out of this land; so we wish that no step of such pride and arrogancy, might be left behind him: namely that no Elder or Minister of the Church (mark these your own words well, good Brethren, and turn them not so off against our Bishops, that ye forget yourselves) should challenge unto himself or accept it, if it were offered unto him, These Governors & Pastors not in Script. any other authority, than that is allowed by the spirit of God, but chiefly to beware, that he usurp no authority, which is forbidden by the word of God. For wherefore do we detest the Pope, and his usurped supremacy, but because he arrogateth the same unto himself, not only without the warrant of God's word, but also clean contrary to the same? Now if the same reasons and authorities that have banished the Pope, do serve to condemn all other usurped authority, that is practised in the Church, why should not all such usurped authority be banished as well as the Pope? we can allege against the Pope and rightly, that which S. john Baptist did answer to his disciples, No man can take unto himself any thing, except it be given him from heaven, joh. 3.27. and that saying of the Apostle to the Hebrews, No man can take upon him any honour in the Church of God, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron: in somuch, that Christ himself did not give himself to be an high Priest, but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. He saith in another place, Thou art a Priest for ever, after the order of Melchizedech. Now seeing these rules are so general, that the Son of God himself was not exempted from them, but showed forth the decree wherein he was authorized: by what rule can any man retain that authority in the Church of God, that is not called thereunto by the word of God? All these words have our Brethren alleged triumphantly against the Bishops, whose authority we have seen to be thoroughly grounded on the word of God. But for their Consistory Governors, to whom they give such great authority, we have as yet after all this shuffling, Our Breath. Governors and Pastors and their elections, have no proof in God's word. conjecturing, pulling, and haling of the Scripture, of the ancient Fathers, and of the old Churches practise to found it upon, we could not yet find upon better view thereof, so much as one good and substantial proof or authority for it, or the example but of one such man. And as for their Pastors, if none be Pastors, but such as are ordained after the form by themselves set down, Pag. 125. saying: this is the right election and ordaining of Pastors grounded upon the word of God: when we come to search better in the word of God, we find not one Pastor so elected and ordained. And as for their selves, these faithful Ministers, Our Breath. unthankfulness to the Bishops. none of them neither that I can learn of, were so elected and ordained, and so, they have either no right calling nor authority at all, but are mere intruders, yea, mere lay men, or else that authority that they have, they have it of the Bishops, and of their authority that gave them authority, and now they reward them well for their labour, that would eat them up that brought them up, as did the wolf eat up the Goat of whom she sucked, or rather as God complaineth, I have nourished children. Prince's making laws. Yea, they are grown now so crank on this little authority, that they fall unto prescribing, abridging, limiting, and setting down laws, even to their sovereign Princes. Our Breath. prescribing laws to the Prince. But quo warranto, by what new authority they can do all these things, against all these states and degrees of men, in all these matters, though it be beyond my authority to examine them, yet, because it is beyond my learning, I would but gladly know it, if they can teach it. But since they begin here to relent somewhat to the Prince's supremacy, without further ripping up of former matters, except they begin again to shrink back, after their former manner: let us take them now in their good mood, and most joyfully we accept this our brethren's grant which here they yield unto, that it is not only lawful, but also necessary for Princes, Our Breath. yielding to the Prince to make laws for Ecclesiastical matters. if they will do their duty, to look to the reformation of religion, and to make laws of matters Ecclesiastical. Yea forsooth, this is another manner of matter, than we heard of any yet of our brethren's mouths, towards the reformation of these things, that it is lawful and necessary for Princes, besides their looking to it, even to make laws of Eccl. matters, so indeed did Moses, joshua, David, Solomon, and other good Princes, The examples of Princes that made such laws. before Christ's coming, and so did Constantine, Theodosius, Valentinian, Martian, Zeno, justinian, and divers others godly Princes, since Christ's coming, and such Eccl. laws have we in this Realm, of the ancient British Kings heretofore: and even so did some Kings also since the Conquest, make some such laws of Eccl. matters, for all their authority was much impugned, encroached upon, and in the end ●ppressed, by the intrusion and tyranny of the Pope, till God moved the heart of that most heroical Prince King Henry the eight, and after him, of his most virtuous son King Edward the sixth, who both of them regayned this supreme authority, and thereby made many most godly and excellent laws, for the reformation of religion, and of Eccl. matters, and so (the Lord be glorified for her) our most excellent Sovereign Lady Queen Elizabeth, (whose days God long prolong in all felicity) very dutifully, carefully, and religiously, to the uttermost of her power, hath done, and doth look to the reformation of religion, and to make laws of matters Ecclesiastical, if our Brethren would on the other side do their duty, and in thankfulness be contented with her majesties reformation of religion, and with the laws Eccl. that her Majesty hath already made, yielding their dutiful obedience, in the reverent accepting and observing of them. If now our Brethren would thus hold on, in the acknowledgement of the Prince's authority, we should soon agree, and (as they say) move no controversy neither on this, Our Breath. restraining of they granted before to Princes. nor other matters. But this confession that cometh thus in a good mood upon them on a sudden, it is too good to continue long. For straight they begin (for fear they might seem to have granted the Prince too much) to come in and pinch it on the back with new conditions and provisoes. Restrain of Princes making laws. But so (say they) that we confound not the offices of the Prince and of the Pastor. Well, if there follow no worse than this, we accept also of this exception, provided again on our part (to fall to indenting on even hands) so that they rightly understand this term of offices: for, her Majesty never attempted, nor the Statute admitteth any such attempt, of confounding these offices of the Prince and the Pastor: would God (and it were his will) our Brethren themselves were as far off, from confounding of these offices, and that they and their new governors would encroach no more upon her majesties royal office, and on the offices of her officers under her, than she or they do upon the office of the Pastors. But now, lest we should yet hover in suspense, what they mean here by these offices, that should not be confounded, they specify the same, and say: Laws made contrary to the Pastor's knowledge. For as it is not lawful for the Prince to preach, nor administer the Sacraments, no more is lawful for him to make laws in Ecclesiastical causes, contrary to the knowledge of his learned Pastors. I thought by little and little the wind would turn about, and sit ruffling again in his old place: what need these caveats here so suspiciously cast out, as though these offices, or at least some of them, were confounded, or in hazard to be confounded by this supremacy that her Majesty claimeth, or that is yielded to her? whereas neither the Statute giveth her Majesty any such authority, as whereupon any suspicion of such confusion of these offices should arise: nor her Majesty, or her father, or her brother, did ever by this title, claim or take upon them any such thing, as either to preach, or to administer sacraments, or to do any other actions properly appertaining to the Bishops, or to the Pastors, or to any other Ecclesiastical officers: neither yet did make any laws in Ecclesiastical causes, either contrary to the knowledge, or without the knowledge, and the consent also; but with the knowledge, advice, counsel and consent of her learned Pastors, Her majesties lawful making lawe● for Eccl. matters. and (so far likewise as reacheth to their Eccl. authority) with their determination, resolution and decree thereon: which thing since her Majesty hath so done, satisfying all these caveats and exceptions: how followeth it not, by our brethren's own confession, that it was and is lawful for her so to do? yea, that it was and is necessary for her Majesty, if she would do, as (God be praised) she hath done, and her duty, to look to the reformation of religion, and to make laws of matters Eccl.? and how then (if our Brethren will look to themselves, and to do their duty) is it lawful for them any more than for the Papists, to disobey, to deface, to control, to impugn, to violate, to alter the laws in Ecclesiastical matters that her Majesty hath thus made? If they think she made them contrary to the knowledge of her learned Pastors, because they take it that it is contrary to their knowledge, Her majesties laws not made contrary to the Pastor's knowledge. if they were not Pastors at all when her Majesty made these laws: or if that they which be Pastors now, either be not, or renounce to be such Pastors, and of such ordaining, Princess laws in Eccl. matters. as her Majesty, and the Laws of the Realm, acknowledge to be Pastors: or if these our Brethren be no● Pastors of such learning and knowledge as they pretend, nor of any such number or estimation, as the other learned Pastors in her majesties dominions are, is she bound to take such knowledge of them, that when all those whom she acknowledgeth to be her lawful Pastors, both the most and most esteemed, both the best and best learned of them, have consulted upon, and consented unto, have agreed upon, and decreed also the same laws, that yet it shall not be lawful to her Majesty, (because of the dissent of a few other, whom she knoweth not to be her Pastors) to make any laws at all of Ecclesiastical matters, or to look to the reformation of religion? why might not the Papists use this reason, The Papists used the selfsame reason that our Breath. do against the Prince's laws. as well as our Brethren, to debar her majesties right and authority herein? yea, did not they use the selfsame reason, pleading, that they were the Pastors of the Realm, and so her majesties Pastors also, and that she could not look to the reformation of Religion, nor make laws of matters Ecclesiastical, contrary to their knowledge and consenting? for at her majesties first entry into her reign, as she carefully looked (before all other things) to the reformation of Religion, and to make godly laws of Ecclesiastical matters, so the Popish Pastors, which then were most in number, and greatest in power, and were in duty her Pastors also, if they had performed their duty dutifully, which they did not: neither can we deny, but that they, or many of them, were learned also, if they had had grace answerable to learning, and had submitted their learning to truth, and not detained others in blindness of ignorance, to maintain their errors: was it not lawful therefore unto her Majesty, to look to the reformation of religion, Her majesties laws against the Papists errors. and to make laws of matters Ecclesiastical, because it was contrary to their acknowledging, and to their consenting? yes, she performed all this, mawger their withstanding, and she did well, yea, most excellent well in her so doing: not yet (as the Papists cried out, and still cry) that she did contrary to the knowledge of her learned Pastors, for they accounted none to be learned Pastors, nor at all to be Pastors, but themselves. But her Majesty did these things, with the consent of those that were both Pastors, and her Pastors too, and her learned Pastors: and even by learning it was tried, and by the better learning of her better learned Pastors, vicit veritas, the truth had the victory, and Popery was confounded. And so her Majesty made her laws of Ecclesiastical matters, and reformation of Religion, with the consent of her learned Pastors, and established them with the approbation and authority of all the states of the Realm and Church of England, and hath (God be praised) happily continued, till now of late, (as though we had not enough to do with the continual maligning, slanders, and practices of the Popish Pastors, and their adherents) we fall out unhappily among ourselves: and as her majesties godly and learned Pastors joined then with her Majesty, against the Popish Pastors, in displacing them, with all their errors, and superstitious Ecclesiastical laws, and reformed religion, and made these laws Ecclesiastical that are now as yet in force: Our Breath. dealing against her majesties laws in Ecclesiastical matters. so a new kind of Pastors begin a new stur, and are weary of these Ecclesiastical laws, and of this reformation, and of all these Pastors: calling themselves the faithful Ministers that seek the reformation of the Church of England, and would try these matters again by learning, and so (among other their books & writings thereon) have now at length set forth to all the realm, this learned discourse of Ecclesiastical government: and her Majesty must now revoke all the reformation and Ecclesiastical laws, that she hath then and since made with her learned Pastors that then were, and begin afresh, both to turn out all those Pastors, for no right ordained Pastors, and to make new laws of Ecclesiastical matters, and a new reformation with their consents, that say they be now her learned Pastors, and on these conditions they will admit her title of supremacy, On what conditions our brethren will admit her majesties supremacy. and her authority to do these things, or else not. If her Majesty now shall hear of this, what may she think thereon? how may she comfort herself, and warrant her actions in all things that she hath done already? for if they were well done, they may well continue: if they may not well continue, but must be undone, it is an argument they were not well done. But her Majesty, though this be no small grief unto her, to have all her doings thus ripped up again, by her own subjects, and professors of the same Gospel that she professeth: and though it be no small triumph to the adversaries of the Gospel, and argument for them to descant upon against her Majesty, and against both our Brethren and us, and all true Protestants: yet, let not her most excellent Majesty be disinayed hereat (though indeed it be a great corsie) but when her Majesty looketh on the grounds of the matter, and not on the unthankfulness and mutability of men, Her majesties comfort against these dealings. and lifteth up her eyes to heaven, from whence cometh her salvation, how mightily God hath blessed and defended her, and prospered these things under her hands, her Majesty shall receive a greater comfort, and confirmation against all the treasonable practices of those her deadly adversaries of the one party, and all the dangerous innovations of these her overzealous subjects on the other party, and repress them both in justice and mercy, with safe continuance and good success (God willing) of all her majesties reformation and laws that she hath made of Ecclesiastical matters hitherto, with the knowledge and consent of those that then were, or yet are her learned Pastors. And except these our new Pastors, that would be, have any better learning, not yet revealed, than is contained in this their learned discourse: the learned Pastors that are now in place, and in Pastoral authority, will (by God's grace) maintain and defend by truth and sound learning, their authorities, and the Ecclesiastical laws that her Majesty hath made with their knowledge & consents, welynough I warrant them. Our Pastor's defence of her majesties authority and laws against these new Pastors And let our Brethren, to begin withal, look to this point better. For sith they grant it is her majesties authority to make Laws of Eccl. matters, so that she take from the Pastor none of these 3. offices, Preaching, Ministering the Sacraments, nor the Eccl. Government from them: the Queen's Majesty having made her Laws without doing any of these three things, nor having taken from the Pastor the third, any more than the two first: Let them look to it, both how they disobey the Laws she hath made, and how they cast forth such suspicious slanders on her Majesty, as though in making her Laws she did take the Pastor's Ecclesiastical government from him. The learned disc. pa. 141. By this it appeareth, how far it is lawful for Princes to intermeddle with causes Ecclesiastical: namely, that it is the chiefest point of their duty, to have special regard that God may be glorified in their dominion, and therefore they ought to make civil Laws, to bind the people unto the Confession of the true faith, and the right administering and receiving of the sacraments, and to all Ecclesiastical orders, that they being instructed by the word of God, through the ministery of the preaching of the same, shall understand to be profitable for edifying of the Church of Christ, and the advancement of the glory of God. If any shall offend against the Laws, whether he be a Preacher or hearer, besides the Ecclesiastical censure, which he should not escape, he is also to be punished in body by the civil Magistrate. They have not yet, either by these, or by aught else before spoken, made it appear, Bridges how far it is lawful for Princes to intermeddle with causes ecclesiastical. And how their supreme authority therein (which is far higher than only intermeddling) stretcheth. As for the things which here (as a recapitulation) they set down: are nothing so much as they granted before. For although they say, that it is the chiefest point of their duty to have especial regard, that God may be glorified in their Dominion: yet that doth not show what especial authority they have therein, and how far forth they have it▪ If they say, that they do this in the conclusion following these words: And therefore they ought to make civil Laws, All our Br. grant of making laws of Eccl. matters, is turned only to civil laws. to bind the people unto the Confession of the true faith, and the right administering and receiving of the Sacraments, and to all Eccl. orders. What have they granted here to her Majesty, but the only making of civil Laws? and thus the conclusion (when all comes to all) is not so much, as that they granted before, or at least, made us a show thereof. And yet they made to great dainty in the grant thereof, with so many exceptions: which grant notwithstanding we gladly accepted at their hands, The ancient Princes intermeddling. and made much of it: that it is not only lawful, but also necessary for princes, if they will do their duty, to look to the reformation of religion, and to make laws of Ecclesiastical matters, so that we confound not the offices of the Prince and the Pastor. Hear every man that meaneth no subtlety, would strait have thought, that as the pastor hath some part of looking to the reformation of religion, and of making Laws of matters Ecclesiastical, pertaining to the office of a pastor, distinct from the office of a prince: so the prince also hath some parts of looking to the reformation of religion, & of making laws of matters Eccl. pertaining to the office of a prince, distinct from the office of a pastor. And that, although the parts of either of their offices be distinct, yet in the very looking to that reformation of Religion, and to the very making of those Laws of matters Ecclesiastical, they both of them dointermeddle, which is the term that their selves even here do use. But see now what a fair gift our Brethren have here granted. It is lawful and necessary for Princes to make Laws of matters Ecclesiastical. What Laws? Forsooth, they ought to make civil laws, to bind the people unto the confession of true faith, and the right administering of the Sacraments, and to all Ecclesiastical orders. Yea forsooth, in this last and third point, lieth chiefly the question, of making laws. What intermeddling in Eccl. matters our Br. allow to Princes. But have they any stroke in making laws of any those Eccl. orders? No, but only that they being instructed by the word of God, through the ministry of the preaching of the same, shall understand to be profitable to the edifying of the Church, and the advancement of the glory of God, should bind the people to them. What? should they make civil laws, to bind the people to them, before that they be made laws and orders Ecclesiastical? or how can they be made laws and orders Ecclesiastical? doth the scripture make all the laws and orders Ecclesiastical that are made? or is the ministery of the preaching of the same, a sufficient instruction for the Prince, to take them for Ecclesiastical laws, because they put him to understand, that they be profitable for edifying the Church of Christ, and advancement of the glory of God? so that, what they shall say as profitable héereunto, that is a law, or he must so take it? or else, still I demand, who had the authority to make those laws and orders Ecclesiastical? except they shall say, they were all made before there were any christian Princes, The ancient Princes intermeddling. which was their former refuge. Albeit, Moses, joshua, David, Solomon, etc. will overreach that shift, for they had a stroke even in the very making of Ecclesiastical laws and orders themselves, and not only in the making of civil laws for Ecclesiastical laws and orders, to bind the people unto them: and so had also divers Christian Princes since Christ's time: The Popes, and our brethren's allowance to Princes. many of whose laws, are Ecclesiastical laws themselves, and Canons of the Church in the Canon law, and not only civil laws made, to bind the people to keep the Canon laws, or Ecclesiastical orders: and such also are divers laws of the ancient British and English Kings in this Realm, and the Epistle of Eleutherius himself (if it be his) giveth Lucius no less authority. But is this all that our Brethren will allow to Christian Princes, and no further authority than this? yes: If any shall offend against the laws, whether he be Preacher, Our Breath. allowance to Princes for bodily punishments. or hearer; beside the Ecclesiastical censure, which he should not escape, he is also to be punished in body by the civil Magistrate. And is this again all that we shall get more than before we got, for the supreme authority of the Christian Prince in Ecclesiastical matters? and what more is here granted to the Prince, than the very Papists, yea, than the Pope himself (as proud and injurious to Princes as he is) will grant unto them? to make civil laws for the defence of the laws Ecclesiastical, that he and his Clergy only do make, making the Princes to be the only punishers, and as it were, their executioners of justice upon them, The Pope's allowance to Christian Princes. that shall offend against their laws. This they can well allow and like, that Princes should have authority to punish the offender in body, besides the Ecclesiastical censure, which the offender shall not escape at their hands: and for this cause they call the Emperor the Church's advocate, and the Pope himself yielded this title to King Henry the eight, to be called the defender of the faith, and will our Brethren yield no better supremacy, nor greater authority to christian Princes, and so to her Majesty, than the Papists, and the very Pope will offer to yield her, so that her Majesty will but make civil laws to bind the people to their laws, and Ecclesiastical orders, that the Pope and his Clergy shall make, and that if any shall offend in body against his laws, whether he be Preacher or hearer, besides the Ecclesiastical censure, which he should not escape, he is also to be punished in body by the civil Magistrate? all this doth the Pope offer to all the Princes in their dominions, that have not cast off the yoke of his subjection, but live in greatest servitude under him, and yet our new Pastors make all this mincing, to grant but thus much authority at length unto their Princes. But now, if they will bear so hard a hand, that we shall get no more authority for the Prince, and so, for her Majesty, but bare and hardly this, which would make a man to marvel, that they which so often talk of her majesties supreme government in Ecclesiastical causes, have now brought it from a supremacy, to such an inferiority, that the Pope will offer as much authority to Princes, to maintain his errors, as these Pastors will offer to maintain the Gospel: yet I marvel the less, considering all things: for they have great cause to be afraid, to grant the Prince but thus much. For, The ancient Prince's laws. have the Prince but this authority over all the persons, that if any shall offend against the laws and orders Ecclesiastical, or against the Prince's civil laws, made to bind the people to them, whether he be Preacher, or hearer, Our Brethren incur bodily punishment by their own grant. besides the Ecclesiastical censure which he should not escape, that he is also to be punished in body, by the civil Magistrate. If this be so, than it stands our Brethren upon to take great heed, for howsoever they shall despise our Prelates Ecclesiastical censure, how will they escape this bodily punishment? Yea, how do they not pronounce this sentence thereof against themselves? do they think that they offend not her majesties laws, that thus deface them, break them, and write against them? or do they think they be not her majesties Laws, but the Churches, or the Clergies? Did not her majesties approbation of them, quicken & confirm them to become Laws? and hath she made no other civil Laws also, with the whole authority of the Realm, to establish those Laws? Or do they think her majesties Laws to be no Laws, neither Ecclesiastical, nor yet Civil? so they may indeed make a wise match, and find, that not only her majesties Laws be L●wes, and good and lawful laws also, but that her punishments be punishments, and that just and severe punishments too. But her Majesty is most merciful, and I hope they will be more dutiful, and bethink themselves better on these things. This we see that all Christian Emperors observed, The learned disc. pa. 141. & 142 that when any controversy arose, either of doctrine, or of order and ceremonies, they commanded the Clergy to consult and determine thereof, according to the Scripture, who assembling together in counsel, obeyed their commandment: their conclusion then by the authority of the Emperor, was commanded every where to be observed, and those that impugned it, to be punished. Bridges The same order we read to be observed by the Christian Kings of France and Spain, yea, The examples of the ancient Christian Princes authority. The Prince's commanded the Clergy to consult and determine on the truth of controversies in doctrine, and ceremonies. of this our Bryttannie also, in governing their Ecclesiastical state by the advice of the Clergy of their dominion. Her Majesty taketh not on her, nor desireth any more, neither do we acknowledge any less authority in her, than had the ancient Christian Emperors, Constantine, Theodosius, Valentinian, Martianus, Honorius, Arcadius, justinian, etc. And we grant, that all Christian Emperors observed this, that when any controversy arose, either of doctrine or of order and ceremonies (if the importance of that controversy did so require) they commanded the Clergy to consult and to determine thereof, according to the Scripture: this is most true, and it was well done of them. Howbeit, they their selves made many good Ecclesiastical laws and sanctions, besides those which they confirmed with their supreme authority, that by occasion of great controversies, were consulted upon, The emperors dealing. and determined in general or provincial Counsels. And yet even in those Counsels, the Emperor did not only command the Clergy to consult and determine of the controversies, either of doctrine, or of order and ceremonies: and when the Clergy had consulted upon, and determined the same, and had declared their determination to the Emperor, than he allowed it, and commanded, that every where it should be observed, and those that impugned it, to be punished: for this indeed were no more, than (as I said before) the very Pope himself (save for the commanding of him and them) could be content the Emperor yet should do, so that he would intermeddle nothing in the matters themselves that are in controversy, but let him and his Clergy alone, with the consulting and determining of all the controversies, and the Emperor only to allow of their Decree, and to command all his subjects, whether they be Preachers, or hearers, to observe the same, and to punish those that do impugn it. But, (that which the Pope can in no wise abide) the Emperor went further than all this cometh to: The emperors doings in the Coun●els. for, beside that he did all those things in the Counsels, which we have before declared, though he had also Precedents, whom he appointed according as he thought meet, to govern the Counsel, and all the order and actions thereof: yet now and then, (as the importance of the matter required, and other affairs hindered him not,) he sat himself in the Counsel among them, debated and consulted on the matters with them, and joined also with them even in the determination of the matters themselves. And that this is true, the Emperor Constantine's own words do witness of his own doings, in the most famous Nicene Council, and that both in the chiefest controversy of our faith, and also in that great controversy of the order and ceremony of keeping Easter day, after the order that we now keep it: whereof Constantine writing his Epistle unto all Churches, as appeareth in Socrates' history, lib. 1. cap. 6. he sayeth on this wise. Socrates lib. 1. cap. 6. When as I perceived by the prosperous and flourishing estate of the common weal, The Emperors' Epistle to the Bishop for the keeping of Easter day. how greatly we are beholden to the goodness of Almighty God, conferred upon us, I judged that above all things it behoved me of duty to foresee, that in the most holy and sacred assemblies of the Catholic Church under heaven, there should one faith, sincere love and charity, uniform consent and agreement, touching the religion and service of Almighty God, inviolably be retained, but sithence that the same could by no other means be settled in sure and firm place, except all the Bishops, or the greatest part of them, had assembled together, and that every one had given his