A TREATISE OF THE EPISCOPACY, LITURGIES, AND ECCLESIASTICAL CEREMONIES OF THE PRIMITIVE TIMES, AND Of the mutations which happened to them in the fucceeding Ages: GATHERED Out of the Works of the ancient Fathers and Doctors of the Church.  
By John Lloyd B. D. Presbyter of the Church of North-Mimmes in Hertfordshire.  
Let your moderation be known unto all men, the Lord is at hand.  Phil. 4.5. 
Multum sacerdotalis officii meritum splendescit, ubi sic summorum servatur auctoritas, ut in nu●● inferiorum putatur imminuta libertas.  Leonis Epist. 61. 
Episcopi sacerdotes se esse noverint, non Dominos; honorent clericos quafi clericos, ut & ipsis à clericis, quasi Episcopis honor deferatur.  Hierom. ad Nepotianum De vita clericorum. 
LONDON, Printed by W. G. for John Shirley at the Sign of the Pelican, and Robert Littlebury at the Sign of the Unicorn in Little Britain. M.DC.LX.   

TO The Right Reverend Father in God JOHN LORD BISHOP OF EXCESTER.  
MY LORD,  
WHen the dark night of our confusions was by God's wonderful mercy, (never to be forgotten) well nigh at an end, by the near approaching of our Sun, the breath of our nostrils, our dread Sovereign Lord the King's Majesty, unto the horizon of his penitent and loyal Subjects in his hereditary Kingdoms and Dominions, whereby all began to be revived, & to be prepared for the receiving all good impressions: in this beginning of our happiness, (considering with myself by what best means men of different apprehensions concerning Ecclesiastical things might be brought unto godly unity and meet uniformity therein;) I thought that the knowledge of the state of the Church of Christ in the Apostles days, and in the four Centuries following their times, (as to the form of Ecclesiastical Government, Discipline, Liturgy and Rites, used in them) would very much conduce to the attainment of that blessed end. For in those days many thousands of holy Confessors and Martyrs flourished; in those times lived the most reverend Fathers of the first four general Councils, of Nice, Constantinople, Ephesus and Chalcedon, celebrated over all the Christian world; of whose wisdom and godly care, to do nothing in those particulars against the institutions of Christ and his Apostles, but rather to do all things as might be most pleasing to God, and most conducing to the edification of the Church, no prudent and charitable man can entertain the least doubt: Men they were, and might err; but that so many men of extraordinary holiness and wisdom, compared to the best men of these latter Centuries, should unanimously agree for the space of two, three or four hundred years in setting up and practising superstition, is incredible to them who believe that God hath promised to teach the humble his way, and show his covenant to them that fear him, and not to forsake them which have not first forsaken him. Having therefore reason and religion to assure me, that all understanding and sober men, if they could once see the form of Church-government, with the Liturgies and Rites used by those Primitive Churches, demonstrated by undeniable testimonies of pure antiquity, would easily be induced to embrace them so far as they should appear to be convenient for Christian unity and edification, in the present circumstances of time, place, and persons, (whereof not private men, but the Governors Civil and Ecclesiastical are the only Judges on earth) I made what inquiry I could, if any book were extant in the English tongue containing a brief, full, and plain demonstration of all the said Ecclesiastical things, which might be had at a cheap rate, soon read over, and easily understood by all men of indifferent capacity, whereby the knowledge of those things might be the more divulged: But, after diligent inquiry, finding none, I resolved (being the work was within the limits of my vocation, and in reading the ancient writers, I had with no small diligence noted the passages conducing thereto) invocato Dei Opt. Max. Nomine, to use my poor talon with my best endeavour to write such a little book, which should comprehend in it the sum and substance of all the matters above specified, as briefly, fully and plainly as I could. And this was the beginning of this small Treatise; which, being ended in convenient time, was offered to worthy men of excellent endowments to be perused by them, in hope that one or other of them (knowing the usefulness of the matter treated of, and observing the too plain, low, and uneven manner of writing) would be moved to put forth a work upon that subject; which (being replenished with good variety of well ordered matters, adorned with convenient eloquence, and commended by the worthy name of an Author famous for his learning, eloquence, and virtues) would be by all readily entertained, greedily read, and would sweetly convey the things desired to be published, to the knowledge of all men. But herein my hope failed me: For those worthy persons were so employed in the high and weighty affairs of the Church, that they had no leisure to go about this, (although an useful work, yet) of less profit to the Church and less proportionable to their great abilities, than the sublime employment, wherein their time was spent. What remained then, but that either that needful work must be altogether wanting, or this poor treatise