THE Apostolical Institution OF EPISCOPACY DEMONSTRATED.  
BY WILL. CHILLINGWORTH Master of Arts of the UNIVERSITY of OXFORD.  
LONDON, Printed by E. Cotes dwelling in Aldersgate-street.  
Anno Dom. M.DC.LXIV.   

THE Apostolical Institution OF EPISCOPACY DEMONSTRATED.  

SECT. I.  
IF we abstract from Episcopal Government all accidentals, and consider only what is essential and necessary to it; we shall find in it no more but this: An appointment of one man of eminent sanctity and sufficiency to have the care of all the Churches, within a certain Precinct or Diocese; and furnishing him with authority (not absolute or arbitrary, but regulated and bounded by Laws, and moderated by joining to him a convenient number of assistants) to the intent that all the Churches under him may be provided of good and able Pastors: and that both of Pastors and people, conformity to Laws, and performance of their duties may be required, under penalties, not left to discretion, but by Law appointed.   

SECT. II.  
To this kind of Government, I am not by any particular interest so devoted, as to think it ought to be maintained, either in opposition to Apostolic Institution; or to the much desired reformation of men's lives, and restauration of Primitive discipline; or to any Law or Precept of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ: for that were to maintain a means contrary to the end; for Obedience to our Saviour, is the end for which Church-Government is appointed. But if it may be demonstrated (or made much more probable than the contrary) as I verily think it may: I. That it is not repugnant to the government settled in and for the Church by the Apostles. II. That it is as complyable with the Reformation of any evil which we desire to reform either in Church or State, or the introduction of any good which we desire to introduce as any other kind of Government: And, III. That there is no Law, no Record of our Saviour against it: Then, I hope, it will not be thought an unreasonable Motion, if we humbly desire those that are in Authority, especially the High Court of Parliament, That it may not be sacrificed to Clamour, or overborn by Violence: and though (which God forbid) the greater part of the Multitude should cry, Crucify, Crucify; yet our Governors would be so full of Justice and Courage, as not to give it up, until they perfectly understand concerning Episcopacy itself, Quid mali fecit?   

SECT. III.  
I shall speak at this time only of the first of these three points: That Episcopacy is not repugnant to the Government settled in the Church for perpetuity by the Apostles. Whereof I conceive this which follows is as clear a Demonstration, as any thing of this nature is capable of.  
That this Government was received universally in the Church, either in the Apostles time, or presently after, is so evident and unquestionable, that the most learned adversaries of this Government do themselves confess it.   

SECT. IV.  
Petrus Molinaeus in his Book De munere pastorali, purposely written in defence of the Presbyterial-government, acknowledgeth: That presently after the Apostles times, or even in their time (as Ecclesiastical story witnesseth) it was ordained, That in every City one of the Presbytery should be called a Bishop, who should have pre-eminence over his Colleagues; to avoid confusion which oft times ariseth out of equality. And truly, this form of Government all Churches every where received.   

SECT. V.  
Theodorus Beza in his Tract, De triplici Episcopatûs genere, confesseth in effect the same thing. For, having distinguished Episcopacy into three kinds, Divine, Humane, and Satanical; and attributing to the second (which he calls Humane, but we maintain and conceive to be Apostolical) not only a priority of Order, but a superiority of Power and Authority over other Presbyters, bounded yet by Laws and Canons provided against Tyranny: he clearly professeth that of this kind of Episcopacy, is to be understood whatsoever we read concerning the authority of Bishops (or Precedents, as justin Martyr calls them) in Ignatius, and other more ancient Writers.   

SECT. VI  
Certainly, from 
* To whom two others also from Geneva may be added: Daniel Chamierus (in Panstratia, tom. 2. lib. 10. cap. 6. Sect. 24.) and Nicol. Vedelius (Exercitat. 3. in epist. Ignatii ad Philadelph. cap. 14. & Exercit. 8. in Epist. ad Mariam, cap. 3.) which is fully also demonstrated in D. Hammond's Dissertations against Blondel (which never were answered, and never will) by the 〈◊〉 of those who wrote in the very next Age after the Apostles.  these two great Defenders of the Presbytery, we should never have had this free acknowledgement, (so prejudicial to their own 〈◊〉, and so advantageous to their adversaries purpose) had not the evidence of clear and undeniable truth enforced them to it. It will not therefore be necessary, to spend any time in confuting that uningenuous assertion of the anonymous Author of the Catalogue of Testimonies, for the equality of Bishops and Presbyters, who affirms, That their disparity began long after the Apostles times: But we may safely take for granted that which these two learned Adversaries have confessed; and see, whether upon this foundation laid by them, we may not by unanswerable reason raise this superstructure;  
That seeing Episcopal Government is confessedly so Ancient and so Catholic, it cannot with reason be denied to be Apostolic.   