judgement of the matters pertaining to the most holy religion: when as for the same cause, so great an assembly as possibly could be made, was gathered together, I myself even as one of your number, was present together with you: The Emperors own● confession of his dealing in the Nicene Counsel. for neither did I refuse to join myself with you in that ministery, of which doing, I conceive great joy: and so far were all the matters exquisitely sought out, until the sentence grateful and acceptable unto God, for the concord and consent of men's minds, was openly pronounced, in so much, that nothing at all remaineth hereafter, that may tend to discord, or controversy of the faith. When as at that time it was disputed upon concerning the feast day of Eeaster, it was thought meet by the common sentence of all, that all men every where, should celebrate the same upon one and the selfsame day: for what could be better or more honourable, than that this feast, by which we have the hope of Immortality set forth unto us, should be continually kept of all men after one manner and order? etc. And so he entereth into many excellent persuasions to the Churches, to move them to forsake the jews order, and to join all in observing the order that he with the Counsel had decreed. But (saith he) if these things had not been set forth by me, yet were it your wisdoms to employ your diligence, and with prayers to wish, that for no manner of cause, ye should be compelled to intermingle the integrity of your minds, with the customs of wicked men. And even as Constantine the great, and most godly Emperor, joined thus with ●he Bishops in these Ecclesiastical causes, and in many other, so did the other godly Emperors in all the approved general Counsels: if they were not present themselves, they appointed Deputies, and those civil Magistrates also, The doings of the emperors deputies i● the Counsels. that now and then improved all the whole Counsels Decrees: as in the Counsel of Chalcedone, when all the Counsel had decreed Bassianus Bishop of Ephesus, to be restored, the judges appointed by the Emperor Martian, rejected that sentence, and appointed them to choose another, whose commandment therein they obeyed. And many times, the Emperor himself nameth the Bishops, and appointeth the Counsel to ordain them, as Theodosius did at the second universal Counsel holden at Constantinople, when they could not agree in the election of the Bishop of Constantinople, they delivered up a number of names for him to choose one, The Emp●rour his self appointeth the Bishop of Constantinople. and he appointed Nectarius to be Bishop: which Emperor also, when he had called before him a number of Heretics, by the council and advice of Nectarius, who also was counseled thereunto Sisinius the Emperor in the Counsel reasoned with them severally, demanding of them all whether they allowed not of such and such godly and famous Fathers: whom when they extolled, and said that he allowed of them, be ●●●●●●ded if they would stand to their opinions in those controversies: whereat, when they began to vary and stagger, The Emperor his self disputeth with Heretics in the Counsel. The manner of the emperors approving the confession of the true believers. The bishops letters desiring the Emperor to ratify their decrees. he willed them every one severally, to bring to him a copy of their faith in writing, and then he would deliberate and determine among them all, which he would accept and follow: whereupon, drawing out the copies thereof, they presented them all before the Emperor: who having first made his prayers to God, and afterward perusing and deliberating of their copies, he approved only the right and true faith of the consubstantiation, (or jointsubstantiation of the son with the father) and tore all the other copies in pieces before their faces, Socrates, lib. 5. cap. 10. And when in the General Counsel at Constantinople, they had concluded all their Decrees, all the whole Counsel write thus unto the Emperor: Sithence the time of our assembly at Constantinople by your godly commandment, we have renewed concord amongst ourselves, and have prescribed certain Canons, which we have annexed unto this our writing: we beseech therefore your clemency, to command the decree of the Counsel to be established by the letters of your holiness, and that ye will confirm it: and as you have honoured the Church by the letters wherewith you have called us together, so ye would also vouchsafe to ratify the final conclusion of the decrees with your own sentence and seal. So that the Emperor (yea though he were absent) had the ratification, or the improving of all the synodal acts, as Theodosius the younger writeth to the first Ephesine Counsel: The Emperor rati●yeth or rejecteth all the acts of the Counsel. we allow of the condemnation of Nestorius, Cyrillus and Memnon: the other acts and condemnations which you have made, we disallow. Which Emperor also sent to be his Deputy in the Counsel at Constantinople, about Eutyches controversies, a noble man of his Court Florentius, writing thus unto them: We will that he shall be present in your Synod, because the controversy is of the faith: The emperors Deputies doing in the Counsel. which Florentius sitting with the Bishops, examined Eutyches in the points of his faith, and pronounced also his own determination on the controversy, saying: He which doth not believe that in Christ there be two natures, doth not believe aright. And in the cause against Dioscorus, Eusebius, Bishop of Dorolanu, writeth unto the Emperor Martian (whose Supplication is set down in the Chalcedon Counsel, Act. 2. in these words: We beseech your clemency, that you will command him to answer to the matters that we shall object against him, wherein, we will prove him to be out of the Catholic faith, defending heresies full of ungodliness. Wherefore we beseech you, to direct your holy and honourable commandment, The Empress, and the Emperor. to the holy and universal council of the most religious Bishops, to examine the cause betwixt us and Dioscorus, and to make relation of all things that are done, to be judged as shall seem good to your clemency. The Emperor requested to command the Bishop to examine the controversies, and to have them referred to him as judge. Thus do the Bishops not only desire the Emperor to command the Counsel to examine the matter, being a matter mere Ecclesiastical, and of faith, but also, to command the Counsel to make relation of all their doings to the Emperor, and the Emperor (even as it should seem good to him) to be the judge, and final determiner of the controversy. Now upon this occasion, this Emperor Marcianus, and Valentinian, with the Empress Pulcheria, (that also being a maiden, had the government of the Empire, and chose Martian to be Emperor in government of the same, with Valentinian and her, The Empress together with the Emperor, summoneth the general Counsel. ) summoned a Counsel to be holden first at Nice: whether, when the Bishops were assembled, but the Emperors could not come, they adjourned the same to Chalcedon, appointing to be the judges of the Counsel 24. noble men. And afterward, when Martian, with Pulcheria, coming thither, were entered into the Counsel, he prescribeth both to the Bishops and to the judges, an order how they should proceed, which order they following, it is set down in the first Act of this Counsel, that, The emperors presumption of the proceeding in the Counsel. when the judges and Senate had duly examined the causes, they gave sentence to depose Dioscorus, and others, so that, this their judgement should seem good to the Emperor, to whom they referred the whole matter. In which Counsel, when they came to the setting down of an uniform Decree of the christian faith, conformable to the first Nicen Counsel, The Emperor and Empress in th● Counsel▪ and the cause of their coming thither. after much trouble that the judges & the Emperors had to appease their disorders, by appointing committees, to whose resolution, when all the Counsel had consented, this being done, the Emperor, with Pulcheria the maiden Empress, entereth again into the Counsel, and after he had declared the cause of his calling the Counsel, and of his personal coming into the same, to be for none other end, than to confirm the faith, and to remove for ever hereafter, all dissension in religion: when the public Notary of the Counsel had humbly demanded, if it pleased him to hear the Counsels definition, the Emperor having willed him to recite it openly, which done, ask of them if every man consented thereunto, when with great acclamations and praises of him, they answered, that it was the consents of them all, than he confirmeth the same, and setteth out a Statute thereupon. As for particular laws and orders Eccl. that both he and divers other Emperors, especially justinian, made, I refer them to the declaration of the civil & Canon Lawyers. There is almost no Church matter, whereof the Emperors, namely justinian, justinian. hath not some Ecclesiastical constitution or other on the same: which justinian also, The emperors dealings. in the Counsel that he held at Constantinople, where he made the Archb. Mennas' Precedent: Mennas concluding the Counsel, saith, that none of those things that are to be moved in the Church, aught to be done without the Princes will and commandment. Thus as we see that the Emperors had this authority in Eccl. matters, so, grant this to be lawful in them, and this lawfulness stretcheth to all Christian Princes in their dominions. And therefore, where our Brethren say, the same order we read also to be observed by the christian Kings of France, and Spain, yea, of this our Brittany also, in governing their Eccl. state by the advice of the Clergy of their dominion: it was the same order indeed that was observed of these Emperors, which these Kings also did observe: and because it was the same, therefore was it not the same that our Brethren say it was, but a far greater authority and intermeddling; and not only to allow that, that the Clergy had determined, and to punish them that impugned those orders, but also to deal so farre-foorth in joining with the Clergy, for the very making of Ecclesiastical laws, as the foresaid Emperors had before done, and for a while after did still continue: as we read of Constantine Pogonatus, Constantinus Pogonatus. who called together the Bishops to a general Counsel at Constantinople, against the Monothelits, sitting as Precedent with his Nobles in the same Counsel, where the Deputy for the Bishop of Rome among other also agreed, The Bishop of Rome's obedience to the Emperor in the Counsel. and acknowledged the Sea of Rome to be subject unto him, and humbly besought the Emperor, to command those that took part with the Bishop of Constantinople, to show from whence they received their new speeches, and erroneous opinions: whereupon, the Emperor commandeth Macarius, Bishop of Antioch, to answer, and in the next Session, he reasoneth himself with Macarius: and in the third action, when the Bishop of Rome's Legate, being there but a party plaintise, had espied forgery in the synodal books that were read, of the fift general Counsel: the judges (though lay men) examined and found out the same by the emperors commandment: and when the Bishop of Constantinople besought the Emperor, The Bishop of Rome's obedience to the Emperor. that the letters of Agatho Bishop of Rome might also be read, the Emperor granted thereunto. In which letters, the Bishop of Rome showeth his obedience to the Emperor, for the effectual accomplishing of his precepts, in sending of meet persons to that Counsel, excusing himself, The Bishop of Rome's confession that the Emperor is Christ's Vicar in earth, etc. that he could do it no sooner, by reason of the great circuit of his Province: protesting withal, that he sendeth his Legates, even for the dutiful obedience that he oweth to the Emperor. And after the confession of his faith in the controversy, he acknowledgeth the Emperor to occupy here in earth the place and zeal of jesus Christ, and that he ought to give the right judgement for the evangelical & Apostolical truth. Now after the Emperor had thus sitten his self in the examining and discussing of divers actions & sessions in that Counsel, (as at large in the discourse thereof appeareth) and after his departure, his deputes, in the end when all was done, & Macarius deposed, and the choosing of another Archbishop in his place referred to the emperors pleasure, and that the whole Synod offered up to the Emperor their definition of the controversy, subscribed with all their hands, The Emperor confirmeth the Counsel's definition, with his total assent. and be séeching him to examine and confirm the same: the Emperor having perused it, and demanding whether it were their uniform consent, upon their confessions thereof, the Emperor answereth: we have read this definition, and we also do give our consent thereto. And even as much as all this cometh to, we read of the christian Kings both of France, and Spain, The french King's government of the Ecclesiastical state. and of this our Britain also, in governing their Eccl. state, which are the three kingdoms that our Brethren here specify. Clodoveus even the first Christian King of France in the Counsel that he called and held at Aurelia, when he had propounded matters for the Counsel to consult and determine upon, Clodoveus in the Counsel at Orleans. Guntranus in the Counsel of Matiscone. they obeying the King's commandment, refer again their conclusions to the King's judgement. And this authority doth Gunthranus the French King declare, in his Edict set forth in the Counsel of Matiscone, concerning the Prince's office, in causing his people to be trained up in true Religion, and godly discipline, protesting, this charge is of God committed unto him: wherein also he declareth unto the Bishops their office, and concludeth, that it was he, which caused the Decrees to be made, that were determined upon in that Counsel, touching discipline and ceremonies to be defined, he confirming the same by his Edict thereon. Charlemagne likewise (as Nauclerus showeth) in a Counsel that he called, sitting with many of his Nobles in the Counsel, not only saith, he called the same, that they should give him good advice, how the law of God, and the Church's Religion should be restored: but he declareth also, what ordinances he together with them had made to thateffect. We did (saith he) ordain Bishops throughout the Cities, The King had the appointing of the Bishops. by the counsel of the Priests, and of my Noblemen, and we did constitute Bonifacius to be the Archb. over them. We have also decreed a Synod to be called together every year, that the Decrees of the Canons, and laws of the Church, may in our presence be reform, etc. We have degraded the false Priests, Deacons and Clerks, being adulterers, The King's decree for annual Synods. and fornicators, and have driven them to penance. We have utterly forbidden all manner of hunting and hawking to the Clergy. We also decree, that every Priest dwelling in the Diocese, be subject unto his own Bishop, and that always in Lent he make an account, The K●ngs within the Church's discipline. and show to the Bishop the manner and order of his ministery, etc. In like manner, Charles the great calling a Synod at Arles, when they had decreed all their matters, The french kings dealings. they decree this withal, that all their doings should be presented to Charles the great, that where any defects are in their Decrees, The Counsel refer all their Decrees to the amending of the Prince. he would supply the same by his wisdom, and if any thing be otherwise than well, that he would amend it by hi● judgement, and that which is well, he would ratify and assist it by his authority. Where they say in the 45. Canon, that for the amending of all those abuses which the Counsel found to be in Eccl. matters, the king's mind must be known. The like they do at the Counsel which he called at Cabellinum, especially in the Counsel that he held at Mentz, where the Counsel craveth his aid and confirmation of such Articles as they had agreed upon, so that he judge them worthy to be confirmed, beseeching him to cause that to be amended, that is found to be worthy of amendment. Which Counsel also giveth God thanks, that he had given unto his Church a Governor, godly and devout in his service, who in his time opening the fountain of godly wisdom, doth continually feed the sheep of Christ with holy food, The Edict of Charles the great, to the Bishops and Pastors of Churches. & instructeth them with divine knowledge, etc. And in his Edicts, set out not only to the Laity, but to the Clergy, he writeth thus: Charles by the grace of God, King and Governor of the Kingdom of France, etc. Wherefore I thought good to move you, O ye Pastors of Christ's Churches, ye leaders of his flock, and clear lights of the world, that ye would travail with vigilant care, and diligent admonition to guide God's people, The King's commissioners joined with the Bishops for the Church's discipline. through the Pastures of eternal life, etc. Therefore they are with earnest zeal to be admonished and exhorted yea, to be compelled to keep themselves in a sure faith & reasonable continuance, within and under the rules of the Fathers. In the which work and travel, wit ye right well, that our industry shall work● with you. For the which cause, we have also addressed unto you our messengers, The King taking upon him the correction of Eccl. ma●ters, is no presumption. which by our authority, shall with you amend and correct those things that are to be amended: and therefore, we have also added such Canonical constitutions, as to us were thought to be most necessary. Let none judge this to be presumption, that we take upon us to amend that which is amiss, to cut off that which is superfluous. For we read in the books of the Kings, how the holy King josias traveled, in going about the circuits of his Kingdom, correcting and admonishing his people, The Christian Kings ought to follow the examples of the good Kings in the old Testament. to reduce the whole Kingdom unto the true religion and service of God. I speak not this, to make myself equal to him in holiness, but because we ought always to follow the examples of the holy Kings, and so much as we can, we are bound of necessity, to bring the people to follow a virtuous life, to the praise and glory of our Lord jesus Christ. And so he entereth into his rules & exhortations to the B. and Priests, how they should guide their Dioceses and Churches both by reading and preaching, and the Bishops to send forth the Priests to preach. It belongeth (saith he) unto your office, O ye Pastors & guides of God's churches to send forth through out your Dioceses Priests to preach unto the people, and to see that they preach rightly and honestly, The princes charge for preaching. that ye do not suffer new things that are not canonical, but forged of their own mind, & not according to the holy scriptures to be preached unto the people, yea you your own selves preach the things that are true and honest, and that lead unto everlasting life. And instruct ye other that they do the same, etc. Yea Alcuinus in his preface of his treatise on the trinity, which he being his Chaplain dedicated unto this French king, Alcuinus in praefas. lib. de Trinitate. being then also made Emperor, maketh the Prince to have so far authority above all other civil persons in Ecclesiast. matters, that he calleth him also a Preacher, and saith, that he hath, as it were a priestly office in these things. And lest (saith he) I should seem not to help and further your preaching of the faith, I have directed and dedicated unto you this book, thinking no gift so convenient and worthy to be presented unto you: Of the princes preaching and priestly power. seeing that all know this most plainly that the Prince of the people ought of necessity to know all things, and to preach the things that please God. Neither doth it pertain to any man to know better or more things than it doth to an Emperor, whose doctrine ought to profit all the subjects etc. All the faithful have great cause to rejoice of your godliness, seeing that you have a Priestly power, (as it is meet so to be) in the preaching of God's word, a perfect knowledge in the Catholic faith, and a most holy devotion to men's salvation. This authority and interest even in the chiefest Eccl. matters doth that famous Alcuinus a countryman of our own, Ludonicus pius his authority and dealing in Eccl. matters. acknowledge unto the Christian Prince. And the like doth this emperors son jews take upon him, and it was yielded unto him, both in the Council that he called at Aquisgrave in Germany, and afterward in Italy at Ticinum: where he giving in charge to the Bishops and Council, to consult among other matters concerning the conversation of the Bishops, the Priests, and other Eccl. persons, of their doctrine and preaching to the people, of writing out of books, etc. He concludeth, I am very much desirous to know and covet to reform them according to Gods will, and your holy advise, in such sort that neither I be found reprovable in the sight of God, neither you nor the people incur the wrathful indignation of God for these things. How this may be searched, found out & brought to perfection, that I commit to be treated on by you, Ludovicus charge to the Bishop. and so to be declared unto me. The lesser matters, which in general touch all, but that touch some in special, and need reformation, I will that ye make enquiry also of them, The kings of spains dealings. and make relation thereof unto me. Whereby we see, that these Prince's had the chief authority in those Councils, and both made Ecclesiastical laws themselves with the Bishop's advise and counsel, The examples of the Christian Princes authority in the kings of Spain. and also all the Bishop's decrees and determinations depended on the Princes ratifying. This than was the order, and not that only which our Brethren here say, we read to be observed by the Christian Kings of France. And even as much do we read to be observed by the Christian kings of Spain: by whose authority▪ the first, second & third Council at Brachara were called and many points for doctrine and discipline disposed. After whom Richaredus commanded a Council to be assembled and holden at Toledo, Richaredus in the Council at Toledo. where the king sitting among the Bishops, declareth unto them how he called them together that he might by the common consultation in the Synod repair and make a new form of Eccl. discipline which had been long time hindered by Arianisme The which impediment (saith he) it hath pleased God to put away by my means, whereupon he exhorteth them to give God thanks for his so doing, and admonisheth them before they enter into the consultation, to fast and pray to God, that he would vouchsafe to open unto them a true order of discipline. And so after a three days fast appointed unto them, the Synod beginning to enter into consultation, the king cometh in with his Queen and nobles, and sitteth amongst them, and causeth the confession of his faith, which he had written and subscribed with his and the queens hands, to be publicly read before them, containing withal, his care & industry in these matters. For the which doing the Council reacknowledgeth the king to deserve the reward of an Apostle, because he had performed the office of an Apostle. And when all the nobility had given up also their confessions in writing and subscribed openly unto them, The kings performing the office of an Apostle. than the king commanded the Synod to go in hand with the repairing and establishing some form of eccl. discipline, saying, that the care of a king ought to stretch forth itself, & not to cease till he have brought the subjects to a full knowledge & perfect age in Christ. The care, charge, and auth. of the Prince for discipline. And as a king ought to bend all his power & authority, to repress the insolency of the evil, and to nourish the common peace & tranquility: even so ought he much more to study, to labour, and be careful, not only to bring his subjects from errors & false religion▪ but also to see them instructed, The kings decree for the people's confession of their faith at the communion. taught & trained up in the truth of the clear light. And hereupon by this his authority, he maketh a decree, & commandeth the Bishops to see it put in execution, that every time at the receiving of the communion, all the people together, do distinctly with a loud voice recite the Nicene creed. Which being done, & that the Synod had consulted about the orders of their discipline, & exhibited the same unto the king: he considering the same, ratifieth and confirmeth all their doings. The Spanish king's dealings. And first he himself, and after him all the Synod, subscribeth to those orders. The like we read in the Council of diverse kings of Spain afterwards. Sisenandus, that called the fourth Council of Toledo. The doings of diverse kings of Spain in Counsels & eccl. matters Chintillanus, that called the 5. and 6. Chinaswindus, that called the seventh, Reccessinuthus, that called the 8.9. and 10. Counsels at Toledo. Bamba, that called the 12. & 13. Egita, that called the 14.15. and 16. all which kings of Spain, as they summoned the Councils their selves, and commanded th● Bishops to assemble, so they sat in the Counsels with them, and when the Counsels had consulted and agreed upon any Ecclesiastical matters, th●y offered the same to the Prince to be ratified and confirmed. This authority had the Christian kings of Spain, not only in governing of all the eccl. persons, but in making together with the Bishops▪ and in ratifying and confirming all their synodal decrees and constitutions of Eccl. matters. And no less authority had the kings of this our Britanny also in governing their Eccl. state, by the advise of the Clergy of their dominion. The authority and dealings of the ancient kings in this our Britanny. For proof whereof, we have seen the Bishop. of Rome's own letter to king Lucius, that is reputed to be the first Christian king of Brytannie. Who when he wrote to Eleutherius then Bishop of Rome, to have the Roman and the Imperial laws to use them in his kingdom: the Bishop returneth him this answer, (as we have seen:) those laws we may disprove, but not the laws of God. Eleutherius acknowledgement of t●e kings authority in this Realm. You have received lately (through the goodness of God in your kingdom, the faith and law of Christ. You have there in your kingdom both the testaments: out of them, (by God's grace and the advise of your Realm) take a jaw, and thereby patiently govern your kingdom. You are in your kingdom the Vicar of God, etc. In which words he plainly confesseth, that the Christian kings authority stretcheth even to the very making and ordaining of Ecclesiast. laws with the advise of the Realm, and so withal of the Clergy. And that thi● supreme authority of th● king was so practised in this land, not only by Lucius, but also by the Christian kings that succeeded him: while the Britons had the kingdom, which rather were not full kings, but under the sovereignty of the Roman Emperors which being at that time the most of them Pagans: the Princes in Brytannie had the less authority, whereby there grew many corruptions, especially the Heresy of Pelagianism in this realm, till the britains were expulsed by the Saxons. And therefore, what with the often wars, either with the Romans, or with the Pictes, or with the Saxons: little or no certain record remaineth, of any Councils helden, or of any Ecclesiastical Laws made, in the times of those british Princes. The Saxon kings dealings and laws▪ Except we shall account Constantine the great as one of them, being the son of Constantius Chlorus, by the most noble and Christian Queen Helena, who being excellently learned in the tongues, wrote diverse treatises of Religion and Ecclesiastical matters, of the providence of God, of the immortality of the soul, of the rule of godly life, etc. As Bale reporteth of this Queen, of whose husband and son we have heard sufficiently before. But to come to the Saxon kings after they had received the faith of Christ (for perhaps our Brethren also comprehend them in the name of the Christian Kings of this our Brytanie:) William Lambert hath much helped us, in gathering and translating, though rather to the sense than to the words, The laws of the Saxon kings in eccl. matters the ancient laws of those kings, whereby we also may gather, what great authority they had in these matters, who beginning with the Laws of King Inas, setteth them down in these words: I Inas by the benefit of God King of the West Saxons, through the persuasion and institution of Cenrede my father, The laws of king Inas of Lyedda and Erknwalde my Bishops, and of all mine Aldermen, (or Senators) and of the most ancient wise men of my people, in the great assembly of the servants of God; I studied both for the salvation of our souls, and for the conservation of our kingdom, that lawful contracts of matrimony, and that right judgements might be founded and established throughout all our dominion: and that hereafter it be not lawful to any Senator, or to any other inhabiting our dominion, to break these our judgements. This preface being made, by all their advice and consents, but (as is aforesaid) by his authority: he setteth down his Laws in Chapters, both for Ecclesiastical and civil matters. And first he beginneth with Ecclesiastical, of the form how the ministers of God should live. First of all, we command that the Ministers of GOD do care for, Cap. 1. of the ministers lives. and keep the appointed form of living. And afterward we will that among all our people the laws and judgements be thus holden. An infant shallbe baptised within 30. days after it is come forth into the world. Cap. 2. of Infants. Which thing if it be not done; the default shallbe punished with the paying of 30. s. but and if it die before it be baptised, he shall forfeit all his goods. Cap. 3. of working on sunday. If a bondservant be put to any servile work on the lords day, his Master shall make him free, and his Master shall pay thirty shillings, but if he did that work without the commandment of his Master, the servant shall be beaten with stripes, or at least let him redeem with a price of money, the fear of his beating. The laws of the Saxon Kings. If a free man labour on this day, without his masters commandment: let him either be made a bond man, or pay 60. shillings: if a Priest offend in this, behalf the penalty shall be augmented double. The first fruits of the seeds shall be paid at Saint martin's tied. Chap. 4. of the first frut● of the seeds He that then shall not have paid them shall be fined 40. shillings, and beside pay 12. times as much as the fruits come to. If any man guilty of death, shall flee to the Church, he shall enjoy his life, and make recompense according to right and law. Chap. 5. of the Churche● liberty. If any man have deserved beating, and flee to the Church, the beating