so void of due ornaments must be suffered to go abroad. I had indeed once in a manner resolved to bury it in my study, but an occasion bringing the matterr into a new debate, I suffered some reasons to prevail with me to give it leave to present itself to the view of the world; yet not without some honourable Patron the glorious lustre of whose great learning, Excellent Virtues and precious name might both illumminate it, and conciliate for the mean and obscure author some room in the good esteem and affection of learned and good men. For which end I thought it most convenient to make choice of one of those very bright stars, which his Majesty's wisdom and goodness had been pleased to set in the firmament of our Church: among whom your Lordship was first presented to my thoughts in your very learned, elegant and eloquent works, especially both in your testification of your great and very remarkable zeal for the now most blessed and glorious Saint and Martyr our late glorious King CHARLES the first, and in your no less zealous fidelity to our most dear and dread Sovereign Lord King CHARLES the second, manifested in times of greatest peril, and also in your sighs, groans, complaints and prayers for and of the Church of England in her deep distress, in your prudent & indefatigable endeavours for her restauration, in those parts of your Lordship's most learned writings, wherein, as in exceeding fair monuments more lasting than brass, you consecrate the blessed Memories of many very precious names, viz. of the right reverend Fathers, Bishop Andrews, Bishop Morton, Bishop Potter, Bishop Hall, Bishop Brownrigg, and other honourable persons, never to be remembered without due acknowledgement of their transcendent worth: and especially, of the most reverend Father in God, Dr. James Usher late Archbishop of Armagh, and Lord Primate of all Ireland; who, in an exact knowledge of all good learning, in depth of judgement, in the due stating and well clearing controversies of Religion, and in sanctity of life, was not much (if at all) inferior to any the best of Bishops since the Apostles days; And lasty, in an acceptable taste which I have had of the sweetness of your virtue in a particular favour, for which I present my humble thanks to your Lordship.  
May it please you, right reverend father, to take this small work into your honourable patronage and protection, and, pardoning my boldness in this attempt, to take in good part the very humble and hearty tender of my best service to your Lordship. God Almighty long continue your life and prosperous Estate, and make you a happy instrument of much good to his Church.  
Your Lordships in all Duty John Lloyd Praesb.   

The PREFACE.  
THis short treatise containeth the sum and substance of what the reverend Doctors of the Primitive Churches for the first four hundred years after the birth of our blessed Saviour have practised and written, and thereby transmitted to our times, concerning Episcopacy, Presbytery, Ecclesiastical Discipline, Liturgy and Ceremonies, omitting only those which appear to be impertinent to the state and condition of the present times. Every material point herein is proved out of authors received by all sides (which caused the omission of the testimony of Ignatius, etc.) and such authors against whom it cannot be reasonably presumed, that they were deceived or erred in their relation of matters of fact and practice, done or used in the times, wherein they themselves or those with whom they conversed, did live. The authorities were not collected by the help of tables, or received from second hands (whence mistakes do easily and usually arise) but were taken from the authors own work read and duly considered. Because the Holy Scripture by reason of humane infirmities in all, and perverseness in many, is in many parts thereof-diversely understood, it is very needful (saith Vincentius Lirinensis) that the line of Prophetical and Apostolical interpretation be directed according to the rule of Ecclesiastical and Catholic sense. And also in the very Catholic Church great care must be had, 
Adversus haeres. c. 2.  (saith the same ancient author) that we hold that which hath been believed every where, always, and by all. Which direction of this discreet Writer, 
In ipsa item Catholica Ecclesia magnopre curandum est, ut id teneamus quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est. c. 3.  rightly understood and applied, is very good, and is and hath been of singular use, especially against Schismatics and Heretics. For when the consent of the Catholic Church in her principal members in all the parts of the world, and in all ages, beginning in, and proceeding from the Apostolical times, unto any other set or proposed age, doth clearly appear to be in any Divine Doctrine, Discipline, Liturgy, Rites, or any Ecclesiastical usage, who can gainsay that unanimous judgement of all the Saints of God, which is a far better interpreter of the word of God, than any general council can be? who dare refuse to embrace the sentence of that just and impartial judge, except in decrees about things in their nature and morally mutable, which may by the good leave of that Judge be with honour laid aside, when they become unprofitable or dissentaneous to the edification and peace of the Church? The