SECT. VII.  
For so great a change, as between Presbyterial Government and Episcopal, could not possibly have prevailed all the world over in a little time. Had Episcopal Government been an aberration from (or a corruption of) the Government left in the Churches by the Apostles, it had been very strange, that it should have been received in any one Church so suddenly, or that it should have prevailed in all for many Ages after. Variâsse debuerat error Ecclesiarum: quod autem apud omnes unum est, non est erratum, sed traditum. Had the Churches erred, they would have varied: What therefore is one and the same amongst all, came not sure by error, but tradition. Thus Tertullian argues very probably, from the consent of the Churches of his time, not long after the Apostles, and that in matter of opinion much more subject to unobserved alteration. But that in the frame and substance of the necessary Government of the Church, a thing always in use and practice, there should be so sudden a change as presently after the Apostles times; and so universal, as received in all the Churches; this is clearly impossible.   

SECT. VIII.  
For, What universal cause can be assigned or feigned of this universal Apostasy? You will not imagine that the Apostles, all or any of them, made any decree for this change, when they were living; or left order for it in any Will or Testament, when they were dying, This were to grant the question; to wit, That the Apostles, being to leave the Government of the Churches themselves, and either seeing by experience, or foreseeing by the Spirit of God, the distractions and disorders, which would arise from a multitude of equals, substituted Episcopal Government instead of their own. General Counsels to make a Law for a general change, for many ages there was none. There was no Christian Emperor, no coercive power over the Church to enforce it. Or, if there had been any, we know no force was equal to the courage of the Christians of those times. Their lives were then at command (for they had not then learned to fight for Christ) but their obedience to any thing against his Law was not to be commanded (for they had perfectly learned to die for him.) Therefore there was no power then to command this change; or if there had been any, it had been in vain.   

SECT. IX.  
What device then shall we study, or to what fountain shall we reduce this strange pretended alteration? Can it enter into our hearts to think, that all the Presbyters and other Christians then, being the Apostles Scholars, could be generally ignorant of the Will of Christ, touching the necessity of a Presbyterial Government? Or, dare we adventure to think them so strangely wicked all the World over, as against knowledge and conscience to conspire against it? Imagine the spirit of Di●trephes had entered into some, or a great many of the Presbyters, and possessed them with an ambitious desire of a forbidden superiority, was it possible they should attempt and achieve it once without any opposition or contradiction? and besides, that the contagion of this ambition, should spread itself and prevail without stop or control; nay, without any noise or notice taken of it, through all the Churches in the World; all the watchmen in the mean time being so fast asleep, and all the dogs so dumb, that not so much as one should open his mouth against it?   

SECT. X.  
But let us suppose (though it be a horrible untruth) that the Presbyters and people then, were not so good Christians as the Presbyterians are now; that they were generally so negligent to retain the government of Christ's Church commanded by Christ, which we now are so zealous to restore: yet certainly we must not forget nor deny, that they were men as we are. And if we look upon them but as mere natural men; yet, knowing by experience, how hard a thing it is, even for Policy armed with Power by many attempts and contrivances, and in a long time, to gain upon the liberty of any one people; undoubtedly we shall never entertain so wild an imagination, as that, among all the Christian Presbyteries in the World, neither conscience of duty, nor love of liberty, nor averseness from pride and usurpation of others over them, should prevail so much with any one, as to oppose this pretended universal invasion of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ, and the liberty of Christians.   

SECT. XI.  
When I shall see therefore all the Fables in the Metamorphosis acted and prove Stories; when I shall see all the Democracies and Aristocracies in the World lie down and sleep, and awake into Monarchies: then will I begin to believe that Presbyterial Government, having continued in the Church during the Apostles times, should presently after (against the Apostles doctrine and the will of Christ) be whirled about like a scene in a mask, and transformed into Episcopacy. In the mean time, while these things remain thus incredible, and, in humane reason, impossible, I hope I shall have leave to conclude thus:  
Episcopal Government is acknowledged to have been universally received in the Church, presently after the Apostles times.  
Between the Apostles times and this presently after, there was not time enough for, nor possibility of, so great an alteration.  
And therefore there was no such alteration as is pretended. And therefore Episcopacy, being confessed to be so Ancient and Catholic, must be granted also to be Apostolic, Quod erat demonstrandum.   
FINIS.