shall be forgiven him. These ar● all the Eccl. laws of Inas, which are there set down, saving that in the next law after the Penalty of fight in the kings Court, he adjoineth also the forfeit of 120. shillings for fight in the Church, and in the 11. law, the forfeit of as much to him that bringeth in false witness before a Bishop. His other laws are mere civil and politic. But by these we see his supreme authority even to the making the decree itself, of the Ecclesi. laws so well as of the temporal. As for the last decree, of killing one's gossip, or of the King's godson, or of the son of a Bishop (for Bishops and all the Clergy might then marry) are mere temporal. The next laws that Lambert translateth, The laws of Aluredus in eccl. matters. are of that excellent Prince Aluredus. Where first he setteth down, the ten commandments of Almighty given by Moses, Exod. 20. and from thence proceedeth to the most of the laws mentioned in the 21.22. and some in the 23. chapters of Exod. which done, he saith: These are the laws that Almighty GOD himself delivered to Moses to be kept. As for the only begotten son of God our salvation jesus Christ, when he came into the world, he openly declared that he came not to violate the law given, but with all meekness and goodness to fulfil it. For he delivered the discipline of true godliness. After whom, when he was crucified, his Disciples (while they were as yet together, nor were severed a sunder to preach the Gospel) joined unto Christ many Nations, and sent their legates and Interpreters of the will of God to Antiochia, Syria, and Cilicia, which were converted unto Christ from the bondage of the Gentiles. The Apostles, and the Elders, Brethren, send greeting unto you. Act. 15. For as much as we have heard that certain men which departed from us, have troubled you with words, and when as they would declare unto you certain things whereof they had no commandment from us, they have rather weakened your minds with error, Aluredes laws. than instructed then with sound and entire doctrine ● it was thought good unto us being gathered together, to send unto you chosen men, Barnabas and Paul, which have adventured their life for Christ, together with whom we have sent judas and Sylas, who shall also by words declare the same things unto you. For it seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us, to lay upon you nothing more of necessary burden, than this; that ye must abstain from those things that are offered to Idols, and from blood and from that that is strangled, and from fornication. And that which ye would not have to be done unto you, ye should not do the same to others. Out of this one precept it evidently appeareth, that right must be rendered to every body: for there needeth no other judicial book, save only this: whosoever sitteth being a judge upon other, that he would not pronounce any other sentence upon others, than he would have to be given upon himself. But where as, when the Gospel of GOD was spread abroad, many Nations, yea, and that the Englishmen, adjoined their faith unto the word of God; many assemblies were made throughout the world, and also in England, there were holden meetings together of the Bishops and of other most notable wise men: The imposing of pecuniary mulctes. and these men being informed of the mercy of God, did at the first impose upon every offender a punishment of money, and gave unto the Magistrates the office of taking the same, without all provocation of offending GOD, having given them pardon before; save only upon a Traitor and forsaker of his Lord, they thought not this (being a milder penalty) to be inflicted: which manner of man they thought good, that he should not be spared at all, Why a traitor's punishment should be capital. both because God would have the despisers of himself to be unworthy of all mercy; and also, for that Christ forgave not them that were betrayers of him to death, but he decreed that the Lord should be worshipped before other. These men therefore in many of their assemblies, appointed punishments of every one of the offences, and committed them to the monuments of writing. These sanctions I Alured the king, have gathered together into one, and have put them in writing; King Aluredes own writing of his sanctions. a great part of which, our ancestors kept religously, and mee-thinketh that many of them are worthy, to be in this age kept of us, with like righteousness. Notwithstanding some of them, which seemed to be less profitable unto us, I have by the consultation of wise men provided, partly that they should be abrogated, The king's abrogating unprofitable constitutions. and partly innovated. And because it might be thought rashness, for any man to record in the monuments of writing, many of his own decrees: and also it might be uncertain what credit they should have with the posterity, which thing we do highly esteem: The laws of Edw. the Senior. whatsoever things I have found worthy to be observed in the acts of my countryman Inas, of Offa king of the Mercians, or of Ethelbert which was the first king of the English men that was baptised, I have collected them all. King Alureds' collection of the former king's laws The other I have utterly omitted. And also in the discerning of these acts, I Aluled king of the west Saxons, have used the Counsel of the most prudent of our men, and they all liked the observation of the same to be set forth. Thus writeth Alured of his doing, both concerning his own decrees, and the decrees of all those kings his ancestors in these matters which were not only civil, and politic, but also Ecclesiastical, In all which though he used the counsel and advise of the Clergy, The auth. of the other kings here mentioned. and of other learned and wise men; yet, as he did the action himself, so he did it by his own supreme authority, and reckoning up all these other kings decrees also, it argueth that they in their times and dominions, had the like authority in eccl. matters. The Eccl. laws of alured, are the second, and the fift; The eccl. laws that Aluredus set forth. of the privileges of Churches, the 6. of robbing Church goods, the 8. of violating Nuns. the 16. of teaching them in dissolute manner, the 21. of Priests that kill any man, the 29. of them that enter into religion being indebted, the 39 of the festival and solemn days. After this alured, his son Edward surnamed the elder, joining with Guthrune the Dane, king of the east Angles, The laws in eccl. mat. of Edward the elder, & of Athelstan king of the east Angles. (who changing his name at his baptism was called Athelstane) do set forth diverse Ecclesiastical Laws, which the same Guthrune and Allfred had before made, but belike, not till then set forth, which laws were these. Before all things they enact, that one God only should be honourably and holily worshipped, The Princes penal laws joined to the eccl. despising and renouncing all the barbarous worship. And then (because they certainly knew, that many would not be kept in the bounds of their duty, nor obey the Eccl. discipline without them) they provided human laws to be written out, and they set forth the laws pertaining to Christ, in common together with the laws pertaining to the king that by these the rashness of them might be restrained, that would not obey the commandments of the Bishop. This therefore did they first decree: That the peace of the Church within her walls, and that the tranquility which is delivered by the hand of the king, should be kept godly and inviolably. And so they proceed against them that forsake the Christian faith. Against eccl. persons that rob the Churches: that fight, or perjure themselves, or commit fornication, etc. And against incest. K. Ethel. staneslawes If any being condemned, desire to confess himself to the Priest, that all doo-earnestly and diligently promote all the laws of God, etc. For payment of tithes, for the money ●hat than was paid to Rome, called the Peter pence; for the Church lights: for the plough alms: (or as I take it alms given by the rate of their plough land) and if any Dane denied or suppressed the divine rights or duties. Of them that do their businesses on the lords day, of fastings. And judicial swearinges on the festival days, 8. and 9 and against witches. Of those that are entered into orders and are deceived of their goods. Next of these are the laws of Ethelstane. The laws of Ethelstan in eccl. matters. I Ethelstane the king, by the prudent Counsel of the Archbishop Vlfhelme, and of other my Bishops, do very straightly charge and command, all the Governors that are in my dominion, by the holy divine powers of God, and of all the Saints, and for my love, that I bear to them, that before all other things they pay the just and due tenths (or tithes) of that that is mine own in proper, The kings, B. Nobles, and all the subjects to pay their just tithes. as well of living beasts, as of the yearly profits coming of the earth, which thing besides me, every one of my Bishops, Senators, and Governors shall do, etc. After Athelstane followeth edmund. The laws of Edmund in eccl. matters. In the solemn feast of Easter, king edmund did celebrate at London a great assembly, as well of the Ecclesiastical persons, as of the Say, in the which were present Oda, and the Archbishop Wolstane and many other Bishops, to consult about the health of their souls, and all them that they had care of. The Clergies chaste life, which chastity was showed before that it debarred not in B & Pastors matrimony. First, they that have entered into holy orders, and of whom the people of God ought to require the example of virtue to follow the same, they shall lead their life chastened (as the reason of their order shall suffer) be they men or women; which thing if they shall not do, they shall be punished according to the rules of their orders, that is to wit, they shall forfeit all their earthly possessions, so long as they live, and being dead they shall not be buried with holy burial, except that they amended their manners. Every Christian shall religiously pay their tithes, and the first fruits of their seeds, Tithes, first fruits, alms. and the money that is due for the plough alms. He that payeth it not let him be accursed. Reparations of churches. Every Bishop at his own charges shall repair the house of God, and may admonish the king, that the other Churches may be decently adorned, which is a very necessary matter. Perjury and idolatry. Whosoever forswear themselves, or make any barbarous sacrifices, except they repent and amend their mind the sooner, they shall for ever be debarred of all the divine services. I Edmund the King, to all that are in my Dominion and power, young and old, do clearly signify, that I have earnestly inquired of the most skilful of my kingdom in the assembly as well of the Ecclesiastical as lay persons, by what means Christendom might be most advanced, and it seemed best unto us all, that we should nourish love and mutual good will amongst us through out all our Dominions, for we are all weary of these continual fightings. And therefore, we ordain in this manner. And so he proceedeth to Laws for these matters. After this, follow the Laws of Edgar. The Laws which Edgar the King, decreed in the great Senate, God to love and himself to preserve and to benefit all his Lordship (or Dominion). And so he also proceedeth to the making of Laws Eccl. The laws of Edgar in Eccl. ●atters. Of the rights, immunities, and tithes of the Church. Of the manner of their tithing, to them that have a place of burial in the Church. Of the times when the tithes of all sorts are due to paid of the Penny to Rome out of every house. Of the Feast days and fastings. And then he cometh to humane and politic Laws. Thus did all these Saxon Kings, with the advice of their Bishops & Clergy, make as well Ecclesiastical Laws, as temporal with the advice of the Lords and other their officers temporal. And this they did their selves and by their own authority, and not only allowed of that which the Bishops and Clergy before had decreed. All which I allege not, to allow of all those their Ecclesiastical decrees: for many of the things▪ (especially in the Kings following, How farr● these decree● are, & are not allowable. ) were full of superstition and error, as (by God's permission) the blindness of the time than was: but I note them only for the point in question, of the Prince's authority, not only in making Civil Laws for Ecclesiastical matters, but in making Laws of Ecclesiastical matters, and so, in making Ecclesiastical Laws themselves. And thus it continued here in England till the Danes got the Kingdom. Neither did Canutus the Dane take upon him any whit less the dealing in Ecclesiastical matters, than the Saxon Kings had done, but rather showeth it more lively than all the other, as appeareth in the collection of his Laws, as well Ecclesiastical as temporal The decree that Canutus King of the English men, of the Danes, and of the Norway's, to the love of God, to his own ornament, Canutu● his Laws of Eccl m●t●ers. and to the profit of his people, enacted at Winchester, on the feast of Mid wintertide, (or the nativity of Christ.) First, that all men shall through out all ages honourably and above all other things worship one God. And hold religiously the only Christian religion, and love the king Canutus with all fidelity and observance. Let us maintain the temple of God with Godly & continual peace, & let us all often frequent it, both for the health of our souls, and for the increase and profit of other things, for the only peace of Christ comprehendeth all the Churches, and therefore it is meet that all Christians hold the Church in great worship and honour. For the peace of God ought to be desired and retained above other things. And next after that, The peace & honour of God, & next after the Princes. the king's peace ought to be kept. It behoveth therefore that the peace of the Church of God, within the walls thereof, and the tranquility delivered by the hand of the Christian king▪ be ever chiefly kept firm and inviolated. If any therefore shall violate any of these two, (Gods Churches and the kings peace) forfeiting his Lands, he shall be put to death, except the king shall pardon his offence. etc. And if the Church's peace be broken without manslaughter, let the punishment follow according to the manner of the offence. etc. It greatly behoveth all Christian men most religiously to maintain in peace the holiness, The Church's orders and dignities to be maintained. the orders, and the places consecrated unto God, and to give to every order his own dignity. For let every one know, (at least he that will or may know) that it is a matter of great weight and moment, which the Priest must do ●or the health of the people, if so be he shall study to please GOD aright. Great is the sanctifying, and more is the sanctifying (or consecrating) with the which in consecrating baptism and the Sacrament of thanksgiving the Devil is driven away. Yea, the Angels keep the holy mysteries, and depending on the Divine providence assist the priest, so often as he serveth God aright. Which thing they do at all times when as the priest doth humbly from his heart beseech Christ, and beg of him those things that are necessary for the people's life: these men therefore for the fear of God, for the dignity of their order, are to be discerned from other men. If therefore any man shall accuse of any crime a Priest, living according to some certain rule of Religion, and if he wit himself to be clean thereof, Canutus' Laws for the purgation of a priest accused. let him say Mass if he dare, and with his once receiving of the sacrament of thanksgiving, he alone shall dash all the slander. But if he shall be accused by three, then receiving the Communion, if so be he dare, and taking with him two other of his own order, The Laws of Canutus he shall wipe away the suspicion of the supposed crime. If any man shall accuse with some special slander of crime a Deacon living after some certain form of religion: Apurgation of a Deacon slandered the Deacon shall purge himself of the crime, by taking two other with him of his own order. But if he have been accused thrice, he shall purge himself with six other men of his own order. etc. We also do bid (or pray) and do teach all the Ministers of GOD, and especially the priests, Canular Laws for degrees of mariege. that they obey GOD and love cleanness and avoid the wrath of GOD and flee from the lake of Hell fire. etc. Moreover we teach, and we pray, and in God's name we command, that no man can contract marriage with in the sixth decree of kindred, neither yet marry the Widow of his coosine, that was within six degrees unto him, neither that he mary any that was of kin to his Wife, that he had before, neither that any Christian marry his Gossip, nor any that is divorced. To conclude, he that hath any care to keep God's Law, and will study to have his soul saved from hell fire, let him shun harlots, and keep him to his only wife, joined unto him in lawful marriage, and have no more, so long as his wife liveth. Let every man pay unto God yearly his rights and his just duties orderly, let him pay the alms of his ploughing, the fift day after Easter. The tenth of his cattle at Whitsuntide, and the tenth of his fruits at Alhollow-tide. But if so be that any will not pay their tenths in manner, as we have aforesaid, concerning the acre that is tythe-able, then let the kings officer, the Bishop, and the Lord of the soil, and the serving priest of the Church come together, and whether he will or no, deliver the tenth part to the Church, whereunto it is due, and leave the ninth to him: as for the other eight parts, the Lord of the soil shall have the one moiety of them, and the Bishop of the diocese shall have the other, be he the King's man or any Noble man's. And in this order he proceedeth to a great number of other Ecclesiastical matter●, (mingling (as in these) a great deal I grant of foul chaff, but good and bad, one with an●ther, all show his authority in Ecclesiastical matters. But when he cometh to the nineteenth, and so forward, because the Laws are of better matters, I will crave the reader's patience further, in setting them down also. And let every Christian man do all those things, that are profitable to his salvation. Let him apply himself with all his thought and care, to the Christian faith and Religion: and whosoever will conceive in his soul and mind those things that are necessary for his salvation (as indeed it ought to be the desire of all men) let him prepare his mind to receive the Sacrament of thanksgiving at least thrice a year. Receiving the Communion thrice a year And if he will hope to find favour, let him well bestow all his words and deeds, and dispose them orderly: let him keep his oath and faith given most religiously. And let every man to the uttermost of his ability, drive away from the bounds of our Dominion, all unrighteousness, and hereafter earnestly follow the righteousness of God both in words and deeds, and so at the length we shall all bountifully obtain the mercy of God. Besides this, let us ourselves put that in execution, that we command other. faith & life Let us always be of a firm and faithful mind to God. Let us uphold his honour with all our forces and abilities, and obey his will. For what soever we shall do towards the Lord, (being moved with that faithfulness that is joined with virtue and our office) that shall be to our great advantage. For in this thing God the chief ruler and Lord of all, will be exceeding faithful unto us, it standeth us therefore chiefly upon, that they which are Lords behave themselves rightly to their vassals. Duties of Lords to their vassals. And we earnestly admonish all Christian men, that inwardly withal their heart they love God, that religiously they hold the right Christian faith, and that gladly they obey their Divine Doctors, that most diligently they search the Laws and Doctrine of God, Obedience to the Teachers. and that they search for it often and much for their own commodity. And we admonish that every Christian man do so throughly learn, Charge to every christian to learn ●he L. prayer & the articles of their belief. that at the least he do well know the right Faith, and can say the lords Prayer, and the Articles of his belief. For by the one all Christian men do call upon God, and by the other, they profess a right faith. Christ himself did first set forth the lords prayer, and taught the same unto his Disciples. Which divine prayer consisteth of seven petitions, the which whosoever shall utter not faynedlie, but from his heart, None that hath not learned these things to be admitted to the Communion, etc. he conferreth with God himself of all things that are necessary, either for the life present or to come. But by what means can any man hearty pray unto God, except he have inwardly to GOD a right Faith? And verily he that will not learn these things, neither shall have his part of rest with the Christians after his death, neither shall here alive be admitted to receive the Communion, neither shall he be counted worthy to bear the name of a Christian man, neither shall he undertake for any other at the Font nor at the Bishop's hand, except he learn these things, and shall know them well. We also admonish them, that each one of them studiously avoid deadly crimes and wicked deeds. And if peradventure they have offended through the instigation of the devil, Avoidance of grievous crimes and repentance that by instruction of the priest they amend it. Moreover we admonish every one to flee filthy whoredom, and the unlawful use of the flesh, and violating of the covenant of wedlock so long as they live. To flee whoredom. Moreover we teach, them, that the fear of God be always thoroughly settled in the minds of them all, The fear of God's judgements. that day and night they fear the punishments due to wicked deeds, and dread the day of judgement, and abhor hell. And suppose even their ending day approacheth. As for the Bishops they shall be the Bedels' of God and the interpreters of God's Law, The duty of B. & Pastors and they must openly teach the benefits of divine matters, and to set forth themselves to be examples of living for others to follow, whosoever will give ear to them. For he is but an evil keeper, which with his voice at least, if he can do no more, shall not defend the flock committed unto him against him that cometh to spoil it. But none is so evil as the Devil himself, which always laboureth in this one point, how he may most destroy men's souls. Wherefore it behoveth the pastors to be watchful and to give warning, that by their advertisements, the people may have knowledge thereof. The pastors we call the Bishops, and the priests, whose parts are with erudition and Doctrine, to watch and defend the lords flock, that the furious and wild Wolf do not forthwith tear nor bite the flock of God. And if there be any that will not listen unto the commandments of God, he hath to reckon for that with God himself. The name of God for ever be glorified, and love him, and praise him, and honour him through out all worlds. Thus did this Dane King here in England even at that blind time take upon him (as it were, like a Bishop or preacher himself) to set forth these Laws and decrees of Ecclesiastical matters. The king t●acheth all estates, Eccl. and lay. After which he proceedeth to those that he calleth his worldly laws. And yet even among them also, he inserteth some Ecclesiastical laws: as the 3.5.36.37.38.39.40.44.46. Besides causes of Matrimony and fornication. And in the end of all his Laws of both sorts, Ecclesiastical and temporal: he concludeth all with a religious and divinlike charge, commanding most straightly in God's name all his subjects, to convert themselves whole to God, and to ●eare their pastors, and the pastors to teach and preach the word of God unto his people. The Clergies advise to the K. This authority and intermeddling in the making of Ecclesiastical Laws, both aswell for the Clergy as for the temporalty, had the Kings in this land before the conquest. This auth. of Princes confuteth our Br. restraint thereof. What they have had since, diverse other have set forth more largely, and I crave pardon that I have been so large in the collecting and setting down of these. But I have done it to this end, that we might more fully perceive this point, that the Princes did not only make civil Laws for Ecclesiastical causes, or for matters that by the Clergy only were decreed, that they should be observed in their Dominions, and appointed bodily or pecuniary punishments for offending the same, of which sort I grant many of these Laws are, that we have collected: but also that they themselves with the advice of their Clergy made Eccl. Laws, The Princes doing all by the Clergies advise, debarreth not their supreme authority. and that mere Ecclesiastical, or altogether pertaining to Church persons, or to Church matters, yea, to matters of religion and Doctrine. Neither diminished it their authority any whit, that they did none of all these things without the advise and determination of their Clergy: for always the Clergy so conditionally determined the same before, if it were a matter but of order or ceremony, and not of Doctrine (which is inflexible, neither dependeth upon man, either of the Prince, or of them) that the supreme authority lay still in the Prince, so to conclude the final determination, that the Prince's sentence do knit up all the matter, and made that order or ceremony, to have the life or force of a decree, Law, or constitution among them. And other supreme authority than this, Her Maiest●es supremacy. with the consultation, deliberating, advising and determining, what Ecclesiastical matter of order or ceremony her Learned Clergy think most meet for ●ur time and state, to be most agreeable to order, comeliness, and edification, to give her royal assent to the confirmation and establishment of the same, that it may have the full force and nature of a decree, Law, or constitution Ecclesiastical: her Majesty otherwise never took upon her, nor claimeth, or desireth to have, nor the Statute giveth, nor we acknowledge. And if our Brethren would grant thus much (as I hope upon better advisement they will not deny it) we should need no controversy in this matter, and all these examples that we are now driven to bring forth to satisfy them, we and they shall more cheerfully turn against the Papists, that are the professed enemies of her Majesty, and of our Brethren, and of us. But it will perhaps be said, that for Princes to subscribe to the determination of priests (as they call them) is no supremacy, but a subjection. The learned disc. pa. 142. We answer, it is no subjection unto men, but to God, and his word, to do nothing in these matters, but by the faithful advise of them, that know his will, and are bound to teach it unto all men: no more than it is, to be counted a subjection, for a Prince in Civil affairs, to follow the advice of wise and faithful Counsellors. We have showed before in the examples of diverse Emperors and Kings, how Princes subscribed to their clergies determinations: Bridges in such sort, as they being humbly requested thereunto, had in ceremonial matters their free choice, and might have dashed all, or in subscribing thereto, they ratified the same and made it authentical. But if Princes were so to subscribe to the determination of priests, ●s we may well without error or superstition call them, that the Princes their selves had no kind of determination in any Ecclesiastical causes, neither above the priests, nor yet at all with them: then indeed it were no supremacy, but a subjection. And what else do our Brethren here give to Princes? neither do they here deny, but in plain words confess, that it is a subjection, and so, not a supremacy: save that, they colour it over with this fair shadow. We answer, it is no subjection unto men, but unto God. And what else do the very popish priests answer, when they tak● from the prince his authority, & bring him in subjection to their pope, & to themselves, but that this subjection, is a subjection not unto them, as unto men, but to God, and to his word, and to his Church? And so under th● reverend names of God, and of his word and Church, they greatly abuse those Princes that think their sayings to be true, & make them thrall to their subjection, and to that which they pretend to be God's word, and to them that call themselves the Church men, as our Br. also have distributed the name of Eceles. or Church persons only among their tetrarkes. As for the faithful advise of those that know Gods will, and are bound to teach it unto all men: We deny not, but that the Prince is again bound, to ask faithful advice in matters of such importance as the making of Laws. And of whom should he rather ask it, than of those that best know, or should know God's will, and have most experience in Ecclesiastical matters, which is their proper profession, and should teach the same unto all men: but this is no rebatement to that right of the princes supreme authority, by which the matter so advised upon, should be enacted and authorized for a Law. And this we have seen not only in all the foresaid examples, how for all the princes advise with their Clergy, their authority still remained entire: but also our brethren's own example that here they allege, doth confirm the matter clean against our Brethren. The K. folloving of advise. For although it is not to be counted a subjection, for a Prince in civil affairs, to follow the advise of wise and faithful counsellors, but for all their duty of giving him faithful advise, It is no subjection to follow Counsel. and his duty to follow their advise yet when the matter shall come to the making of a Law, his voice hath the authority to strike up all the matter, they determine thus it should be, and then it is he that determineth thus it shall be. So that, their determination is indeed properly no determination of the matter, but deliberation and advisement, as our Brethren do here more aptly term it, or their determination is rather of the nature of the matter than of authorizing the same: For, the resolute determining with authority is more properly in the Prince, if we respect the making of the matter to be a Law in force amongst us But, if these counsellors to the Prince, will go beyond advise, and turn their advise, into authority, and such authority, that whatsoever they determine, that must the Prince maintain and set forth to be observed every where in his Dominions, How the Counsellors determine, & how not. and command those that impugn it to be punished, and that his Counsellors will let the prince to have no further authority than this: call ye this the advise of wise and faithful Counsellors? well may they be wise to themselves, but they be not so faithful as they should be to the prince, neither take they upon them as Counsellors, according to their name, but rather as Princes. But no wise prince will so suffer them, nor any faithful counsellors will so take upon them. And therefore, if our Br. will but mark this their