Ecclesiastical institutions which want sufficient evidence to prove their approbation by the Church flourishing in the Apostles days, and are found to have the general approbation of the Churches between the times of the Apostles, and about the year of our Lord 500, although they be of less esteem and regard then the institutions known to be received by the Apostolical Church, yet are they Venerable and worthy of very great regard: partly, because of the propinquity of those Churches, to the time of the Apostles, from whom some of them might be probably thought to be derived, although a certain proof of their derivation appeared not to succeeding ages: partly because of the eminent wisdom of the Fathers, and exemplary sanctity of the Churches in those times, in comparison of the Churches in the following Generations. The Churches of this space of time; that is, between the Apostles decease and the year 500 wanted the extraordinary Apostolical Spirit, which so guided the Church, planted by them in all public resolutions, that she would make no Ordinance without the Apostles approbation, and having it, she could not err in her determinations. All other Churches therefore might easily err, and they that upon good occasion given them would modesty affirm, that they did err in some constitutions and usages generally approved by them, and also in some remote conclusions of the Divine Doctrine, are not to be thought to disparage them, seeing upon the matter they say no more, then that they were men which wanted the guide of the holy Spirit to lead them infallibly to truth and goodness in all things of Ecclesiastical concernment; but that those Churches within the first 500 years erred in any public constitutions or customs unto Idolatry, or, which is less, unto apparent superstition, is a thing improbable and incredible to them, who rightly consider the public doctrine and Ecclesiastical Ordinances of those times, and take due notice of the great prudence and holiness of many of the chief Governors and Pillars of those Churches; Heretics, Idolaters and superstitious persons were in many of the Churches, but that the Churches themselves in any part of that time became Haereticall, Idolatrous, or Superstitious, is very untrue and unworthy the thought of a prudent and charitable man. And here by the way, concerning the Church of England, if we compare her in her legal constitution with any other Church after the year of our Lord 180. it will be found that they who charge her with Antichristianisme, Idolatry, or Superstition in her constitution, established by Law, do by clear consequence pass the sentence of the same condemnation upon every of those Churches, especially them of the 4th and 5th century: the rashness and injustice of which censure is very worthy of a very severe censure. The Apostle, indeed, saith that the mystery of iniquity began to work in his time: 
2 Thes. 2.7. Revel. 2.24.  but did he mean thereby that the mysterious iniquity and depth of Satan, began to work in the public constitutions of the Catholic Church in his days, and that they were parts of the constitutions? no surely, neither can any Christian be so simple or so injurious to the Ministry of the Apostles, and the purity of that Church, as to think that the Apostle had any such meaning. The mystery of Iniquity was indeed in the Church in some dead branches, in some wicked livers and Heretics, but it was not of the Church, it was no part of the constitution of the Church, although it did labour to insinuate and work itself into it: it may be granted as very probable, that the mystery of iniquity in particular, and those dead members, and by them working upon the Churches, might more vitiate the Churches of the second century than the Churches in the first century, and the Churches in the third century, more than the Churches of the second and so of the rest to the end of the fifth century; but that in any part of that time it prevailed so far, as to become a part of the Ecclesiastical Doctrine, Discipline, Liturgy or Ceremonies universally received and used, is rather a surmise of an excess of jealousy, than an opinion grounded upon probable reasons, it is so far from being an approved truth. After the year 500 and the division of the Empire, and establishment of the Kings, 
2 Thes. 2.3. Revel. 17.12, 13.16.  which were to give their power and strength to the Beast, and which in due time were to burn the Whore of Babylon, the Churches grew generally more and more corrupt; the civil and Ecclesiastical confusions attending the Wars in the several Provinces, giving advantage to the mystery of Iniquity, to mingle itself, first with the Discipline and Ceremonies, and after with the public Doctrine; whereby, first superstition, than Idolatry, and lastly, Heresies took place in the public profession of the Churches; so that in persons who knowingly swallowed the good and bad together, the infection of the mystery of Iniquity hindered the operation of the good portion of the whole lump, and working the effect of its poison into their vital parts, corrupted and destroyed them. And therefore these latter Churches were not by the first reformers of our Church proposed, for patterns, as the former were, which preserved the purity of Doctrine, Discipline, and Ceremonies without the addition