own example better, they need no better satisfaction, that although they would in the making of Eccl. Laws be her majesties wise Counsellors, and give her (as they say) faithful advise therein: Unfaithful Counsellors yet if their advise shall grow so peremptory, that they will prescribe, and the Prince must subscribe: that they will determine, & the Prince must execute, that it shall not be good without their consent, & the prince must not dissent from them, and that it is they that make it a law, & when they have so decreed it, than the princes must command it to be observed every where in their dominions, and command them to be punished that impugn it: this is plus satis pro imperio, and were very dangerous to her Majesty and to the whole state to admit it. Whereby we see that if God's ordinance were not plain in the scriptures, The learned disc. pa. 143. yet reason itself would conclude, that if in temporal matters, a wise prince will do nothing of weight, without the counsel of wise men: how much more in God's business, which are of greatest importance, should they not decree any thing without the advise of them that be learned in those matters. Bridges Our Br. have as yet showed no ordinance of God, either plain or obscure in the Scriptures, The K. dealing by advise. against the princes supreme authority that her Majesty claimeth, or that we acknowledge, or for any thing that they have as yet aouched, since they entered into this matter, of the title or authority of the prince's supremacy. And therefore having alleged nothing at all out of the Scriptures, no not the examples, Their examples of the Empire France, Spain, and England clean against them. that are apparent in the scriptures, of Moses, joshua, David etc. Which might much have cleared the matter: but fled to the examples of the Emperors, of the Christian Kings of France, and Spain, yea and of this our Brittannie: and having only thus bumbased up the matter with their foresaid reasons: they are now fallen in such a liking with these reasons, that as it were vaunting, they say of them: Whereby we see, that if God's ordinance were not plain in the scriptures, yet reason itself would conclude: And what would reason itself conclude in this matter, against that supreme authority and government that her Majesty claimeth and enjoyeth, Their conclusion of reason from Counsel & advisement. or that we acknowledge and yield unto her? as for the reason they last alleged, we see nothing yet, but it maketh much against them, and that very dangerously against all such advisers, as would from advising fall to commanding, and from counseling of the Prince, would seize upon the Prince's authority. But if they will drive their reason to conclude only of counsel and advisement: I grant them that than it is a good reason, but it helpeth them nothing in this matter, ●ea rather it maketh clean against them. It is good reason that in all the Princes temporal matters, and business of managing the commonweal, but in God's business (as I grant also, Eccl. Laws may well be so called, and that some of them are matters of greatest importance) that the Prince should not decree any thing, without the advice of them that be learned in those matters. Howbeit this giveth not the authority, and much less all and the only authority, of determining those matters unto the advisers of them, no more than it doth in temporal matters (from whence they still urge their reason by this comparison) that a wise Prince will do nothing of weight, without the counsel of wise men. I grant, that not only reason itself will conclude this, but that also the ordinance of God is plain in the scriptures, for every man, namely a wise Prince, Their reason either against all reason, or against themselves. in all matters be they Ecclesiastical or temporal, to do nothing rashly, but if the matters be doubtful, with good counsel and advise of them that be learned in those matters. Neither any good reason, nor any ordinance of God plain or not plain in the Scriptures, willeth any person taking such advise, least of all willeth the Prince on that advise given or taken, to think, that because he should do nothing without their advise, that he can do nothing without their authority. Neither is there any reason or ordinance of God in the Scriptures, that any which are but advisers to the prince, should fall from advising him, so to encroach upon him. And if I were worthy to advise princes. I would advise them to take good advisement, how they advised themselves by such advisers, and (as I am thus advised) me thinketh it reason. And if all princes by heathen wise men's judgements, are so rulers, that they are servants of the Laws, The learned disc. pa. 143. and of the common wealth: why should it be accounted for any dishonour unto princes, to be obedient to the Laws of God their Father, and to serve to the commodity of the Church their Mother? It is a greater honour to be the Son of God, and the Child of the Church, than to be a Monarch of all the earth. All princes (I grant) are such servants of the common wealth, (not only by Heathen wise men's judgements, but also by all Christian wise men's judgements too, Bridge's that nevertheless their supreme authority in governing of the common wealth, Princes sevaunts to the common weal and Laws. is not one whit diminished by that service. And as for their service to the Laws, which Laws either they have made themselves, or were made Laws before they were made rulers, serveth (I grant also) to the maintenance of those Laws, and to the punishment of the impugners of them: This service no debasing of their authority. howbeit this hindereth not, but that princes have another ruling and not serving service (or as we may well term it) a serving rule and government, (besides the conserving of the Laws) even to make Laws, as our Brethren have before confessed. Aug. in Epist. 48. & 50. & lib. 5. de civit. dei. cap. 24. And as Saint Augustine excellently well doth say, in his 48. epistle ad Vincentium, And in his 50. Epistle ad Bonifacium (as we have seen at large before) And in his fift Book De civit. Dei. cap. 24. He reckoneth this service among the prince's chiefest virtues, he saith: that they make their power which they have to be a servant unto the Majesty of God, How highly good princes esteem the service of God. most largely to spread abroad his service. And of this service (as Eusebius reporteth in the second Book of Constantine's life) doth Constantine glory, saying: I reclaimed mankind being instructed by my service (or ministry), Eu●eb. in li. de vita Constant. to the religion of the holy Law, and I caused that the most blessed faith should more and more grow under a better ruler. For I would not be unthankful, especially to neglect my principal service, which is the thanks that I own even of duty. Sith therefore the prince's service is so high and principal a service, stretching to the making of Eccl. Laws, and to all these matters, which service (as Saint Augustine saith Epistola 50. None can do but princes: This service is no debar, but rather an advancement and prerogative of the princes supreme authority in these matters. The King serving the Church's commodity. We do not therefore account it any dishonour unto princes, to be obedient to the Laws of GOD the Father, and serve to the commodity of the Church their Mother: It is rather the greatest honour that in this World, and in their royal estate they can attain unto. Neither can any of their subjects, Clergy or other, The greatest honour of Princes. compare with them in the supreme degree of that authority, that only Christian princes have herein. But rather our Brethren would abase this authority, with telling princes they must account no dishonour to obey the laws of GOD their Father, and serve to the commodity of the Church their Mother: Our Br pretence of honouring God our Father, and serving to the commodity of the Church our mother. what laws of God the Father have they as yet alleged, either for this matter, or for any of their tetrarchs, that infer any of these new Laws, which they all without and beside the authority of a prince, would press both upon the prince and us: Or what one thing, that (being better considered) serveth to the commodity of the Church their and our Mother, but rather to the great disquieting of her, in the calm harbour (God be thanked) here in England, and to the discrediting of her name to all other Churches and people's round about us, and to the great hazard of her estate amongst us? And is this the way to serve her commodity? If not rather to serve their own turns and humours, both to the great dishonour of God our father, and to the no little damage of the Church our mother, besides the dishonour and disobedience of our so gracious Prince, with the trouble and endangering of all the whole Realm. But let our Brethren take good heed, that they abuse not Princes thus under these high titles, of God their Father, and of the Church their mother: for, How the Papists used these pretences that our Brethren do even with these terms did the Papists deceive Princes and all the world. When they sought their own honour or profit, than they always pretended the honouring of God their father, and serving the commodity of the Church their mother, in whose names (as Gods and the Church's deputies) they took on themselves to be honoured, and their own commodity served, both of all Princes and of all people, as much, if not much more, than either their father or their mother. It is a greater honour (say they) to be the son of God, and the child of the Church, than to be a Monarch of all the earth. A Prince may be God's child, and yet supreme governor. And so it is indeed, who denieth it? and this is also as one of the papists blearing the eyes of princes. But any man, woman or child, never so poor or private, may (by the grace of God) be so well enough, though he have no public auth. at all. But can not a man be a Monarch (though not of all the earth) but in his own dominions, & be also the Son of God and child of the Church, and yet with all in his own Dominions, be the supreme governor over all persons in all matters and causes eccl. so well as temporal? The Prophecy of Esay. 49. Of this honourable subjection to God and his Church, Esay prophesieth, Chapter, 49.23. The learned disc. pa. 143.144. & 145. King's shall be thy nourssing Fathers, and Queens shall be thy Nurses. They shall worship thee with their faces towards the earth, and lick the dust of thy feet, and thou shalt know that I am the Lord. The Prophet meaneth, that Kings and Queens shall be so careful, for the preservation of the Church, that they shall think, no service too base for them, so they may profit the Church of Christ withal. isaiah. 49.23. Unto this honourable subjection the holy ghost exhorteth Princes in the second Psalm, after that they have tried that they prevail nothing in striving against the kingdom of Christ: Be now therefore wise O ye Kings, be learned that judge the earth, serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice to him with trembling, Psa. 2.10.11 declaring that it is a joyful service to be obedient to Christ: yea, to serve God is indeed to reign. And especially it is to be noted, where S. Paul commandeth prayers and supplications, to be made for the conversion of Kings unto the knowledge of the truth, and their own salvation, that he allegeth this reason, That we may lead a quiet & peaceable life, 1. Tim. 2.12. in all godliness and honesty under their protection. A godly & honest life we may live, under enemies of the church and persecutors: but a peaceable and quiet life in all godliness and honesty only under a Christian prince. This thing therefore the Church most humbly desireth of the prince: for this end the Church continually prayeth to God for the prince: in this respect the Church most obediently submitteth herself unto the prince as a child to his Nurse, that both Prince, and people may honour God in this life, and after this life reign with Christ everlastingly. We shall now have after these reasons, some testimonies of the scripture alleged: Bridges but if we shall still hold us to the point in controversy, whether the Christian prince hath authority with the advise and counsel of his learned clergy, All these 3. cited testimonies make also against them. to make and set forth ecclesiastical decrees and laws, for all persons in his dominion to observe, not one of all these three testimonies here cited out of the scripture, do gainsay it, yea rather every one of them doth confirm it. The Papists also allege this Testimony of Esay for the superiority of the pope and of the Church over all Christian princes: The Papists abuse of this testimony of Esay. and will our Brethren abuse it likewise for their new clergies authority? but who may not see, that even in the resemblances of these metaphors, a great authority, not under, but over the Church, is given here of God to Christian princes? yea, even as much in the new testament as was in the old: but by our brethren's drift▪ they should have less. Esay. 49. See what an interpretation they make of this prophecy: as though the Prophet's meaning were, altogether to abase the authority of Christian princes, and not rather clean contrary, to exalt and extol it: though withal in some respects it be inferior. The words of Esay not spoken so much to foretell of Princes abasing them under the church as of governing it. For except he had called Kings and Queen's Fathers and Mothers, by what nearer title could the Prophet have called them, than Kings to be the nourishing Fathers, and Queens to be the nourishing Mothers of the Church? joseph was but a nourishing Father unto Christ: and yet saith the text as well of him, as of the Virgin Marie his natural Mother, Luke 2. verse 51. that he was Subject unto them. So honourable is the title of a nourishing Father, and comprehendeth in it such authority. Not, but that the Princes again, (in respect that the Church is the spouse and wife of Christ) do humble themselves as Children unto her. And so, as they acknowledge God to be their Heavenly Father, they reacknowledge her to be their mystical Mother. Which not only they, but every Ecclesiastical person also must do, as well and as far forth as they, though in some other respects, the pastors are again spiritual Fathers, even as well to the Princes, as to any other of God's people. And so are both the parts of this Prophecy joined together, that the Prince's superiority is declared in the former part of the sentence: Kings shall be thy nursing Fathers, and Queens shall be thy Nurses: that nevertheless in the other respect, they again be the Church's Children: and therefore it is added, They shall worship thee with their Faces towards the earth, and lick the dust of thy foots. A third part of this testimony left out, whereto the other parts be referred. But both these parts of prophecy, are again referred to a third that followeth: And thou shalt know that I am the Lord, for they shall not be ashamed that wait for me. As though he said to the Church: Do not thou ascribe this unto thyself, but unto me, by whom and for whom it is done, neither let the Princes be ashamed, as though they did abase themselves in doing this to thee: for they do it to thee, not for thee, but for me, for whom they wait, and have respect unto: & therefore this reciprocal obedience neither of thee to them, nor of them to thee for me, shall be any shame or dishonour either unto thee, or unto them, nor any abasing of their Sovereign authority over thee, for they shall not be ashamed that wait for me. Which last words of the sentence, our Brethren clean cut off and leave out. And thus doth calvin himself expound the words: For they shall not be ashamed. etc. I take this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Cal. exposition of the testimony of Esay. for a particle causal, for it is a continuing speech, which of some is ill cut off, and by this argument he proveth it to be equity, that Princes should cheerfully addict themselves to the Empire of God, nor b● aggrieved to humble themselves before the Church, because God doth not suffer them to be shamed that put their trust in him. But he joineth his truth with our health, as though he should say, this shall be an amiable and pleasant subjection. etc. So that this is no diminishing nor abasing of the Prince's authority, and therefore calvin also called them before (upon the first words, And Kings shall be thy nursing Fathers) Patrons, and Tutors. Whereupon (saith he) it is to be noted, The duty of Princes above all other Christians. that a certain singular matter is here required of Princes, besides the vulgar profession of the faith, because authority and power is of God given unto them, that they should defend and procure the glory of God. This indeed pertaineth unto all: but Kings, how much greater their power is, so much the more ought they to employ themselves, and more studiously to have care thereof. And this is the reason why David by name calleth on them & exhorteth them to be wise, and serve ●he Lord and kiss the Son. Psalm. 2.10 Hereupon it appeareth how mad their dotages are, which affirm that kings cannot be Christian, except they renounce that office. For these things were fulfilled under Christ, when as by th● preaching of the Gospel, Kings being converted unto GOD, they attained unto this most noble degree of dignity, wherewith all kind of Dominions and principalities are excelled, that they should be the nursing Fathers and Tutors of the Church. The papists do understand that Kings are nursing Fathers of the Church none otherwise, The papists mis. understanding of this place. then that they have left unto their sacrificing priests and Monks most large revenues, wealthy possessions and wide demaynes, by which they are fed fat as Hogs in a Sty. But this education tendeth to a far other matter, then to glut such unsatiable gulfs. For neither treateth he here of enritching their houses, that under a false pretext vaunt themselves to be the Church's Ministers (which was nothing else but to corrupt the Church of God, The Christian Princes nourishing of the Church. and to destroy it with deadly poison) but of taking away superstitions, of removing all wicked and naughty worship, of promoting the kingdom of Christ, of conserving the purity of Doctrine, of removing offences and of purging the filthes which corrupt Godliness, and obscure the majesty of God. If now the authority of the Prince stretcheth itself to all these things, in the name of nourishing the Church, which is far above all bodily nourishment or maintenance of living: then is not the Christian princes authority abased any whit thereby, in the making of Ecclesiastical Laws for these Eccl. matters, but much more confirmed and increased: so that, the prophets meaning was not (as our Br. here say the prophet meaneth) that kings and Queens shall be so careful for the preservation of the Church that they shall think no service too base for them, so they may profit the Church of Christ withal: The Prince's service, Psal. 2. For it is no pro●i●● at all unto the Church, for princes to abase themselves as they have done, unto the Pope and his Ministers: who no less shamefully abused 〈◊〉 prophesy, than the Princes simply in believing of them, did think indeed no service too base for them, that they might (as they thought) profit the Church of Christ withal. But the prophets meaning was rather of twain, besides the comforting of the Church, to foretell not only the Prince's honourable reverencing of the Church, but also that by their exaltation & great authority above it, they should become of persecutors, (as it were) even parents to it. But now, if this testimony will not serve, to make Princes stoop unto their bent: they have another at hand. Our Br. ●. testimony Psa. 2.10.11. Unto this honourable subjection (say they) the holy Ghost exhorteth princes in the 2. psalm: after that they have tried that they prevayl nothing in striving against the kingdom of Christ: Be now therefore wise O ye kings, be learned that judge the earth, serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice to him with trembling, declaring that it is a joyful service to be obedient to Christ, yea, to serve God is indeed to reign. Our Brethren where they should yet n●w● at length, Our Br. that promised to treat of Princes governing, are now all in Princes obeying. according to their promise, w●en all their other tetrarche● were serried, have declared unto us, how far the Prince's authority in the government of Eccl. matters stretcheth: they are now altogether fallen from describing unto us the Prince's authority, of which (God wots) we have heard full little yet) to the description all of the Prince's subjection. For although they commend it with the name of honourable, yet still it is but subjection that they speak of, not authority. Albeit, I grant, this is most true, that it is a joyful service to be obedient to Christ, yea, to serve God, is indeed to reign, & better than to reign in any worldly kingdom, without God's service: and therefore the holy ghost ●oth well therein exhort those Princes, which have tried that they prevayl nothing in striving against the kingdom of Christ to be wise, and learned and to serve the Lord. But let our Br. withal remember this, that they abuse not this exhortation of the holy ghost, spoken to those Princes that resisted Christ's kingdom, by applying it here altogether to the Princes that we speak of, that only are true Christian Princes, & have already subjecteth their kingdoms to Christ's kingdom. For now we inquire of godly Princes, Our Br. wrong applying this testimony, Psalm. 2. what auth. they have by Christ allowed them, in the governing of his kingdom? Otherwise, if they apply this sentence thus, as though her Majesty in not submitting herself and her auth. to these their decrees & orders, did as yet resist the kingdom of Christ: Psalm. 2. they offer her Majesty no small 〈◊〉, nor she may well abase her authority so far: nor any other Christian Prince, that hath subjecteth his kingdom to the obedience of the kingdom of Christ, as her Majesty (God be praised) hath do●n●. Not, but that (I grant) there is still an use of this exhortation even to all Princes never so godly, to continue in this Wisdom, learning, and service of the Lord, But her Majesty (God be praised) being wise and Learned indeed, hath Learned and found out a great diff●renc●, between th● serving of the Lord himself, and the serving of the servants of the Lord. How all the Clergy are inferior to the Prince. For although there be a service that the Prince oweth to them also, in respect that they in their divine service of God's word and Sacraments represent God: yet, the Princes being also the servants of God, as they again represent him in their service: so their service is such a high and supreme government, as (set the very action of the spiritual servants divine service aside) they are all inferior to the Prince's service, and in some respects, not only Subjects, but servants also to their Princes, and not the Prince's servants unto them. Yea, even in those divine services, which the Ministers, Stewards, or servants of God profess, the Christian Princes, being also the Ministers and servants of God, have an higher service, ministery and Stewardship, in the general oversight of those particular overseers, to oversee and overrule them to do their duties, and with their advise and counsel, devising and determining what is fittest, to make laws and orders with them and above them, not only to rule all his temporal subjects, but all his Eccl. subjects too, and even himself in all due subjection to those his Laws & orders, that he hath made. And that this service of the Prince to God, stretcheth hereunto, and to the Prince especially above all other: we have heard how S. Augustine expoundeth this testimony▪ And yet because our Br. lead us here unto it, let us again mark it a little better, whether it more infirm and abase, or confirm and augment the prince's authority, in making decrees & laws of Ecclesiastical matters. S. Aug. in his 50. Epistle, ad Bonifacium, upon this verse, And now ye Kings understand. etc. How then (saith he) do kings serve the Lord in fear? Aug. in epis. 50. ad Bonifacium. but in forbidding with a religious severity, and in punishing those things, which are done contrary to the commandments of the Lord. For he serveth otherwise in that he is a man, and otherwise in that he is a King. For, in that he is a man, he serveth in living faithfully. How the K. serveth God as a man, & how as a king. But in that he is also a King, he serveth in the enacting with a convenient vigour, Laws that command righteous matters, and forbid the contrary. Even as Ezechias served in destroying the groves and Temples of the Idols, and those high places that were builded contrary to the commandment of God. Even as josias served, he also doing the same things. The example of the kings service. Even as the King of the Ninivites served, in compelling the whole City to appease God. Even as Darius served, in giving it into daniel's power to break the Idol, and in casting the enemies to the Lions. Even as Nabuchodonozor served, (of whom we have already spoken) in forbidding by a terrible Law, all that were placed in his kingdom, from blaspheming God. The service that none can do but Princes. In this therefore kings do serve the Lord, when they do those things to serve him, that none but Kings can do. If this service then be the only prerogative of the Prince's authority, The Christian Princes supremacy in Eccl. matters. that none but the Prince can do: and this prerogative be, to make such Ecclesiastical laws, as some of these Prince's Laws were: how doth not this service plainly include the Prince's supreme government in Ecclesiastical causes? And sith this service of the Princes unto Christ, consisteth principally in making laws for Christ: no marvel then, if the holy ghost exhort Princes to be wise and to be learned, and to understand, The wise christian Prince may aswell give advice to his Clergy as take advice of them. as the most necessary thing for them, to understand the state of the Ecclesiastical government. So that, if their Clergy forstowe to do their duty; yet the Prince by this wisdom, learning and understanding, might as well be able to give advise again (if need be) even to his Clergy, in the making of many Ecclesiastical laws and orders: as to take advise of them. As we see how divers of the forenamed Princes did, (and that by their authority, with the advice of wise and learned men,) both make laws of Ecclesiastical matters, and have a supreme government in the maintenance and direction of them. Musculus writing on these words. And now ye kings understand, Musculus in 2. Psal. etc. The nations and people (saith he, and much more, say I, the Clergy) are not excluded: Why Princes are most especially called upon. but Kings & judges are by name called to bethink themselves, even for this cause that they are the heads of the nations, and of the people (containing in the nation, Clergy and all) to whom it principally appertaineth to be subject unto the Lord, and to give themselves to be leaders of the people that are their subjects, unto this true obedience. For in two respects it standeth them upon to be obedient to the Lord, first because they are subject to his power, as are all other mortal men: and then because they are made his peculiar Ministers, to this purpose, that having received power over their subjects, they should both their selves the will of God, and cause their subjects to be obedient to it. And Marlorate upon these words, Serve the Lord in fear, noting out of Calvin saith: Princes therefore in this place are admonished that they shall then reign happily, Marloratus in psal. 2. when their power is nothing else but God's service. That is to say, where in commanding and bidding, they serve not their own lust, but gods will: neither usurp that tyrannical speech, Sic volo, sic jubeo, stet proratione voluntas: Thus will I have it, The benefits by Princes. 1. Tim. 2 thus I bid it be: it stands for reason that it pleaseth me. But they say: Sie volo, sic jubeo, quia sic divina volunt as mandat, cui soli cuncta subesse decet, thus will I have it, thus I bid it be; because this is the will of God's decree: He bids it be, to whom what ere he say; all creatures (will they nill they, ought obey. Let them also note this place which deny the power of the king & secular Magistrate (as they call him) to have aught to do in a cause of a religion. In what matters Princes serve the Lord For, although the kingdom of Christ be in the hearts of the believers, notwithstanding it appertaineth to the Magistrate to have a care, that the doctrine of the word may be retined in the Church, that Idolatry and false worship may be taken away, that the Ministers of the church may be commodiously maintained, & that the adversaries may be repressed, & then to forbid the name of God to be blasphemed, & to bring to pass that such as lead a godly life may live in safety, but the wicked persons & those that are unquiet may be punished & restrained ned. This then is the Prince's service unto God. And is not this as much, as to make good Eccl. laws & orders, with the advice & counsel of the wise & godly learned clergy, as hath done, and doth her Majesty? But now our brethren after they have tried. whether they should prevail by these two aforesaid testimonies, lest these should not prevail in striving against the Prince's authority in Eccl. matters; they adjoin a third unto them out of the new testament, Our Br. third testimony out of 1. Tim. 2. for the restraint of the Prince's supremacy. saying: And especially it is to be noted, where S. Paul commandeth prayers and supplications to be made for the conversion of kings unto the knowledge of the truth, and their own salvation, that he allegeth this reason, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, in all godliness & honesty under their protection. A godly & honest life we may live, under enemies of the church & persecutors: but a peaceable and quiet life in all godliness & honesty, only under a christian Prince. If they do it as paraphrasts, by way of some part of exposition, they add these words well, under their protection. But in that they set them down as the words of the text, me thinketh it somewhat over bold so to cite the holy scripture; or yet as paraphrasts, if they so limit the end of our prayers and supplications for Kings & Princes, The Prince's authority stretcheth further than to protection. which (in these three benefits that the Apostle citeth,) stretcheth a great deal farther than to protection only. For (as David and other godly Princes were) they may be both protectors and procurers of the same, yea, the chief governors and directors in the setting forth and maintenance of them. Neither is S. Paul's exhortation to pray for Princes, to be restrained only to the prayers & supplications to be made, for the conversion of kings un the knowledge of the truth: but it stretcheth further, yea generally, as well for those that are converted, as those that are to be converted: & as well to give thanks for the one, as to pray for the other, & not only for their own salvation: but that by their means, all their subjects likewise may attain to the way of salvation. 1. Tim. 2. He reckoneth up (saith calvin) the fruits that spring unto us, out of a principality that is well ordered: the first is a quiet life. For, Calvin in 1. Tim. 2. the magistrates are armed with the sword, to keep us in peace. Except they should beat down the audaciousness of wicked men, all things would be full of robberies & slaughters, etc. The second fruit is the conservation (or salvation) that is to wit, while the Magistrates endeavour to nourish religion, to plant the worship of God, to require the reverence of holy things. The 3. is the care of public honesty, etc. If these 3. things be taken away, what is the state of man's life? if any care therefore, The benefits that we have by the Prince's ministery. either of public tranquillity, or of Godliness, or of honesty touch us, let us remember to have consideration of them, by the ministry of whom, so excellent things do come into us. Thus doth Calvin confess) that the Ministry of the Prince stretcheth as far forth, in procuring unto us the benefit of religion, as of the other twain: & therefore he concludeth, that we must pray for Princes aswell & as much (if not much more) for this benefit, as for the other. Yea, saith he: If any man shall ask, whether prayer ought also to be made for the Kings, of whom we receive no such thing? I answer; Why we should pray for Princes of whom we have not these benefits our prayers ought to tend hereunto, that they being governed by the spirit of God, may begin to be the Ministers unto us of those good things, of which before they did deprive us. And therefore it behoveth us, not only to pray for those that already are worthy, but we must pray to god, that of ill, he would make them good. For we must always hold this principle, that magistrates are appointed of God, aswell for the custody of religion, as of tranquillity & public honesty; even no otherwise, than the earth is ordained to bring forth nourishing fruits. As therefore when we pray for our daily bread, we beseech god, that with his blessing he would make the earth fruitful; so in those former benefits, we must look to the ordinary mean, which by his providence he hath appointed, etc. Moreover here are Princes (on the otherside) and whosoever are Magistrates, admonished of their office. For it is not enough, if that they repress all injuries, by rendering to every one his right, & nourish peace: except that they promoat religion, The Prince's office. & study to compose men's manners with an honest discipline. For David doth not in vain exhort them, to kiss the son: nor Esay in vain denounceth, that they shallbe the nourishing fathers of the Church. Therefore they have not to flatter themselves, if they shall neglect to give themselves to be helpers to plant the worship of god. Thus doth Calvin upon this place, advance and recommend unto us, the great & most necessary authority of Princes in Religion, & not allege it to their restraint, (as do our brethren) clean contrary to all the Godly interpreters of this place. A godly and honest life (say they) we may live under enemies of the Church and persecutors. Very hardly (say I) and very few, except the mightyer power and grace of God preserve them. How hardly we may lead a godly life under persecutors. Howbeit our brethren here, do but as they did before, Pag. 9 where they said: the Church of God was perfect in all her regiment, before there was any Christian Prince, yea, the Church of God may stand and doth stand at this day, in most blessed estate, where the civil Magistrates are not the greatest favourers. And was it not enough and to much for them, in the beginning of their learned discourse, to have put back the treatise of the Prince's authority, Our br. renew their old defacing of the Prince's authority. till all their Clergy have all their authorities first allotted out to every one of them, and to put back the Princes with such a contumely: but that now also, when they should come to the place that they promised to reserve for them, instead of commending their authority in Eccl. matters, thus still to abase it, & especially this greatest benefit among all other, & far above them all, that under God chiefly floweth unto us from godly & religious Princes? I grant it springeth not from them, as from the only or principal founteynes: for God himself & his grace that floweth unto us from him, is the chief fountain, that cannot be stopped, where he vouchsafeth to infuse it: and his word is even a fountain of life, in the preaching, teaching, reading, meditating, believing, & obeying the same, sourging & flowing into all godliness and honesty in this life, & to life everlasting. Which (though in the elect of God) cannot by any Prince's power be dried up, or utterle stopped, but that the water course thereof will break forth with great force & violence, though not of bodily resistance, but of spiritual power & operation: yet notwithstanding, as it pleaseth God to use the labour in the word of his Eccl. Ministers, for the planting & watering of his Church: so hath he ordained godly Princes, (where he of his great mercy raiseth them up) to be the chief Governors & directors, The excellent benefit that we receive by a godly prince. to oversee the conduit pipes of these spiritual waters, to be conveyed into all the offices of the Lords house, & into all the parts of their dominions, & to run orderly in their currents, & to remove all the stops, & to cleanse all the corruptions, & as need is, to repair & amend all the pipes: or else the effects of godliness & honesty shallbe greatly hindered, be spilled, or run another way; and dishonesty & ungodliness overflow. This therefore, (if we shall respect the general course of these effects in the Church, throughout the whole states of Realms & Dominions, rather than some rare & particular persons,) is not so well spoken as it should be of our Bre. that a godly & honest life we may live, In the word godliness S. Paul understandeth the worship of God. under enemies of the Church & persecutors. For the enemies & persecutors (except god miraculously do turn it otherwise, to his glory & his elects confirmation) are the greatest hinderers & overthrowers, both of honesty, & of all Godliness. In which word godliness (especially when the Apostle addeth, in all godliness) not only godliness of life (as the Papists confess) which is but all one with honesty: but (as we have showed out of calvin) the godliness of religion or true worship of God is most especially comprehended, as Beza also weary well doth note thereon. This (saith he) is a most noble place, not only against the anabaptists & all other fanatical (or mad-spirited) persons, that think the Magistrate is to be taken away: but also against that most cruel charity (or brotherhood of love) of the Academikes, which of late have crept in, & yield not to Magistrates a right, against the disturbers of true Religion: when as mention is here expressly made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, The Prince's duty before all things to set forth true religion. of the just & lawful worship, of which only before other things, it behoveth the godly Magistrates to be the maintainers & setters forth. Yea, so far forth, that so often as there should be any necessity, either to forego religion, or civil peace: what Princes soever would not prefer that before this, they should wittingly, & advisedly bind themselves, with a most grievous offence, etc. Thus again doth Beza on this sentence, commend the authority of the Christian Prince, The peaceable & quiet life that our Bre. grant we have by Princes. a great deal further here than do our bre. and yet I deny not, this is somewhat, that they will yet grant thus much; that we may live a peaceable & quiet life, in all godliness and honesty only under a christian Prince. For so can we not do, under enemies & persecutors: for they will suffer none to live a quiet and godly life, that are the professors of true religion, but to the uttermost of their power, destroy them, or disturb their peace and quietness. And how then will our bre. justify their former saying, Pag. 9? the Church of God may stand, and doth stand at this day in most blessed estate, where the civil Magistrates are not the greatest favourers? Is that a blessed, and most blessed estate: Our Bre. here confute their former saying Pag 9 when they that profess godliness & honesty cannot live a peaceable nor quiet life? doth not the Church of God stand in a great deal far more blessed estate, where they may lead a peaceable and quiet life in all godliness and honesty? and therefore sith they confess here, and that more truly, that this benefit is only under a Christian Prince: it followeth, that their other saying was not true: no, nor yet this: & albeit in part, this be the truer of the twain; yet it answereth not home to the due commendation & setting forth of a christian Princes authority, how far it stretcheth in matters of Religion. For although quietness & peaceableness in these things, is no small commodity (for a man would give much, to buy his peace & to live in quietness?) nevertheless, since that in these things is not the only end, nor the chiefest end of Christian Princes, nor the greatest benefit that we receive by them; but their help, furtherance, & supreme authority under Christ, in setting out godly and honest laws, Our Bre. s●t not forth the best parts of the benefits by a godly Prince. ordinances & decrees, with the advice of their godly learned Clergy in those matters, for the establishment & maintenance of godly Religion & honest life in peace and quietness, therefore our bre. do not here sufficiently set forth all, nor the best part of the benefits, that we receive by the authority of a godly Christian Prince: nor so much as the ancient examples both in the old testament, & as the allowance of the new Testament, or as the foresaid practice of the Emperors & Kings in Christendom doth allow, nor as we ourselves have both of late felt, The benefits that we receive from God by her majesty. in the governments, of that most Heroical Prince King Henry the 8. and the most virtuous King Edward the 6. or that now especially (if we be not to unthankful, in not recognizing the manifold & exceeding benefits, that daily we all receive & enjoy from the godly reign of our most gracious sovereign Queen Elizabeth, which now most happily reigneth over us, God be highly blessed for her, and God vouchsafe still to bless her, and give us better grace in all duty & thankfulness to acknowledge it. Much better doth Beza, Beza in Christ confess, ca 5. act. 44. even on this sentence also, in his confession. cap. 5. article 44. acknowledge these benefits of the Christian Prince, saying: It remaineth that we treat upon the Magistrate, to wit, one of the members of the Church, & that in his kind, placed before the other without any exception. As that whose force is architectonical or building, the office therefore of this magistrate, is to conserve the public peace & tranquillity. But when as that cannot well be done, but that in the first place, the true worship of God must flourish, from the which only all true felicity springeth; The chiefest office of Christian Magistrates. it followeth that nothing aught of Christian Magistrates to be esteemed higher, than that they have the church ordered, according to the prescript of God's word, the authority whereof they ought to defend & maintain, against all the froward contemners & disturbers thereof, following the example of David, etc. This thing (say they) the Church most humbly desireth of the Prince: for this end, the Church continually prayeth to God for the Prince: in this respect, The learned disc. pag. 145. the church most obediently submitteth herself unto the prince as a child to his nurse, that both Prince and people may honour God in this life, and after this life reign with Christ everlastingly. This conclusion is a great deal better than the premises. For in them, we had all things still driven, to the Princes abasing of themselves unto the Church. Bridges. Which subjection notwithstanding, in the foresaid sense, as she is the spouse of Christ, & the Prince a particular person; as she is the mother, & the Prince her child, Our Br conclusion better than all their premises. so well as any of his subjects: we deny it not. But here now at length, our bre. tell us another tale; how the church desireth of the Prince; how the Church not only prayeth continually for the Prince; but also most obediently submitteth herself unto the Prince, as a child to his nurse. In these words is inferred a great authority of the Prince over the Church. Now, if we shall see, what the matters are, wherein this authority of the Prince over the church consists: all this controversy is forthwith concluded. The doubtful re●●●ea●e of our Brother's speeches. And here, to the specifying of this point, this thing (say our bre..) the church most humbly desireth of the Prince: what is this thing? For this end, the Church continually prayeth to God for the Prince: & what is this end? In this respect the Church most obediently submitteth herself unto the Prince, as a child to his nurse, and what also is this respect? For, Our Bre. & our grant to the prince. we may either refer, this thing, this end, & this respect, either to the words that went before; or to the words that follow. If we shall refer them to the words that follow; that both Prince & people may honour god in this life and after this life reign with christ everlastingly: our br. from giving to little, may give too much, Princes the means to s●luatio●. except they make Princes to be but as means & instruments hereunto; as also be the Eccl. ministers in their callings. Both of them the prince & they, are the instruments & means that God hath ordained to this end, in the government of his church, by the making of good Eccl. laws that both Prince and people may honour God in this life, 1. Sam. 2. 30●. & of the consequence that God hath vouhsafed to set down, (I will honour them that honour me) theymay after this life, reign with Christ everlastingly. But if we shall refer this thing, this end, & this respect, to the words, going before, that is, a peaceable and a quiet life, in all godliness & honesty: then are we never the hearer for the point in question, to know how far forth, in procuring a peaceable & quiet life, in all godliness & honesty, The pitch of the controversy between us concerning this question. our br. will grant the authority of the Prince to stretch: whether to make (with the advice of their learned clergy) Eccl. laws, conducing aswell to godliness, that is to say, to gods true religion & worship; as to honesty & to a peaceable & quiet life, yea or no. For this is the very pitch of the question in controversy. They say, that the Prince with the advice of the learned clergy may make civil laws for Eccl. matters. And we say, that the Prince with the advice of the learned clergy, may make, even Eccl. laws, or laws not only for, but of Eccl. matters. They say, that the Pastor's only (though for a show now and then they join with the Pastors, Th● difference between us. those whom they term the governors) must make the decrees & laws Eccl. appertaining to order comeliness & edification of the church yea, who but teachers & preachers is able to know them? & then the prince must make civil laws to bind the people to all eccl, orders, that they being instructed by the word of god, through the ministry of the preaching of the same, shall understand, to be profitable for edifying the church of christ, & to the advancement of the glory of god. And yet somewhat further, If any shall offend against the laws, whether he be preacher or hearer, besides the eccl. censure which he should not escape; he is also to be punished in body by the civil magistrate. we say, that the prince hath a part, & that a principal part, even in the very making of all these eccl. laws, orders or decrees, in that he maketh them by his royal consent to be eccl. laws, orders & decrees. For till the princes royal assent, ratify them, (if there be a christian Prince so to do) they be but determinations what should or may be done, and are indeed rather deliberations and advisements, than that they have the vigour & force of decrees and laws. So that, the Prince tarrieth not (as they say) till the Clergy have fully decreed it for a law, & afterward by the Ministry of their preaching, they let him understand what decrees and laws they have made: How the Prince is a nurse & then must he observe them, and bind his people unto them, & punish those that offend against them: but we say, that they devise them, & he enacteth them. They say, they should be; & he saith, they shall be: and so he maketh the Eccl. laws with their advices. This is the very point, that if they could they should, or rather should not, but would infringe. For in this chiefly consisteth, the Prince's supreme authority in Eccl. matters that we defend, and they thus begin to call in question. But even their own similitude doth here beat them: that they say, in this respect the church most obediently submitteth herself unto the Prince as a child to his nurse. For if the Church doth so submit herself to the Prince: Our brethren's similitude of a nurse against them. then, as the nurse doth not only procure peace & quietness to the child, in the things that are necessary for him, but doth give him suck also, and nourisheth him with milk from her own breasts, besides other things that she provideth, and not only dresseth & trimmeth up the child, but also appointeth orders & rules to others in the house, how the child should be kept & tended: so the Prince in all these things not only for quietness & safety of the church, nor for civil honesty only & conversation of life; but also in feeding the Church with the milk of God's word (as even the very interlineall gloss of the Papists themselves, cannot shun, but confess that interpretation, it is so forcible against them) & how is this the feeding them with this milk from the Prince's breasts? since they their selves do not Preach the word; but by that authority that is in the Prince to set forth Eccl. laws, for the feeding of the people with gods word, by all such other means beside preaching, teaching, & ministry of the Sacraments, as is competent to their princely estate: that is to say, by making Eccl. laws, orders, & decrees, for the nourishing and governing of the Church. Though still, in respect the Princes are but particular persons, they again are but as the children, the Pastors their nurses; God their father; & the Church their mother. And thus (we grant) as mutual means & instruments thereunto, they have on all parts, this authority given them of god, that (as our brethren say) both Prince and people may honour God in this life, and after this life, reign with christ everlastingly. And this is all that our Bre. say, of the supreme authority of Christian Princes in Ecclesiastical matters. Thus have we briefly set forth a form of reformation, touching matters Eccl. (as we are thoroughly persuaded, agreeable to the word of God, & as we are able to prove, consenting with the example of the primitive church, The learned disc. pag. 145. building only upon the most sure foundation of the canonical scriptures: but intending more at large, if occasion shall serve, hereafter to set forth the practice & consent of the godly fathers in their acts, Counsels & writings, following the same rule and interpretation of the scripture that we have done, And thus also have we fully & thoroughly heard, The Epilogue of this learned disc. what our bre. briefly or largely have set forth, in all this their learned discourse of Eccl. government, for the form of reformation touching Ecclesiastical matters. Bridges. Here therefore, having now finished their whole discourse, which in the front thereof they have entitled, A brief and plain declaration, containing the desires of all those faithful Ministers, that have and do seek for the reformation of the Church of England: Our brethren's Epilogue of this learned discourse. They now enter into the Epilogue or small per-oration, for the knitting up of all the matters, that in this learned discourse have been laid down. And first, whereas (the more to persuade the reader to believe them) they say, this form that they have here set forth, Our brethren's persuasion that this their form is agreeable to God's word. is (as they are thoroughly persuaded) agreeable to the word of God: I answer, this is not material, what they are or are not thoroughly persuaded to be agreeable to the word of God. For though in Christ, we wish as well to them, as they to us: yet depend we no more on their persuasions to themselves, than they on ours to us. But if they could have brought, or can bring, any sufficient and clear proof of matter, out of the word of GOD indeed, We depend not on our brethren's persuasion, but on their proves that might persuade us thoroughly thereunto: If they could do that, it were very material, and by the grace of God, we should not gainsay it, contrary to our consciences, but yield on all hands thereunto, and be as thoroughly persuaded as there are. But this must be with better and firmer proves of God's word, than either our Bre. have yet alleged, or any other that ever I read, agreeable or inclinable to their opinion. For, setting aside all such persuasions of men; this persuasion must be wrought with pure matter. For till then, they can never thoroughly persuade other, to be persuaded as they be, if they their selves be indeed (as they say they are) thoroughly persuaded. And although I may be somewhat easily persuaded, that they are somewhat persuaded, that this their form is agreeable to God's word: yet as yet, I can neither be thoroughly persuaded, that they their selves are thoroughly so persuaded of this form: nor that this form of this learned discourse (let the learning, in each man's persuasion, go as it shall) is either the discourse, declaration, or desires, of all those faithful Ministers, that have and do seek for the discipline and reformation of the Church of England. Our brethren's persuasion of our Bishops and most of the Clergy. For first, they are not (I think) persuaded that all, or any one of our Bishops, and a great many, if not all, or the most part of us, are so persuaded, either thoroughly, or in part, or at all. If they shall utterly herein reject all our Bishops and all us, beside only themselves, as no faithful ministers: that were too arrogant a part in themselves, and too injurious and contumelious to all the Ministers in the Church of England, that are not thoroughly persuaded as (they say) they be. Yea, this contumely and injury would include many not only of their own favourers, that yet are not persuaded at all, Our Br. persuasion of this form. in many things contained in this learned discourse, but utterly mislike them, and will perhaps be less and less persuaded, Our bre. their selves not persuaded of this form but dissenting from it. and more mislike them, when they view and consider better of the matters, of the grounds, of the proves, and of the drifts thereof. But if they mean this through persuasion, to be of them only that do openly profess their discontentment, and are recusants and accusants of th● government established in Ecclesiastical matters, and that speak or write against it, and have set out other books, or that have complotted themselves together in devising and setting forth this form of reformation, which they call a learned discourse, and a declaration of all the faithful Ministers, etc. which who they are, and what number they be of, God knows, I know not: yet this I know, and it is apparent, that divers of them are so far from being thoroughly persuaded in the form here set forth; that almost none of their writings & books in many points, Our bre. condemning all ministers disagreeing from them to be unfaithful. and some of those very material, are agreeable either one with another, or with this form, as by conference of them will easily appear. And some of their divers opinions, and clean contrary positions, we have here seen, as occasion hath served to observe the same. Yea, we have seen, how their own selves oppugn their own selves, with divers and contrary assertions in this learned discourse. And then by this title of their form, that it is the desires of all the faithful Ministers, that seek for the discipline & reformation of the Church of England; all those different from these, seek a wrong discipline & reformation, & are unfaithful Ministers, & call their own faithfulness & seeking in question too. But I verily think (God forgive me if I think amiss) where this learned discourse is set fo●th in the name of all the faithful Ministers that desire & seek for the reformation of the Church of England: if they would declare their names who they be, and that they were asked their voices by scrutiny, or might deliver the same as freely as they their selves would wish; our scrutators when they had numbered all their voices, would return us a fair Non placet. If they would not rather many of them, even openly disclaim their consent for their parts, & profess that this form is none of their form, nor they desire nor seek for many of these strange and dangerous matters, that in this learned discourse are prescribed. Yea, whosoever were the writers hereof, in the names of all the faithful Ministers; me thinketh they began even here somewhat to s●agger, and dare not in plain words for a round conclusion say; Our bre. begin to shrink in their persuasion. this form is plat and plain set down, and prescribed or commanded in the word of God; and that they are thoroughly so persuaded. No, they have yet more grace than so: & they pronounce their words more warylie, saying: it is agreeable to the word of God. Howbeit, they deal not well in this cunning conveyance of their words, that under the quarter sail of agreeable, will so compass the wind, till they set up full sail, and thrust it upon us, not only as agreeable; but as flatly commanded and prescribed. For if it prescribe not, but be● only agreeable, as here they say; agreeable form ●o gods word. then are not we of any such necessity bound thereto, but that we may keep this form of Ecclesiastical government, that is already established, Agreeabl or disagreeable to god's word. well enough; except our brethren can prove it to be disagreeable. Yea, so disagreeable, that it be repugnant to the word of God: which as yet they have not, withal their heaving and shoving, been able to do. And yet, if they could prove it to be disagreeable: this enforceth no necessity of their form; no, though we should also admit that it were agreeable to the word of God: which neither yet have they been able to do, withal their éeching and wring of God's word, to prove it. But for all this, they say, they are able to prove, that their form of reformation here set forth, is consenting with the example of the Primitive Church. Indeed they said not so much before, for the agreeableness of this form to the word of God, that they were able to prove it; but only that they were thoroughly persuaded it is agreeable. But for all their persuasion, we have (thanks be to God) plainly seen it proved, that it is much disagreeable from the word of God, even in every of the persons of their tetrarchy, and in many other great and important points: and not only disagreeable, but contrary. But now, when they come from the word of GOD, to the Primitive Church, where they begin to take upon them somewhat more boldly, that they are able to prove: what now are they able to prove? any rule, commandment, or prescription of this form? No. What our Br. say they are able to prove. But (say they) we are able to prove it to be consenting with the example of the Primitive Church. What? do they pass clean over all rule, commandment, and prescription, as a matter that they dare not so much as touch, or look after, but leap at the first chop into example? Or doth every example in the Primitive Church make a prescription? consenting with the example of the primitive church. or is equivalent with a rule or commandment? or if it do not; how doth it bind us? especially, understanding the example of the Primitive Church, so as here they do, in a separate sense from that, that is contained in the Scripture: for so I take it, that they meant the scripture only, when they spoke before of the word of God: and that now by y● example of the Primitive Church they mean the time immediately succeeding that time, What they mean by the primitive Church. that is expressed in the word of God. And yet, though they did comprehend in the name of the Primitive Church, the time also expressed in the word of God, or any example in the word of God: they should hardly urge a rule, or prescription of some one example, if they have nothing else but only some such example for it. Well might an example be brought for an instance of the practice, of some one point or matter set forth in this form: Every example neither inferreth a rule nor general practice. but what would that serve, for any example of all the points & matters, that they have set forth in this form? Can they prove a general practice of all these, or of any one ●oint upon which they have discoursed, that the example thereof was used universally, Our Br. wary speeches. and in continual practice in the Primitive Church? Understand the Primitive Church how they please; they have not yet showed us any such example. No, in very deed not any one example, that is answerable to this their prescribed form. Yes (say they) we are able to prove this form, to be consenting to the example of the Primitive Church. Consenting? what mean they by that: So they told us before, of being agreeable to the word of God, and do they now tell us of consenting to the example of the Primitive Church? Why do they now begin so sparingly to mince their terms, and as it were by ounces thus warily to way their words, Why our Br. do thus now in the end restrain their speeches. in the ending of this their learned discourse? What, is it now, in fundo parsimonia? or are they now waxen more wise, than before in the discourse of all their learning? They had wont to follow the matter so freshly, to urge and press on every thing so peremptorily, that it was so, and it is so, and it shall be so: every conjecture was a conclusion; every example was a prescription; yea, every word a sentence, every sentence a rule, and every rule without all exception; there is no remedy, thus and thus it must be. And now, when it comes to the upshot and last reckoning, I cannot tell how, all is dashed. Or do they misdoubt, they have somewhat overshot themselves before? And it is good to keep some sober for an after reckoning, and therefore they now come in, with these more circumspect terms. Well, yet when all is done, it is either at least, agreeable to God's word: or at least, we are thoroughly so persuaded: or if it were not in the word of God: yet at least, it was in the Primitive Church: or at least, there was then the example of it: or at least, it was consenting with the example. Nay then brethren, and ye can drive it on thus: was it not at least, your own consent that we should imagine it for an example, or at least, was it not indeed mere nothing? Parturiunt montes nascetur ridiculus mus? is all this platform come now to this, that it is consenting to the example of the Primitive Church? Well then, if it be but consenting, and that but with example, and that but of the Primitive Church: then, the market is well fallen, and perhaps marred, for the utterance of these wares. And as we had before nothing but agreeable, so it may fall out, that it is neither agreeable, nor consenting; at least, this is manifest that agreeable and consenting is not the same. Yea indeed, this form of reformation that our brethren urge, is neither the same, nor agreeable, nor consenting. And yet, admit it were consenting in matters that are not prescribed, not only other forms agreeable and consenting, Agreeable and consenting are not the same. but even disagreeable and dissenting also in some points, are so little to be condemned, that they may be very well allowed: or (to come down as they do) they may at least, be so well borne withal, that the unity of doctrine, and peace of God, should not be broken, nor Schisms made for them in his Church. But since our brethren here, after God's word, stand upon the consenting with the example of the Primitive Church: Our Br. dissent and disagreeablenes what time will they limit for the Primitive Church? For if we shall understand it (as commonly it is understood) for all the time of the persecutions till Constantine's reign? Our Br. form not consenting with the Primitive church. how can they prove the form of reformation that is here prescribed, to be consenting with the example of the Primitive Church: yea, take it for any age after the Apostles: yea, in the very Apostles times? Can they name but one Doctor in any place, that might not or did not apply his doctrine, and exhort, and preach? they have not named him. Can they name any one Church, where all the Pastors were so equal, that they had not a Bishop, or some one having a standing superior government over the residue, if there were many Pastors in that Church; or if they had not at all times, might not have had, as well other Churches had; as we have seen what a number of such superior Bishops there were in the Primitive Church? Or can they name the man, that was such a governing Elder as might not teach, or any Church that had them, Our Brethren can show no example in the Primi. Church for the most of their chiefest positions. speaking of such as were Ecclesiastical or Church Presbyters Priests or Elders? Or if there were any such in some Churches; that there was such, and a Consistory of them, in all the Primitive Churches? Or can they tell who, where, and when, there were such Deacons, as meddled only with the care of the poor, and contributions for them, or distributions to them, that did not also attend upon the Pastors, and might not be admitted (as occasion served) either to preach, teach, nor administer the Sacraments, nor so dispose themselves thereto, that they might be prepared to be made Pastors? Can they show that excommunication was so pronounced by such as were not Ministers of the word, that all the people or a signory of them in their names, were joined with the Pastors, in the power of the keys, or for the Spiritual binding and losing? Can they show that all which were elected and ordained Pastors, were elected and ordained only in Synods; and the Pastoral Elders of the word no longer accounted Pastoral Elders, than they were only in the place where their Pastoral charge did lie? And a number there are of such things, in this form of reformation pretended, of which they can never show in the Primitive Church any example; although perhaps of some things, they might show some example, and yet that not general, nor any perpetual rule thereof, to bind all Churches and all ages to that example. But they do well here to tell us, that they are able to prove all this. Our brethren say they are able to prove it. And why then (if they be able) have they not done it? Do they want the act and esse, whereof they told us, pag. 126? And have they now in the end found out (to dare us withal) a potential ability in the Clouds? Do they tell us now (when they have finished all their learned discourse thereon) that they are able to prove it? It had been better if they could have said they have proved it. Me thinks it had been a iolier hearing, to have heard them say, we have proved it. And I am thoroughly persuaded in this, Our Br. ability of proof that if they had thoroughly persuaded themselves that they had proved it, they would not have strained courtesy to have told us, that they had proved it, and not have said now, they are able to prove it. But it is a sign of grace, that our Brethren have this shamefastness, that yet they will not go thus far, A token of grace not to boast they have done that they have not done. as to say they have proved that, which their own consciences witnesseth, and all the world may see, they have not proved, in all this their learned discoursing on the matter. Well, what of that: though they have not as yet proved it; yet, what say we to this? They are able to prove it. Be they so indeed? Let them do it then, say I, a God's blessing, begin when they list, so they do it more orderly than they have hitherto gone to work. But till then, I stand still on this; proved it they have not. And (for any thing that they have already said) we need not doubt, but that we shall (by God's grace) be as well able to improve it, as they to prove it, except they have better proves to come, than as yet we have seen any. And if they shall be able to bring such proves as shall prove it indeed: I for my part (God willing) as I shall be able, will be also as ready, to yield most gladly so far, as they shall be able to prove it. Building (say they) only upon the most sure foundation of the canonical Scriptures. How our Brethren have builded on the foundation of the Scripture. That (say I) is a most sure foundation indeed, and yet withal they must build well and surely, and with good matter, not with stubble, sticks, and combustible stuff upon it. But, that they have neither built the form set forth in this learned discourse, only upon this most sure foundation; nor, where they have taken any plot of ground out of scripture, as their foundation to build upon any piece of this litigious frame, they have done otherwise than to enforce that platform on that ground with no right nor propriety thereunto; nor yet have builded thereon as good and skilful builders should have done; nor with such firm stuff and metal as will abide the trial of the fire: I refer it to the surveyors of the work, and to all such as are expert in this kind of Architecture, to give their judgements both of the whole modill of this plotforme, and of every parcel thereof, and of all their stuff, workmanship, and manner of their building. But our brethren put us in better comfort, that if all this learned discourse will not serve; they are not minded to leave off so. But intending (say they) more at large, if occasion shall serve, hereafter to set forth, Our Bre. promise to set forth the ancient Fathers of these things the practice and consent of the godly fathers in their acts, Counsels and writings, following the same rule and interpretation of the Scripture, that we have done. Verily, neither this learned discourse, nor any other of our Brothers, as yet set forth, no, nor any thing in Calvin, Beza, or Danaeus, (for I take it, What our brethren have performed. that our brethren have most followed these three) or any other treatise that is extant, (at least, that I could ever see or read) doth nor can prove the form of reformation, that our brethren have here in this learned discourse prescribed. So that, they do well to be intending of some other piece of work: for I see no other remedy, (to persuade us so thoroughly, as they say they are) but that we must intend also on their further intending, when and whatsoever they shall more at large hereafter set forth as occasion shall serve. Which (what occasion they intent it shall be) I remit to God. And if they shall truly set forth this that here they solemnly promise, of the practice and consent of the godly fathers in their acts, Counsels and writings: I dare (by prevention) say thus much before hand, let me prove it, as I shall be able, that they shall never be able to prove, that those godly fathers followed the same rule and interpretation of the scripture, that our brethren have followed, What our Br. shall do if they shall truly perform this promise. in the form of this their learned discourse of Ecclesiastical government: or that herein, either Calvin, or Beza, or Danaeus, and other our brethren have so done. Not that I burden them as falsaries: (whom I honour as godly fathers also, and dear brethren, with all due reverence) but as mistakers of those ancient godly fathers, as we have partly seen already, and shall see further, by God's grace, when the performance of this promise shall come forth, to examine thoroughly, Doctors. how they interpreted or practised the office of Doctors not exhorting nor applying the Scriptures; to search more narrowly, how they interpreted the rules, and practised the office of Bishops and Pastors: and whether one among the Pastoral Elders, were not in dignity and jurisdiction, a continuing superior, to whom the residue yielded a propriety of the name of Bishop: yea, whether it were practised otherwise, Bishops and Pastors. among those godly fathers, in any Church in all Christendom from the Apostles times, until Constantine's: yea, whether other of our brethren themselves, both Calvin, Beza, Danaeus, and divers others, do not confess as much in plain words? And therefore, if they shall hereafter when occasion shall serve them, allege those godly fathers to the contrary, that is to wit, to prove all Pastoral Elders to have been all in dignity and jurisdiction equal, and Bishops all alike, one as much as another, except only for a prerogative to some one Pastor, in some synodal assembly: let them also intent to this, whether they should not manifestly hale th●se godly father's interpretations and practice, clean contrary to their meaning and doing, yea clean contrary to their own consciences and open assertions, that should so allege them. To peruse likewise the writings, acts, and counsels, Consistory of Elders. of those godly fathers, how they used their Consistories of Elders, where they had any (as in great Cities they had) whether they were of such Presbyters, Priests or Elders, as being Ecclesiastical persons, they had not to meddle in public teaching, but were governors only; and not how many of those godly fathers, but whether any of them, interpret those words of Christ, Math. 18. Math. 18. Tell the Church; as Calvin and our brethren do interpret them. And further, to consider the interpretations, writings, acts, and Counsels of those godly fathers, Deacons. for the use and practise of the Deacons: whether besides the collections and distributions for the poor, they might not also be employed to the public teaching of the word of God, as occasion served, nor to the ministering of the Sacraments, nor to the attendance in the divine service on the Bishops and Pastors, whose proper office consisted therein. If our brethren shall prove all these things to have been so used, to have been so interpreted, and so practised, in the practice and consent of the godly fathers, in their acts, Counsels and writings, following the same rule and interpretation of the Scripture, that our brethren in the form of reformation prescribed in this learned discourse of Ecclesiastical government, have done: when they shall have performed all this, and shall, as they intent more at large, as occasion shall serve, hereafter set it forth, that we may also be thoroughly persuaded by it: then will I say also for these our brethren, that they shall have better acquit themselves than as yet they have done, yea, than any hitherto have done. If not rather in attempting this, they shall not do, yet worse than they have done, and worse than any other have done; if they shallbe manifestly found to wrest the interpretations, writings, practice, consents, acts and Counsels, of those godly Fathers. What we have heard already in those godly Fathers, cited the more at large, The godly fathers against our brethren in all these things. and the greater number of them, even to the tedious tiring both myself and the reader; but chief to avoid all suspicion of wresting or abusing them, and to show the greater consent of them, and the more continual and universal practice of them: and how in all these things those godly Fathers do hitherto appear (at least wise in my simple judgement) clean contrary to this form of our brethren, set forth in this learned discourse, for all these matters of this their quadripartite government in Ecclesiastical causes, being the greatest points, or next the greatest here in controversy: I refer all past on both parts to God and the reader, praying the reader, till this their promise be performed, when they shall hereafter have occasion; in the mean time to consider better of this their learned discourse, and of this (though not comparing in learning, but pleading for truth) my well meaning answer thereunto. Our brethren having now made this repetition, what they have done, or rather would have done; and given us this promise, what they are intending hereafter to do: The learned disc. pag. 146. hereupon they proceed to a solemn protestation, of the causes that moved them to set forth this learned discourse. Therefore we protest before the living God, and his holy Angels, and before the Lord jesus Christ, Our Br. protestation. that shall come to judge the quick and the dead, and before the Queen's majesty our most gracious sovereign, and the whole assembly of all estates of this Realm: Our Br. protestation of the causes of this learned discourse. that as the whole world may plainly see, we seek hereby not our own profit, case nor advancement, but only the glory of God, and the profit of his Church: so by this present writing we discharge our conscience according to our duty, which is to show unto all men the true way of reformation, and to move them that have authority to put it in practice, and to seek by all lawful and ordinary means, that it may take place, that if it may please GOD to give it good success, at this time to be embraced, we may fulfil the rest of our course with joy. The manner of our Brothers protestation, I would have liked a great deal better, to have had our Lord jesus Christ, Bridges. (being also himself the living God, one and coequal with the father) set before his holy Angels, The manner of our Br. protestation. be they never so holy. But now, as they protest before the living God, our heavenly father, and before the Lord jesus Christ his son our saviour, that shall come to judge the quick and the dead, and before his holy Angels: and before the Queen's Majesty our most gracious Sovereign, and before the whole assembly of all estates of this Realm, meaning the high Court of Parliament: so, howsoever they may deceive mortal creatures, God is not mocked, as the Apostle saith. And therefore our brethren have to take great heed, what they have here protested in the name of God, (whereof saith David Psal. 111. Holy and fearful is his name) if they mind not as seriously and religiously the matter, as they have thus solemnly protested the name. I speak this (which I am heartily sorry to speak) seeing this great overzealousnes of our brethren, that in their earnestness (if they mean earnest, or else it is a great deal worse) avow these high speeches in the name of God, of Angels and of men, that they can never justify before either God or Angels, or before men. For, since they have made this great and terrible protestation in the name of them all; and which all? All those faithful ministers, that have and do seek for the discipline and reformation of the Church of England: and that this is a brief and plain declaration of the desires of all those that seek for these things, which they have here set down in this learned discourse: whatsoever they seek hereby, Our Br. protesting for all the faithful ministers. this protestation is very dangerous. All penned not this learned discourse, and perhaps all have not seen it; yea peradventure, it is so little the desires of all; that some may mislike many things, or some thing in it. Yea, I myself have showed it unto some, that are even of the most earnest of them, who at the first view have liked this book, and called it indeed a learned discourse, and yet when I have showed them some of the principles therein; they have upon better conference and advisement, divers of our brethren misliking these desi●es in whose names this protestation is made. so misliked them, that they have utterly protested, that whosoever were the compilers of it, or consenters to it, both they and many others think their names abused, accounting themselves to be no less of the number of those faithful ministers, that have and do seek for the discipline and reformation of the Church of England, than any of these learned discoursers reckon themselves to be: and yet they renounce the desire of these things. But what need we allege hereto, the private speeches of any of our brethren? Vanescunt voces, litera scripta manet. See and confer our Brothers writings, or look but on those, that by occasion have here fallen out to be noted, in the answer to this learned discourse, in how many, and that no small things, divers of our brethren oppose themselves, to the desires that here these learned discoursers do seek for. Yea, I believe, that if all and ●uery of our brethren, The variety & uncertainty of our br. desires. which would claim interest in the title of this discourse, but not in the matter of this discourse, would freely lay down all their several desires, and the thing that every one of them doth indeed seek for: their desires and seekings would be so variable and repugnant in many unportant matters, that we should neither know any certainty, what they would agree upon to desire; nor be able to determine what we might grant. And how then in this confusion and contrarieties of their desiring and seeking, can any one man, or a number of them, that agree upon this form here set forth, (if indeed they had agreed, and were not also in many things, as we have seen, clean contrary to their own selves even in this learned discourse) make this solemn protestation, not only for him, or for themselves, but for a number of other, yea for all other among them, that seek, or seek not this or that? And therefore, in my poor judgement, and as one that wisheth their good unfeignedly, A more wary protestation had been better. this solemn and dreadful protestation, might better have been spared, or protested in some other more wary manner. As right now, talking of agreeable and consenting, they were wary enough, how they tempered and set their words, and so much more (when here they protested on this wise) stood it them upon, to have added at least, so far as they know, or so far as they are persuaded, believe, or hope: and not so resolutely to affirm that, which neither they nor any, but God doth know, who is the only searcher of each man's heart, and only knoweth (whatsoever they pretend) what indeed they seek for and desire. But yet our brethren thought perhaps, that this solemn protestation would do well here, Why our br. conclude with so solemn a protestation. to move the reader's hearts at the closing up of all the matter: and indeed it moved mine, and that not a little, to see them after such long dalliance, all the while of this their learned discoursing, thus solemnly in the end, to appeal to God for witness. And yet for some part of the matter, and for some part of the men also, What our Br. seek. I for my part will believe them on their bare word, without this deep protesting: though all the whole world may not plainly see it, nor will believe it, for all this protestation, that they seek hereby, not their own profit, ease, They protest that they seek not their own profit. etc. nor advancement, for if they should, they might full easily be deceived. Do they not rather seek their own hurt, trouble, and overthrow? Not wittingly, I think: and yet, they may seek it, and find it too, as some of them have done, and have now leisure enough to repent them of it. Our br. seek rather their own and others hurt. But if some of them seek it not; there is a shrewd likelihood that some other do seek hereby, their own profit, ease and advancement, a little, or rather a great deal too much, with the hindrance, disquiet, and spoil of many others. And would GOD, if they also seek not these things, Our br. are instruments to other. that they were not the instruments unto others that do seek them. But if they seek not these things, what seek they then. For sooth, Our Br. wrong seeking of God's glory & his Church's profit. but only the glory of GOD and the profit of his Church. Still the glory of God, and the profit of his Church, must carry the name. Prove it to be so, and there an end. But what stand we seeking, what they seek? If they seek God's glory: why do they thus open the mouths of the adversaries, How Gods glory & truth is defaced hereby. to deface the glory of God, and discredit his Gospel, by these unnecessary dissensions? If they seek the profit of his Church: what greater hindrance to the Church can they offer, than thus to break the unity and divide the force thereof? Than thus to cast abroad to the wide world, to the deadly enemies, these bitter defacings and sharp oppugning of the same Church, How the Church is hindered by this our br. seeking. whereof their selves profess to be the parts and members? Than thus to wound the weak brethren, that stand between us, and make many that were coming on, to start back, and that were among us, to fall from us: yea, to discourage the hearts of the strongest of us: yea, to reproach all the Bishops and Prelates of the Church with all despites: yea, to disarm their most gracious Sovereign, and bereave her of the best part of her supreme authority, and to expose her Majesty to all dangers of her estate, besides those that the Papists practise against her person: yea, to innovate and turquish all the whole state of both the Realms of England and Ireland, the very Parishes and all must be new transformed? While in the mean time, the professed enemy lieth hovering for the advantage of all occasions, do even draw and whet their sword, to sheathe them in the bowels of us all; except the living God through his mighty power and superabundant mercy, did even miraculously defend us from them. So that, If the Lord had not been on our side (may Israel now say) if the Lord had not been on our side, when men rose up against us: they had then swallowed us up quick, Psal. 124. when their wrath was kindled against us. True way of reformation. Nay, when our own wrath is not yet slaked, against our own selves. And is this to seek the glory of God, and the profit of his Church, that our brethren say, they seek only? But if they seek indeed God's glory, and the profit of his Church: let them reclaim and leave off all these evil practices: How our Br. should indeed seek God's glory and the Church's profit. and if all things be not as they would have them, yet remembering what in common together we have, which is the principal, and which the common adversary seeketh most of all to take either it from us, or us from it, and the roaring Lion goeth a pace about, seeking how he may devour us all: let us both without disturbance of the present state, join ourselves together, and unite all our forces against the public enemy of us both, & especially of God's truth; till that (after we shall be out of all danger of that man of sin, that great adversary and his confederates) we may parley of these matters more brotherlike. And then the whole world might plainly see and say, that there were more likelihood, our brethren did only seek the glory of God and profit of his Church, as they protest they do. Yea, where we make our enemies now to laugh and leap for joy, and ourselves to weep and fall for sorrow: Then should our mouth be filled with laughter, and our tongue with joy: yea than would they say (with grief or admiration) among the heathen, Psal. 126. the Lord hath done great things for them, and ourselves confess with joy and thankfulness, the Lord hath done great things for us, whereof we rejoice. But if our Br. will not seek God's glory & his Church's profit, in such order as they ought t● seek it, but thus unorderly: although they seek it only, and nothing else: yet, seek they never so much, they shall never find it. The true way of reformation But as they protest that these are the things which they only seek: so by this present writing (say they) we discharge our conscience according to our duty, which is to show unto all men the true way of reformation. That this is the true way of reformation, is not yet proved, in all this learned discourse. They told us they are able to prove it, and they promised also that they will prove many things hereafter when occasion shall serve their turn. But if this form of theirs were (as they imagine & vaunt) the true way of reformation: what? and is this the true way of reformation too; and the discharge of their conscience, and according to their duty, Our Br. manner of putting their form in writing is not the true way of reformation. to show it to all men, and that in this manner? I speak it not so much, for putting it in writing: for so, it might well be done with more advisement, and be better conceived, and all times the readier to be perused and pondered, of those that should have to consider the same; and their selves with less ambiguities, alterings, and tergiversations, be more straightly bound, to justify their writing: nor only for vaunting their selves of that they had written, to be such a profound piece of work, such a learned discourse: for that might be, or seem but an overliking of their own baby, and proceed of too good an opinion of th●ir own learning. But when they pester their writing with such reproaches to other their Br. and that in authority: Discharge of conscience when they enter into matter of state, yea deal withal states, and with public government, and will show such matters unto all men, that concern not all men, but is above many men's callings, to intermeddle in them, especially to alter the laws established, and the powers of so many persons, setting up (as they say) new Lords new laws, new Doctors, new Bishops, new Governors, new Deacons, new Segniories, new Synods, new authorities, new Parishes, and remove all the old, or new transpose them, yea, bring in a new supremacy of the Prince also, with the old authority half clipped away: and to put all these in print the more to show this present writing to all men: as who say, Be it known to all men by this present writing, yea, by this present printing, and to do all this without any authority, or licence or knowledge of the Magistrate, yea, against the Magistrate too: if this be the discharge of their conscience, and according to their duty, being subjects, being private persons, being Protestants, The discharge of conscience or rather charge thereof. being faithful Ministers, being learned discoursers: would God they would better bethink themselves. It is beyond my learning, and a great scruple it is in many men's consciences, that think our Br. have set their conscience on the tenters, & much charged it, rather than any whit discharged it, & do not according to their duty therein; nor that this their doing, is any true or good way of reformation: but if aught were amiss, to make it much worse, if not to mar it quite, and to give licence unto such a way, as would or might bring all things to an utter deformation and confusion. And here it followeth prettely, at the hard heels, that might set the matter well forward. And to move them (say they) that have authority, to put it in practice, and to seek by all lawful and ordinary means, Seeking means that this form may take place. that it may take place, that it may please God to give it good success. What mean they here by these perilous speeches? And is this also a part of conscience & duty, and the true way of reformation, to move them that have authority to put it in practice? Who are these that have authority, whom our Br. would by this their writing, The moving them that be in authority to put it in practice. move to put in practice, this form of reformation? Would they have any that have authority in the Realm committed unto them by and under the Queen's most excellent majesty, to attempt this, without her majesties authority thereunto, whom they called before our most gracious sovereign, when they made their last protestation? No, we hope there is none, that in her majesties dominions hath any authority committed unto him, will be moved by this writing, or by any other writing or soliciting of our brethren, to put this form in practice, without ●e have her majesties authority so to do, Dangerous means. she having now (God be praised, & long continue it) the supreme authority of these matters. Neither should they that have but inferior authority to her majesty, Offering up books to the Parliament. yea all the Magistrates in the Realms of her dominions, holding all the authority that they have immediately or mediately from her Majesty, and her Majesty immediately from God; seek any lawful and ordinary means, but unlawful and beyond extraordinary, if they should practise that this may take place, without her authority thereunto: especially it being with all the direct overthrow of her chief authority. They do well to say, that they would have them do it by lawful and ordinary means: wherein our brethren differ from the Papists that seek vijs & modis by all means to put in practise their desperate resolutions. Which as God defeateth, and our brethren detest: so what lawful and ordinary means can they imagine, to put this their form in practice against her majesties will, that may stand with her supreme authority? Good success. And therefore (in my opinion) this is very ill done, and dangerously spoken of our Br. to cast forth such suspicious words, as to move them that have authority, so to abuse it, or as though they would or should be moved to this practice. And for my part I protest, that I like all this whole learned discourse the worse, that in the end and conclusion of all, it should come to this drift, which verily is not pleasing unto God, nor God will ever (I dare warrant it) give it good success, if the wind begin once to blow in at that door, which God forbidden that ever we should see that tyme. But what is the time that here they speak off? At this time to be embraced. It should seem to be at the time of the Parliament as may appear by the last part of their protestation saying: We protest before the living God, etc. and the whole assembly of all estates of this Realm. I marvel much at this practice of our brethren, that they are so eager in their pursuit, to have their platforms put in practice that they see not how they cross in this doing, O●r brethren's offering up their Pamphlets every Parliament do therein contrary to their own principles their own writings. They are still at every Parliament offering up their little books (for I forbear to call them Libels to avoid offence) of the reformations that they call upon, unto the high and most honourable Court of Parliament. Wherein although if we should lay together and confer, all their books and forms of reformation, that they have offered up unto the Parliaments; we should find great varieties, and some contrarieties among them: yet let them agree or disagree in other things how they shall: what do they mean herein by putting them unto the Parliament? Would they have these controversies to be disputed upon, and determined by the Parliament? That is clean contrary to the chief material points, of the very books themselves, that they offer up unto the Parliament. For except they will make all the Burgesses in the neither house and all the Lords in the higher house to be Ecclesiastical persons, and either Doctors and Pastors, whom also they make all Bishops, The Parliament about these matters. teachers and Preachers of the word and Sacraments; at least wise, such Presbyters, Priests or Elders not teaching, whom they call Governors; if they shall be present as any parts and members or necessary regents of the assembly, and not only as spectatores or auditores tantum; if they shall remain still as lay civil or politic persons: so that they can not (by their own Canons) have any voices, at least, not determine any thing in Eccl. matters, especially, so great and important matters as they make them. And what would they have the Parliament then to do in these things? Nay, wha● will they suffer them to do: Yea, what would the Parliament do, Our brethren's words pa. 117. against the Parliament & all that are no Pastors. when they should find, that in the very books offered unto them of these matters, they are prohibited to deal in these matters? Yea, how can they deal in these matters, and allow these Pastors to come in, and take them up for their labour, saying unto them: yea my Lords, and Masters, dare ye take upon you, or are ye able to deal in these matters, or so much as to know them? For who should be able to know what order, comeliness and edification requireth according to God's word, but they that be teachers and preachers of the same unto all others? For it is absurd that they should be taught by such in these small things, as aught to learn the truth of them in all matters. pag. 117. and much more absurd, that they should be taught by such in greater matters. Yea they ought to learn the truth of them in all matters. If the Parliament once hear this thunder crack: conticuere omnes intemtique ora tenebunt. If some one among them perhaps do reply and say: If they will not suffer us to have any thing to do in debating and determining of these matters: why then (a God's name) do they put them up to us? or what would they have us to do in them? except they will give us some authority of them. How the Parliament may reject all their Pamphlets. But they are so far from giving us any such authority: that they say, we are not able so much as to know them. No, nor yet their own Consistory governors able to know them, but only the teachers and preachers of the same to all others. And what will they then allow to us? If the Parliament hear this man speak thus: may they not think, that man speaketh reasons? and that there was little reason, in troubling them continually with those matters, in the Parliament house, whereof they may not (according to the liberty of that most honourable assembly) speak their minds in reverent manner, pro & contra freely, and no man debarred of his speech or judgement: or else the house would better advise themselves, how they permitted such fellows to come among them, or to bring in such bills or books among them, of which they must be restrained of their liberty, both of speech and judgement. Yea, what if now another waxing bolder in the Parliament house, would tell these faithful ministers, The Parliament not without the Prince. that the matters contained in this learned discourse, being Ecclesiastical matters, were to be consulted upon and determined, by those that were the Bishops & Pastors of the Realm and Church of England, These matters to be rather debated in the Convocation than in the Pa●liament. and that they had a Convocation & synodal assembly among themselves, and that they must go to them, and be tried by them, and be as well content to submit themselves, to the determination of the Bishops and Pastors, lawfully and orderly there assembled, as they would to have it tried in the Parliament, if they were all such Eccl. persons, as were the other. And that if they would flee from their own coat & Eccl. company, to such as were but civil and politic persons, save that they were Christians as other of the people were: they should give an ill example & prejudice their matters, and make themselves and their books to be more mistrusted, as not daring to abide the censure, of the chiefest professors of those matters. Tractent fabrilia fabri. Ecclesiastical matters to be tried by Ecclesiastical persons. And that this is according to their own positions. For who should be able to know, (at least wise, who ought better to know) what order comeliness and edification requireth according to God's word, than they that be teachers and preachers of the same unto all others? Clergy men to determine Clergy matters. For it is absurd, that they should be taught by such in these small things, (and much less in greater things) as ought to learn the truth of them in all matters. And therefore go to them, and let them determine those controversies. If our brethren shall hear this tale, and their own words thus duly returned on themselves: may they not then think they have well helped themselves, by putting up these matters to the Parliament? And if the Parliament should answer them thus, should they not answer them aright? But if now they had rather revoke some of their positions, & give the Parliament authority to deal herein, than to have them be determined by the Bishops: The Parliaments determining without the Prince what on the other side would they have the Parliament do, without the authority of the Prince? Yea how chance they put not up their books & writings first to her Majesty, & move her first: for if they accounted her Majesty indeed the supreme governor of all persons in all her dominions, & in all causes so well Eccl. as temporal: would they have the Parliament decree those things without her Majesty? Or the Parliament whereof her Majesty is the supreme governor to determine these things without any debating of them? Or if they should be debated upon: who should rather do it than the Clergy? And have not all that have been assembled together already, both the Bishops, & the whole Convocation, consulted, debated and determined already on the matter? These matters already determined and by the Parliament ratified. And if they would have her Majesty & the Parliament to deal further therein, have they not done that also? Hath not her Majesty ratified and authorized all their articles that the Convocation agreed upon? And hath not the whole Parliament also approved & allowed, & so, ratified and confirmed all the Communion book, & (besides the acknowledgement of her majesties supremacy) all the articles agreed, and decreed upon all, Ours and our brthrens' disputation. or the most or chiefest of the laws and orders Eccl. now standing in force and established amongst us? And would they have them revoke & cancel all that they have done in these matters? or what else would they have the Parliament herein to do? If they offer to dispute of these matters, either before the whole Parliament, or before any by the Parliament deputed, to hear the disputation between us of these controversies; Our readiness to approve these matters, being orderly called thereto never so often. do they hope to dispute better and with more deliberate judgement of that they shall say ex tempore, than that they have with advisement written, or can write thereon? or that we can dispute worse, or not so well, as they persuade themselves they can? Or do they think (as Aeschines said, Quid si ipsam belluam andissetis) they shall better persuade and move the hearers of them, more by their lively speeches than by their learned writings, and so win it that ways? verily we refuse no way, what it shall please our most gracious sovereign and her most honourable counsel, or the high court of Parliament to appoint (if that would serve the turn) for any further trial, of renewing never so often these matters, by disputing and calling them in question, again and again, for (God be praised) in so good a cause we need not fear the event: they that could so win the garland let them wear it. But we may easily see (before the disputation shall begin) that all this would not serve their turn in these controversies, The event of all disputation which our brethren refuse except their selves be d●●●●miners of these matters. which the word of God hath not expressly decided, but in generality referred to these three heads, comeliness, order, & edification. Who shall judge and determine of our disputation? they have before hand debarred the prince, and all that are not teachers and preachers, and both the parties in controversy are teachers and preachers, and they say it were no reason, that we being the parties in controversy on the one side (though we be teachers and preachers) should be determiners & judges, what is comeliness, order, and edifying in these things: and may not we say the same to them again, that they being also parties in controversy on the other side, though they be teachers and preachers, it is no reason that they should be determiners and judges, what is comeliness, order, and aedifieng in these things, and when shall then these matters be judged and determined? Except we would yield to them, or they would yield to us, or both to some other, as to her majesty and the Parliament. But if they shall so do, they should convince themselves before hand, that the form is untrue and false which they have already before hand not only avowed to be true, but so determined already, and so before hand peremptorily prescribed, both to us and to the Parliament, & to the queens majesty also; that we must all yield of necessity unto them. Or whether we will yield or no, The 〈…〉 should take place. so that they can move them that have authority to put this form in practice, and to seek by lawful and ordinary means (say they) that it may take place: that it may please God to give it good success, Our br. desire of this or the like. at this time to be embraced: we may fulfil the rest of our course with joy. When indeed if it should take place, or that it pleased God to give it that success (which they call good) at this time, or at any time hereafter, by these means (which as we have seen) are neither ordinary nor orderly, nor lawful, nor reasonable, nor tending to God's glory, nor to the church's profit, nor the safety and sovereignty of her Majesty, nor the honour of them that have authority, nor to the custom or freedom of the Parliament: then should our brethren also find & feel by experience the schoolmistress (as they say) of fools, though now in opinion they hope and are persuaded, and would persuade us by the Theoriks of their learned discourse, otherwise, that they should so little fulfil the rest of their course with joy, that they should rather consume their course with too late repentance, being continually coursed about these matters, with restless troubles and vexations. But if our sins be the let, that this or the like, grounded upon God's word, The learned disc. pag. 147. may not now be received: yet the present age may see and judge what is the uttermost of our desire, concerning reformation, which hitherto for lack of such a public testimonial; hath been subject to infinite slanders, devised by the adversaries of God's truth, and hindrance of godly proceed unto reformation. And that the posterity may know that the truth in this time, was not generally unknown nor untestified, concerning the right regiment of the church of GOD: nor this disordered form of ecclesiastical government, which we have received for the most part of popery, delivered to our children without contradiction that our example should not be prejudicial unto them: as the example of our godly fathers (which in this point neglected their duty) hath been prejudicial unto us. Very well saith saint james, chapter 4, ver. 1, etc. From whence are wars and contentions among you? Bridges are they not hence even of your lusts (or desires) that fight in your members? Ye lust (or desire) and have not: ye envy & have indignation and can not obtain: The cause why this desired form is not to be received. you fight and war and get nothing, because ye ask not: ye ask and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that you might consume it on the things that you lust for (or do desire.) And even so for our brothers lusts and desires, to have this form take place and be put in practice; their selves have well confessed, saying: but if our sins be the let that this or the like, grounded upon God's word may not now be received: for their sins indeed be the let, because the things desired, and their desires and attempts thereof are full of sins, and therefore God of his great mercy lets and stops the receiving of this form, sith it is not (as they pretend to us, or persuade to themselves) grounded upon God's word, and even therefore it might not then, neither may it now, The uttermost of their desires. nor (by the grace of God) ever shall of us be received at all. But what is this which here they said: if our sins be the let, that this, or the like grounded upon God's word, may not now be received? What have we here? This indeed is a new point. Are we come now after all this ado, Our brethren's conclusion of their desires, that either this or the like form should be received. in the final conclusion and lapping up of all this form & learned discourse of ecclesiastical government, of all this declaration, of all the desires of all the faithful ministers, what reformation of the church of England they seek for; after all this urging, prescribing, protesting, etc. are we now come to the receiving of this or the like? I had thought all this while (and so they still did bear us stoutly in hand) that they had pleaded for this form, & would have proved that this form of eccl. government (which they have here set forth in this learned discourse) had been the true way that they meant, of reformation. And now for sooth, when all comes to all, it is not this; but it is either this or the like. Aha, is it but so; that is another manner of matter, if it be, but either this or the like: well then, thanks be to God, we have seen already what this is, and what truth and force this hath carried. But what is that they say, or the like? for it is an old and a true proverb, If it suffice to receive the like then there is no necessity of this form. Nullum simile est idem, Nothing that is the like is the same, so that now, if we receive the like, our brethren have here given us a flat discharge, & our quietus est for this: and as for this, we may again give it a free passport out of England, so that we receive the like, for this bindeth us not, but this or the like. No, nor yet the like bindeth us, any more than this. But as nothing in this did before bind us; and yet, had it bound us, the bands (as now in the end we see) were of no force; yea, their selves have here undone the bands and set us at liberty, on this condition that we have the like, What is meant by the like form. so as yet we be free from this like also, for what this like is, that they tell not, and how shall we learn it? For if we look on all the forms, that any other of our brethren do also prescribe; or on any other form in any other reformed church; they are neither like this form, nor one like another: It is not hurtful that all churches forms of government be not like. In substance of doctrine they must be all one. neither is there any hurt at all therein, though they be not alike in their forms of eccl. government. For, so that they be not alike, but all one and the same, in all one and the same substance of doctrine, faith, and religion; the eccl. government, in divers states and dominions, may differ in divers matters, and be neither the same, nor yet alike, without any danger to those churches themselves, or any prejudice to the churches of other prince's countries and dominions. But like or like not, if it may not (say they) be received: yet the present age may see and judge, what is the uttermost of our desire. That (say I) is very hard for us to see, The seeing & judging the uttermost of our br. desires. when their own selves are not able to determine it. For although we may see these their desires that are set down in this learned discourse (if they may be rightly termed desires, Adversaries of God's truth. and not rather prescriptions: yet neither do we see the uttermost of them, nor what a number (even as in the horse of troy) lie hidden and included in them, that yet in these beginnings are not opened, and God knoweth whether the present age now living, shall see the one half or quarter of them, especially of the uttermost of them. Yea, what an uncertainty of their desires do they here open to the present age; when they conclude thus, that they either desire this or the like form to be received? Can this present age, or do theirselues in this preset discourse, see the uttermost of these indefinite desires of the like, till they shall further open it, or till experience the mistress of fools, shall reveal it: They say, that the reformation which they desire, hitherto for lack of such a public testimonial (meaning as this learned discourse) hath been subject to infinite slanders, devised by the adversaries of God's truth, and hindrance of godly proceed unto reformation: If our brethren have cause to take offence for slanders (as they say) devised against their reformation, Our brethren's grievous slandering of their brethren to be the adversaries of God's truth. do they not see here what a foul and intolerable slander they cast upon all the professors of the Gospel, that are not of their opinion in this their devised reformation, to term us the adversaries of God's truth, that favour the truth of God, as much (by the grace of God) even for their lives as they? Are we not their brethren in the profession of the Gospel? Have they not confessed, that in substance of religion we agree, and it is resolved & publicly maintained for our true and holy faith? Were we thus professors of God's truth, in the preface of this learned discourse andare we now in the peroration of the same, the adversaries of gods truth? Indeed, in the very first title to the book of this form discoursed upon, they began roughly, and set it out, to serve for a just apology (as they said) against the false accusations & slanders of their adversaries: there also they mentioned slanders and false accusations, and called us adversaries. All which were heavy words, and a rough beginning of such as are or should be brethren. It was but malum omen to stumble on such foul terms at the very threshold, it did prognosticat we should have some storms, and so we have had indeed, in passing through this learned discourse, and yet this is but a mild book in comparison of many other of theirs, albeit our brethren have not been very meal mouthed, but have used very broad language (God wots, and all the world may see) too unseemly for ministers, faithful ministers, & learned discourses, against their brethren in Christ, for no greater matters than these are. But we have borne them off with head and shoulders, as well, and with as much patience & forbearance as we mought, save that we have turned again now and then for our necessary defence, and laid (I trust in modesty) before our brethren only, how ill they have done therein, and how the most of the same slanders were such stones cast as could rebound. But now, This learned discourse begun, continued, and concluded in foul language. when we have got out of the whole plotforme and building of this learned discourse, bearing off all the blows & taunts in the several lodgings of all these new Eccl. officers: and thought now on the backside of this building all had been past and done: nay soft, we shall have like farewell to our handsel; yea, where we were called before but their adversaries: we shall now be driven out with another manner of peal: as not only hindrances of their proceed to reformation, but to all the present age, & that the posterity may know it too, as a perpetual blot of infamy, we are now hissed out, & cried out vpo●, not for their adversaries only; but for the adversaries of gods truth, they complain of our false accusations and infinite slanders, to let go all their other complaints on us, this one is unum pr●mille. To whom shall we complain of this so apparent untrue, and withal so heinous an accusation made on us? It deserveth indeed (for the indignity thereof) to have shaken our garment, & with silence (as clear therefrom) to have gone our way. Our answer to this foul slander. 10.8. But because it toucheth God & his truth, in which case we may yet at least return & say with Christ our saviour, ego daemonium non habeo: we are not the adversaries of God's truth: It is untruely and unbrotherlie spoken, neither toucheth it us alone, but all the holy and ancient fathers in the primitive church, whom we have plainly showed to be of the same opinion, in all or the greatest of these controversies that we defend: & in our own days & present age, How many besides us this slander toucheth. it spotteth the fresh memory of our late godly fathers, Cranmer, Latimer, Ridley, Hooper, Ferrar, Philpot, etc. all blessed martyrs, and all that consented unto them: and divers reverend & godly Confessors of later memory, as Bishop, jewel, Horn, Pilkinton, grindal, Cox, Bentham, Parkhurst, and others, which were all notably known both on this side and beyond the seas, to be great professors of gods truth, and no less earnest impugners of the adversaries of the truth of God. And albeit they liked not these desires and devices of our brethren's forms of reformation; yet for their great learning and sincerity in the gospel, the most notable men of late in the reformed churches beyond the seas, do highly honour them, and think and speak well of them, giving full testimony of their liking. Yea, both Bucer and Peter Martyr, two chief lights and pillars of God's church in these our last days, forsook their own countries, and all other reformed churches, & lived under the form of reformation of this our English church, with all due reverence both to the state than being, & to the bishops then living, without any impugning or defacing of them. Yea calvin himself (as we have showed) alloweth well both of the ancient bishops and Archbishops, before the tyranny and errors of the pope began; and of the bishops of these days, to continue still in their bishoprics, so they be professors of God's truth, Hindrance of our br. proceed. and not adversaries to it. How unadvisedly then is this spoken of our brethren, and how reproachfully to call our Bishops and all us that join with them, the adversaries of God's truth? Who are the adversaries of God's truth. Can they bestow any fouler term upon the rankest of all the Papists, or upon the Pope himself? For they indeed are the adversaries of God's truth. And so S. Paul saith 2. Thes. 2. of that man of sin, & son of perdition, which is an adversary, and exalteth himself against all that is called God. And this term as a parting blow, for a token of remembrance, our brethren vouchsafe to give our bishops & us, Our hindrance of our br. proceed in this form. to be the adversaries of God's truth: this is too too bitter zeal, Mors in olla, there is Coloquintida in this pot that boils over such froth. God's truth is not in this accusation, no brootherhood of Christ, no link of love, no bond of peace, no bowels of mercy, no affection of compassion, but all of passion in this too black rhetoric. But it sufficeth us to clear ourselves, GOD forgive it our brethren, and we do. And whereas withal they burden our Bishops and us, that we are an hindrance of godly proceed unto reformation: this is another great untruth and slander. These proceedings indeed of our brethren, our Bishops and we, have good cause both to hinder and repel. For they are neither Godly proceed, nor proceed as becometh either learned preachers, or faithful ministers, or dutiful subjects; neither proceed they in any charitable and orderly manner; neither is this form that here they prescribe a reformation, as they call it, or (howsoever they persuade themselves) any other than a ready path to confusion most deformed, as we have plainly seen, even where, pag. 84. they pretend most to avoid horrible confusion, as they term it. And that we do not bely this their form, with infinite, or with any slanders, let the reader mark, or their selves revise better their devices, about the persons office and authority of those presbyters priests, or elders, whom they term governors; but they might much better in my opinion have the term of secular priests, What deformed confusion among us this form of reformation would breed. for difference of the other pastoral priests, or eccl. priests, that are the ministers of the word and sacraments. And if they shall advise themselves of the authority that they give them (except they will wilfully sot themselves) they shall soon find great confusions, which upon their admittance both in the office of the pastor, in the office of the prince, and of all officers and Magistrates, for laws making and for laws breaking, and for all vices wherein they would intermeddle and disturb all the eccl. and civil state, and breed infinite contentions among the common people in every parish & congregation, which all their devices could not help, except with putting them down, & that were no less danger if they were once up, and therefore to avoid all such deformations, I think it better before hand to hinder such proceed to reformation, and to stop them that they come not in. I have myself heard, and so have divers other, Deformed refomation. the means that now & then the pastors of the French & Belgike churches, The French and Belgike churches. have made, of the confusions and contentions that have chiefly risen by these signiories, & yet may their state far better admit them, especially now (God comfort them) standing as they do, than our state may, God be praised for it. Neither doth Gualther cry out so much upon this devise of these governors, without good cause where otherwise there are godly civil magistrates. Besides this, their equality in all places, of all Pastors, & making of them to be all Bishops in every parish or several congregation; what a reformation that would make, if their selves cannot see it (that perhaps would have no superior) I refer to others better pondering. And to join these new Bishops & these new Governors together, to make up a consistory of them, both these secular priests of all conditions & estates, noblemen, gentlemen, merchants, yeomen, craftsmen, confused together with these eccl. priests, that are the pastors; and all these in all eccl. discipline, excommunication, & other church matters, to draw altogether in one joint authority, whether it might be such a yoking (for some of them) as God forbade, of the ox ploughing with the ass; Deut. 22.10. and how fitly this would draw and proceed to godly reformation, we have partly seen, let others think further of it, I fear the worst. Besides the infinite troubles, about the continual, or very often shire Synods, for elections & ordaining pastors: besides every church's variety in matters of ceremonies: beside the cold lectures of the doctors, that might not exhort, nor rebuke, nor comfort, nor apply their doctrine: but the hotter scambling about the new divisions of the Bishops, the Colleges & the cathedral churches lands, with all the sacrilege (as they call it) of Abbeys, as impropriatious, etc. all which their Deacons would look to distribute, but they shallbe served all at leisure. Besides the divisions & new boundings out of all particular parishes & congregations, besides her Majesty to be put besides her chiefest and most principal authority: and all these things to be done, & she cannot do thereto: besides a number of their other proceed, for the which I refer me to this learned discourse, & to their other treatises, which, how well they all agree together, and when all is done, either they would have this or the like, or we cannot tell what, nor they tell us what the like is, that they refer us unto: are not these godly proceed to reformation? & are we now to be blamed as hindrances to these godly proceedings unto reformation? nay rather if they will indeed blame any, let them blame themselves, for they hinder themselves more than any other do, except that they hinder most of all (which most of all they pretend to further) the glory of GOD, the quiet and increase of the church by these proceed, or rather receding and backslidings. But to clear themselves hereof, they have forsooth set forth this learned discourse concerning reformation, which hitherto (say they) for lack of such a public testimonial, Our brothers public testimonial. was subject to infinite slanders. This is a fair pretence, for the setting forth this their learned discourse. But if their intendment had been indeed no further, but to have cleared themselves from infinite slanders, Our brethren's pretence only t● clear themself from slander. they should have stood either altogether or most, on that defensative point: whereas their chiefest part of this learned discourse hath been spent in coursing and oppugning us, and that with casting forth far more slanders and accusations against us, than any matters that they were charged withal. But (I think) they have sped accordingly, even with the only returning home their own words, without any our sclandring of them. It is an old saying, Self do, self have; they could never have found greater adversaries to themselves, than their selves are, nor greater hindrance of their proceed, than this their own public testimonial, Our brethren's public testimonial. to be a testimonial beyond all exception, against themselves. For whatsoever they have been burdened heretofore by others, their selves have now confirmed all those reports to be most true, which before the coming forth of this public testimonial, might have been suspected to be slanders: or that these things had been but the singular conceits of this fantastical head, or of that particular person. But now that this learned discourse is set forth, and is such a public testimonial, as containeth A brief and plain declaration concerning the desires of all those faithful ministers, that have and do seek for the discipline and reformation of the church of England: Let this public testimonial be thoroughly weighed, how it concordeth with the particular testimonials, of all other that before had written on the like argument. The disagreement of our br. testimonials Yea, how it agreeth with itself; lest our brethren's testimonials in this point, should be found like the witness of those, of whom it is said, Mark 14, 57, Many bare false witness against him, but their witness agreed not together. I do not compare our brethren to such a pack of false varlets; nor to go about any such wicke● purpose; but only for this point, that their testimonials do not agree, and so do breed their own discredit. Besides many apparent untruths, contradictions, inconveniences, absurdities, ambiguities, and a number of undutiful reproaches of the pastors, of the Bishops, of the Magistrates, of the Prince, of the whole church, state, and realm, wherewith this their public testimonial is not only interlaced, but full fraught. Which the present age seeing and considering; might rather reject it for an infamous libel, unorderly crept out and scattered abroad in the name of all the faithful ministers, and yet not one of all their names set unto it; rather than accept it for any lawful, authentic, and public testimonial. And as our brethren say, they meant this for the age present; so say they: And that the posterity may know, Our brethren's intendment for the posterity. that the truth in this time was not generally unknown nor untestified, concerning the right regiment of the church of God, nor this disordered form of ecclesiastical government, which we have received for the most part of popery, etc. Knowledge and sestification of the truth. Lo, how our Brethren still hold out to the hard end, their boisterous reproaches, of our disordered form of Ecclesiastical government; and that we have received it for the most part of Popery; and it was within little, that they said not, for all of popery, as the most part, doth often times go for all. But with them, these speeches go not for slanders, but for friendly admonitions, and brotherly testimonials, of their good opinion of our state and us. Yea, these and all the rest are uttered, That the posterity may know. What should they know? How to ruffle in the like Rhetorical figures? What should they know? How these that went before them, left behind them, such a reproachful testimonial of the present age? Is not this a fair record, and full worthy to be commended to the posterity for a perpetual memory? But they say, they shall know hereby, that the truth in this time, was not generally unknown nor untestified, The posterity can know no certain true form by this Learned Discourse. concerning the right regiment of the Church of God: And how shall they know this? By this Learned Discourse and public testimonial (as they call it) testified by a general individuum vagum, Sir Nicholas Nemo, and all his company, of faithful Ministers? May this in law be admitted for a lawful record, and public testimonial of the truth? Veritas non quaerit angulos. Well, yet the posterity may know that the truth in this time, was not unknown nor untestified, concerning the right regiment of the Church of God. Truth indeed, the truth (God be praised for it) is not generally unknown, especially, in this time. Yea (thanks be to God) it is known and testified more generally at this time, than for generality, it hath been known (as I suppose) at any time, not excepting (in that respect) the very time of the Apostles: If our lives were generally also answerable, to our general knowledge, and to our public testification. Neither is in this time the right regiment of the Church of GOD generally unknown or untestified, but was generally known and testified well enough, before the public testimonial of this Learned Discourse came forth. Neither do we, or can we take any certain knowledge concerning the right regiment of the Church hereby. Yea it should seem, that their own selves (except in some generality, and superficial knowledge) do not as yet know it, nor can testify what it is For, if this be the right regiment of the Church, that in this public testimonial they prescribe unto us: it hath not only been generally and altogether unknown and untestified, in any time heretofore, until this time, that his Learned Discourse came forth, An uncertain conclusion. and before was never heard of: I mean, for this form, taking it altogether, as it is here discoursed, except for some parcels of it, testified of late by others: But, for any certain knowledge, it is not yet either generally made known and testified unto the present age, or to the posterity by this public testimonial, nor particularly unto the testies themselves, for all that they boldly affirm this to be the right regiment of the Church: and yet when they have never so truly testified, and discoursed never so learnedly, all that they can, The uncertain conclusion of all our Brethr. desires. with all their heads laid together, their very desire in the end and sum of all, is but either to have this or the like to be received. But if this be the right; then either this, or the wrong, there is no like will serve the turn. And is their desire to have either right or wrong, they care not whether, so they may be rid of this regiment that now we have? If this regiment seem too hot unto them, will they leap with the Flounder out of the frying pan into the fire? But (God be praised) they need not fry, except they fry in their own hot and fretting choler, at the regiment of the Church of England under GOD and her Majesty, it is generally a good Regiment and right enough, according to the establishment of the laws thereof, if our Brethren would cool their over-hoate passions, and be thankful to God, and under him to her Majesty for it. As for this public testimonial of our Brethren, if our regiment of the Church, be not right; the posterity shall never know by theirs, what is right or wrong, or that the right regiment of the Church, was made known or testified in this time, either generally, or particularly, or (that is most to be desired) certainly, by such a doubtful testification of uncertain desires, that either this, or the like, or else we can not tell what, might be received. As for that they call our regiment of the Church, a disordered form of Ecclesiastical government: Our Brethr. disordered speeches against our form of Ecclesiastical govern. it is but their own disordered form of not governing well their minds and tongues. Our form, both for the formal & material laws & orders thereof, is far more formal & material, than this form of their is. Yea, if it should come to this, or the like: what misshapen form we might happen to have, we can not yet foretell, nor they can tell us. As for that which we have already we know it, and we know the very worst thereof. The best of theirs is yet uncertain. I grant, our form is not so well ordered, but that there may, and do fall out disorders: but those happen by the abuse thereof. And so it may be, in any form of government never so good, by men's infirmities or corruptions, wherewith the form itself is not to be charged. And yet I go not about to defend our form, or to vaunt thereof for any such absolute perfection, that it could not be altered or amended: Disorder a speeches. what Law is there not, that man can make, but it may be, or rather is unperfect? As for the form that they have here set forth, (be it spoken with our brethren's pardon, if they please) besides their disordered setting it forth: the very form itself is either much disordered, Abuses disordering good forms and orders. or else other forms that other of our Brethren have also set forth, or that other reformed Churches are governed by, not only in Germany, but in Héluetia are disordered. But be this and theirs never so well ordered: mought they not through abuses or corruptions be disordered? Or what warrant can they give us that this form which they prescribe should never be disordered? And would they be content that any should call this their form a disordered form, only because of the abuses and corruptions? So that, admitting this their own form had in itself no disorder: yet this may touch their own form, so well as ours. But they think they have answered that already pag. 132. That although upon this their form there crept in as many or more abuses than now there are: yet God, though he condemn abuses, would approve their order. Because (say they) it is grounded upon God's word. Our Brethr. form not grounded on God's word. But we could there find no such ground, but only that it is grounded in their mere fancies, it is no more grounded on God's word, nor yet so much grounded by many parts, as our form is grounded. And therefore, if they may say, God approveth our order, though he condemn the abuses: then may her Majesty for her supreme authority: if any under her, abuse her majesties authority: them may our Bishops for their supreme dignity & jurisdiction: then may our Doctors for their exhorting and applying: then may our Pastors for their ministery & ordaining: then may our Deacons for their attendance on the ministery and preparing themselves to be made Pastors: then may our Eccl. Presbyters, Priests, or Elders, which are not altogether debarred from teaching, though most employed in governing, much better say; for our form of the Church's government, we shall be sure that God approveth our order in these things though he condemn the abuses in any of these things, because the order is grounded upon God's word. And so far our form of Eccl. government is not disordered. But they say of our form of Eccl. government: it is that, which we have received, for the most part, of Popery. These speeches are again very slanderous untruths, that we have received the most part, or any part of popery, or that we have received this form of popery, for the most part thereof. We have received indeed (we do confess) at the hands of the Papists, diserse things which our Brethren can not deny, Reasons taken out of Popery. to be good things. Neither is the receiving of a thing that is good, from a man that is ill, prejudicial to the goodness of the thing. Yea, although the good thing were defiled or abused by the ill man's ill handling of it, if when we receive it, we reject the defilings and abuses, and reduce the thing to his original use, or proper nature. We have received many excellent things from the jews, yea many notable things also from the very Heathen: but far better, if not the best of all from the Papists. For, from whom could we have got them else? As for their Popery, that is the Popes and Papists abuses and corruptions. Such rye we have not received from them, retaining the Popery. If we have taken the good and left the bad, that ought not (as a fault) to be upbraided unto us, but rather deserveth commendation. But what mean they here in these words, that we have received for the most part of Popery? Do they acquit us yet of some part? And why then do they thus condemn all the whole Ecclesiastical Government? Do they it because they say it is the most part? And yet when it cometh to the trial, they shall find it so much the less part, that indeed it is no part at all, which we have received of the Papists, wherein any corruption was, that (considering the establishment of them by the laws now in force) we have not altered and corrected. So that, if now there be other abuses rising; yet properly, it is not to be called Popery, except to Papists, that use it still in their popish manner, and so they will do even the Sacraments also, and Gospel of jesus Christ: and yet may not these things, but that kind of abusing them be called popery. But from whence have our Brethren (to prove this form of their eccl. Government) gotten all these arguments: Our Brethr. receiving from the Papists their popish arguments for their Pastor's government. That the Church of God was perfect in all her regiment, or ever there was any Christian Prince, pag. 9 That the authority which their Pastor's claim, was granted to the Church by our Saviour Christ, practised by the Apostles; continued by their successors, three hundred years before there was any Christian Emperors, pag. 118. That the Christian Princes authority reacheth no further, than to make civil laws to bind the people to the confession of true saith, and the right administering and receiving of the Sacraments, and to all Ecclesiastical orders, that they being instructed by the word of God, (through the ministery of the preaching of the same) shall understand to be profitable for edifying of the Church of Christ, and for the advancement of the glory of God. If any shall offend against the laws, whether he be preacher or hearer, besides the Ecclesiastical censure, which he should not escape, he is also to be punished in body by the civil Magistrate, pag. 141. And again, why should it be counted for any dishonour to Princes to be obedient to the laws of God their Father, and to serve to the commodity of the Church their mother? It is a greater honour to be the son of God, and the child of the Church, than to be Monarch of all the earth. pag. 143. and hereto are alleged for the Prince's service, and subjection, Esa 49. to think no service too base for them, so that they may profit the Church. Ps. 2. and 1. Tim. 2. What have we here? Is this Sanders, or Stapleton, or Fecknam, or Hosius, or some other Papist, that speaketh in these voices, and hath all these Popish arguments? Or is it not some Pope himself, that useth them against the supreme authority of Christian Princes? If this be jacob: may we not say with Isaac; Come near my son, that I may feel thee, whether thou be my son Esau or not? But what need we fear that? We wish all blessing and good to jacob, and that Esau should serve him. Yea, we acknowledge no son, nor brother, but jacob. Yea, but for all that: the voice is jacobs' voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau? What? And have ye then indeed (Brethren) got Esau's voice also? Or but covered your hands with a beasts rough skin, to get the blessing? And do not those rough hands, make the blessing worse? Ha Brethren, Brethren, for shame burden not us herein, if we have received some thing, concerning but the form of the Church's government from the Papists, having cleansed the same from the roughness of it and abuse●, and yourselves in so great a matter of the Churches supreme government, have gotten all the five fingers, yea the whole, yea the very rough hand itself herein of Esau. Of Esau say I? Nay of all these Papists, and of the man of sin himself, that child of perdition, that great adversary both of the King Christ, and of all Christian kings. And yet you think to use these arguments well against all Christian Princes that the Pope used against them; but ye do very ill, for herein ye take not these reasons and testimonies of the Papists, but ye take of the Popery of the Papists. Yea, even where ye condemn the Pope, there ye both justify his doings, and would profess to follow them. Doth not your book of obedience, pag. 52. and 53. break forth in these words? Although the Pope for sundry enormities have deposed Princes by their unlawful authority: yet the reason that moved them so to do, was honest and just, and meet to be received, and executed by the body or state of every commonwealth. See here in what a dangerous matter, you say the Pope's reason is to be received, yea and his doing to be executed, and that by the body of every commonwealth. And thus as the Pope did excommunicate and pronounce Princes to be deposed, such excommunications, and depositions would you pronounce in all kingdoms. Example of contradiction. Is not this a new kind of popery, if not far more dangerous▪ Ye say, our form of regiment is translated from Rome to Canterbury. But this new Popery comes directly as we see, even from Rome, & would enter into every parish, would come to our own doors, would enter into the Prince's palace, would trample down her majesties most principal and supreme authority, and turn it out of doors, to place these new Parishional Bishops, and their Consistories of unteaching Priests or Governors. But this is no Popery. That was ill, I grant, and too bad, but God grant this be not a great deal worse. But such is our corrupted nature, when we have well amended that that was amiss, our finger's itch, still to be mending it (as we think) better and better, till we have made it as ill as it was before or quite marred it altogether. But our brethren are further offended with our form of Ecclesiastical government, that it is (say they) delivered to our children without contradiction. And why should it be delivered with contradiction, if the matter delivered, be lawful and good? Do our Brethren love contradiction so well, that they would have it used in good and lawful matters? And where no necessity is? And to nousell up our Children also in contradiction? S. Paul teacheth us another rule, 1. Cor. 11.16. If any man lust to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the Churches of God. We shall find contradiction enough, against the adversaries of God's truth, against wicked livers, and abusers or corrupters of the form of Ecclesiastical government establied. And yet among the very enemies, saith the Apostle, Have peace with all men, so much as in you lieth. So that, we need not contend one with another so unbrotherly about these matters, if we shall do well: save in the necessary defence & maintenance of the right use and authority of them; and least of all ought we to teach and train up our children to use contradiction against their spiritual fathers, in the Ecclesiastical government, that they deliver unto them; for that were to make them disobedient and rebellious children to their fathers. But less marvel it is if they have herein contradiction with us, that have so many contradictions in these matters among themselves. But our Brethren would have our form of Ecclesiastical government, not to be delivered to our children without contradiction, that (say they) our example should not be prejudicial unto them. How our Brethren would nuzzle up their children in contradiction. As though it were a prejudice to our children not to be fleshed in contradiction against our form established of Ecclesiastical government, even as Hannibal was devoted in his childhood to be a perpetual deadly enemy to the Romans. So that these faithful Ministers do not think, they can be spiritual fathers to their natural children, Our brethren's accusation of our godly fathers. except they bring them up in this spiteful contradiction. And if they should not show their children this example; they should be prejudicial to them, and their children might degenerate, and not love contention as they do And so, they would have contention grow by inheritance. For that will not out of the flesh, that is bred in the bones, cat after kind a good mouse hunt. Is not this a godly care of fathers, and a godly education of children? As the example (say they) of our godly fathers (which in this point neglected their duty) hath been prejudicial unto us. They complain of their fathers that they brought not them up thus, Our Brethr. accusation of their godly fathers. nor gave not them such example of contradiction, as they will bring up their children, and give them better example by their contradiction. They accuse their Fathers of negligence herein, and yet they call them godly. But do they not herein accuse themselves of many great crimes, both in unthankful accusing of their fathers for negligence; and for neglecting that matter, which if they should not have neglected, yea, if they should not diligently have shunned and taken heed of, lest they should have given them any example, they should indeed not have done the parts and duties of godly fathers to them, if they had nuzzled them up in these contradictions. Which because they did not, they were the more godly fathers to them, and they the worse children that follow not therein their godly father's godly example. But are such as ungodly degenerate from them, and that is more ungodly, give ill example to their children: wherein they neglect their duty, both to the honour of their godly fathers, and to the charge of their tender children. And as this their ill example to their children may be dangerous both to themselves, and to their children: so this accusing of their fathers, and yet acknowledgement of them to be godly, doth convince and condemn their fathers. For, if the form of the Ecclesiastical regiment which they have here discoursed upon so learnedly, that they make their boast of it in the top of every leaf, to be a Learned Discourse, be so high, so urgent, and so necessary: how do they call their and our father's godly, Our godly father's neglect of this form and of nuzzling up their children in these contradictions. having neglected their duty in so high, urgent and necessary matters? If they may be godly, and nevertheless neglect this their form prescribed of Ecclesiastical gonernement, for which they contend with us their Brethren: then is not the same so important, as they would make it to be; nor the want or neglect thereof so prejudicial, but that we their sons may be godly also well enough without it, as our Fathers were godly fathers, notwithstanding they had it not, or did neglect the same. Our father's neglect of this ●o●me. But this they say, is prejudicial unto this their form, and unto them herein, that our godly fathers did neglect it. Indeed it is not a little prejudicial thereunto. But it showeth withal that they accounted it not to be of that importance that our Brethren make it, nor to be any part of their duty, which if they had, being godly fathers, they neither would nor could have so neglected. For who were these godly fathers? And how long have they neglected this form of our Brethren, if at least they ever knew, or heard, or dreamt of this, or any such form like to this? Verily even all the godly fathers that have been in any age, Our Brethr. prejudice by their godly father's neglect. from the time of Christ's being here on the earth, even down till our time, are these our godly Fathers. And this is no small prejudice to these sons, that would now thrust these things upon us, and accuse all our godly Fathers in neglecting their duty rather than they would leave their contradiction against either us their Brethren, or against their prince and Magistrates, or against their and our godly Fathers of any ages passed heretofore: that they might leave behind them as a perpetual public testimonial to their and our children, and to all posterity, an example of their contradictions and contentions And thus with this good report of our godly Fathers and with this good public testimonial to the posterity of the age present, and with this careful example for our children, to be nourished up in his contradiction, and to deliver it as their inheritance to their children and children's children while the world continueth after them: they break off, and end all this Learned Discourse, and with this charitable affection and quiet mind to us, and to our form of Ecclesiastical government established, they conclude yet a great deal better, with a final wish, and (as it were) a prayer to God, Wherein so far as the same tendeth to the glory of God, to the more manifest revealing of his truth herein, to the acknowledgement of our sins and imperfections, to the humble and hearty begging of his mercy, grace, consolation, and unity of his holy spirit: (not to the confirming of the form that they have here prescribed, nor to the defacing of the form of Eccl. government, already in this his Church established:) we jointly say with them, and crave of them also to repeat their own words, and to say with us and all of us altogether with heart and voice. The Lord grant for Christ's sake, that we being (all of us) so far from (any) perfection (in this mortal life, but rather, as the holy Apostle saith, Our Brethr. conclusion with prayer. 6. Hebr. being led forwards towards: that according to the commandment of our Master jesus Christ, we may be perfect as our heavenly father is perfect) God may open all our eyes to see the same, (and not be blinded in our own conceits) and bend our hearts earnestly to labour to attain thereunto, (by all such godly and lawful means as is answerable to our vocations.) And in the mean time, so far as we have attained, (to be thankful to God for the same, and under him to all them whom he hath made the instruments, whereby we have attained thereunto. And not to be weary thereof, and seek innovations, but with all constant alacrity of going forward, both in sincerity of true religion, and in sanctification of our lives, and in due obedience to our most gracious Sovereign, and under her Majesty to all our Ecclesiast. overseers, and civil Magistrates, and to all the godly laws Eccl. or political, of this our Church and Realm of England) that we may proceed all by one rule, that we may be all like affectioned to seek the glory of God (and the peace of his Church) and to build up the ruins of his temple (and not to hinder the building, by controlling or defacing the builders thereof, by unnecessary contradictions, and by devising of new platforms) but, that with one heart, and with one voice, we may praise the father of our Lord jesus Christ, in his holy temple, which is the congregation of Saints in the holy Ghost, (and praise the son also, which is the same our Lord and Saviour jesus Christ, and together with the Father and the son, pray the holy ghost, the comforter to lead us into all truth, and to sanctify both our souls and bodies, with all holiness and righteousness, according to the rich and plentiful measure of his grace, in this life transitory, and to glorify us in his life eternal. All which, and all those other things, whatsoever his blessed will and heavenly wisdom seethe most requisite for his glory, for our salvation, and for the ceasing of these contradictions, that we may be all truly united unto him, and in him be reunited one to another, he of his infinite mercy vouchsafe to grant: To whom (three persons and one Almighty God, the king everlasting, immortal, invisible, and God wise only) be all honour and glory, all dominion and power, all praise and thanksgiving, both now for ever and for evermore. And so, unto this our brethren's prayer thus a little (and I hope without offence) augmented, I beseech them and all our other Brethren and sisters in jesus Christ, let us all take withal upon us the good clerks part and join in the closure, by unfeignedly pronouncing the Amen. Amen (good Lord) according to thy good will. Amen. So be it. Faults escaped. Pagina 19, line 17, Read these. 158, l. 14, to. 163, l. 42, them. ●98, l. 11, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 227, l. 26, of. 239, l. 11, sacrificer & 244, l. 38, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉▪ 243, l. 2, unlearned. 256, l. 38, is. 258, l. 12, imposed. 268, l. 11, your. 276, in margin. antiquity. 277, l, 41, praefectum. 284, l. 13, likely. ●0. l. 31, repress. ib. is it. 293, l 36, engendered: 305, in mark deal of Ieromes. 323, l. 41, returned to. 332, in mark not Evangelists. 341, l. 5, it. 346, l. 20, deal not. 347, l. 16, not. 348, l. 3, no long. 364, l. 37, greater. 368, l. 7, ordain. 378, l. 27, so forth. 389, l. 13, sith. 405, l, 37● 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 40●, in mark forbiddeth not. ib. l. 39, deal from. 419, l. 6, confsed. 427, l. 29, Theoctistus. l. 31, deal Bishop. l. 33, twentieth. 428, l. 36, yea. 432, in mark praefatus est. 433, l. 27, & 28, superintendents. 441, l. 2, pontifex are: & yet he. 444, l. 6, deal the. 451, mark Math. ●3. 454, l. 16, & 17, If there had been no primacy, there had been no love of it: for, Ignoti null● cupidopunc; 457, l. 3, Colleagues. 467, l. 18, member. 473, l. 11, as far. ib. l. 36, that he. 505, l. 40, haled. 526, l. 22, expel. 534, l. 21, suffice. 541, l. 36, seal. 568, l. 15, as. 569, l. 15, that. 571, l. 16, or. 575, l. 42, principles. 610, l. 12, so. 611, l. 27. consent. 612, l. 24, the. 633, l. 34, we. 665, l. 25, no. 681, l. 32 representeth. 694, l. 21, that. 703, l. 13, she. 704, l. 10, is not. 711, l. 30, Batilidis. 721, l. 15, with. 726, l. 8, no superior. 728, l. 40, of his. 732, l. 2, virilis. 740, l. 36, the. 742, l. 5, Alexandra. 749, l. 41, powers. 759, l. 19, he. 784, l. 39, which is. 797, l. 28, or. 812, l. 32, e●conuerso. 820, l. 29, with. 826, l. 37, deal not. 827, l. 6, confusion. 829, l. 1. then. 830, l. 6, are not. 831, l. 13● is. 836, l. 22, deal the hea●ing. 839, l. 5, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 840▪ l. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 841, l. 1, 1. Tim. 4.844, l. 9, some government in the church, separated both from others, and from this sole. 85 1, l. 46, neither. 855, l. 42, unpreaching. 856, l. 8. perusal. 876, l. 28, proportion. ib. margi. Theophilact. 787, l. 9, life. 883, l. 13, the. 914, l. 13, Epistle. 922, l. 37, ye. 923, l. 40, of elders. 924, l. 26, them. 938, l. 21, driveth. 942, mark 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 943, l. 36, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 962, l. 21, drive us. 972, l. 3, chosen counsels. 975, l. 3, deal for. 993, l. 13, whosoever. 994, l. 6, is. 996, l. 37, assessors. 1002, l. 35, they. 1003, l. 8, Sari. 1007, l. 28, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 1029, l. 4, that. 1037, l● 35, any thing. 1044, l. 19, is. 1048, l. 5, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 1052, l. 10, mere. 1057, l. 4, confute. 1062, l. 24, and him. 10●3, l. 42, disputed. 1114, l. 33, to be. 1116, l. 27, or she. 1120, l. 17, communion. 1138, l. 32, them. 1144, l. 2, discourses and. 1152; l. ●, all alike. 1164, l. 1, seat. l. 14, came. l. 32, confirm. 1176, l. 26, as. 1182 l. 25, then no. 1295, l. 14, distractions. 1198, l. 28, deal worthy. 1204, l. 13. humour. 1209, l. 36, to. 1216. l. 9, still. 1236, l. 4, severely. 1243, l. 12, is. 1244, l. 6, which. 1251, l. 37, cry. 1254, l. 21, deal pro. 1255, mark proiudiciall. 1256, l. 22, without. 1261, l. 3, reference. 1266, l. 2, no. 1287 l. 13, Signiory. 1317, l. 28, the. ib. l. 39, 40, Lord Bishop. 1325, l. 3, reference. 1348, l. 2, they. ●350, l. 41, seat. 1357, l. 2●, God. 1361, l. 16, be. 1365, l. 9, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 1366, mark artic. ib. mark reference. These lines following are to be referred unto the ends of their several pages, as they are here quoted. Pag. 212. : thus as they ministered before by preaching: Pag. 700. unto his beauty, which hath there for the time been unworthily defiled. Pag. 747. here committed: Pag. 844. the church's consent: yet that the regiment is a consent of them, is doubtfully