of any thing causing Superstition, much less Idolatry or Haeresy. Our Church hath separated the Precious from the Vile, the good of Doctrine, Discipline, and Rites from the pestiferous and noxious additions; and now if either the abuse of prosperity, or the iniquity of the late times hath added any evil quality to any of our Ecclesiastical things, or made us incapable of good by some Rite or particle of the Discipline or Liturgy, or if any defect appear to be in our former reformations, and especially if any of these have happened in any Rite of adoration (wherein is the greatest danger;) it is not to be doubted, but that all these things will be carefully looked into; and whether by omission, explanation or otherwise, the Discipline and Rites, by the help and blessing of God, shall be reform according to the best patterns, and as shall most conduce to the godly unity and peace of the Church and Kingdom. What do I speak only of future Reformation? seeing the deep Wisdom, and the most sincere piety of his Sacred Majesty hath by the blessing of God upon his Royal endeavours, found out the best temperament for the healing of the present distempers, and by his gracious Declaration hath established a most happy Interim, the fittest that could be devised for the preparing different apprehensions and affections unto an unity, meet to entertain the best form of a Christian Church, which the infirmities of these last days of the last time can well bear. The Regicides of late had proceeded far in breaking down this our House of God, 
Psal. 74. 1 King. 6.7.  with their iron tools, their Axes and Hammers, but as it is said of King Solomon's Temple, that there was neither Hammer nor Axe nor any tool of iron heard while it was in building, so our blessed Solomon in re-edifying this decayed house of God, doth the work without all iron instruments, without all unpleasing sounds, it goeth on sensim sine sensu, and it is and will be the glorious effect of his Majesty's incomparable providence, guided by the most gracious direction of God, cunctando restituisse rem. But some of them which will read this small tractate, may therein observe some passages, which suppose the Church of England without the benefit of any proceed of his Majesty towards her restauration, and may therefore be ready to censure the Author as he well deserved, if he had not this just Apology, namely, That he can make it good by many witnesses of worthy persons of known integrity that this treatise was ready written five months agone at the least, at which time the Author could only write of the state and condition of things as they were then, and not as they would be in times to come. If any object, It had been better, if ever, to have published this at that time, for which it seems more convenient; to which I say, That the Conscience of mine own infirmities retarded and had almost hindered the publication thereof.  
But partly my desire to contribute my poor mite towards the restauration of God's House prevailed with me, partly believing the truth of that saying of Clemens of Alexandria, that the science of preaching is in a manner Angelical, and whether it be exercised by the tongue or hand (writing) profiteth either way, and knowing myself to be not far from the time when the strength of voice may decrease, I thought it not amiss to put it to the trial by this beginning; whether I might hereafter with any hope of acceptance and profit, attempt to recompense the defect which (if I live) may likely happen in my voice, with the labour and pains of preaching by the pen. Some may think that I have made no good choice in preferring the judgement of St. Hierome a Presbyter, and not well affected, (as many think) to Episcopacy, before the opinion of Epiphanius a Bishop, and the elder of the two. 
Aerius maintained that neither the Apostles were, nor the Churches could lawfully be the authors of the preferment of a Bishop above the Presbyters, and therefore he departed from the Communion of the Catholic Church, and became an Independent Presbyter of an independent Congregation.  First, I must deny that Hierome was disaffected to good Bishops, or to the Episcopal dignity. His works do abundantly testify, that he bade in singular honour, both the one and the other: only he often reproveth, and that sharply the Ambition, Covetuousness, and other vices of many Bishops, which not he only, but others before him, and in his time, even Bishops themselves did perform with no less sharpness and severity. See one among others, Gregory, who was created Bishop of Sasimis, executed his function in Nazianzum, and after was advanced to the Archbishopric of Constantinople, this Archbishop wisheth there were no prerogative of the Throne, nor Prelacy, which (saith he) had indeed in former times been desired of good and prudent men, but which now to shun, is counted an act of singular prudence. What? is this wise and holy Archbishop for the abrogation of Episcopacy root and branch? no; no, he only taxeth the exorbitancy, the abuse, the ambition, and not the holy function: he expounds himself, when in the same place he expresseth the prelacy which he wisheth outed, to be the Tyranny of Authority, and pre-eminence; it is that which caused many wife men to shun the function, because in had company it is difficult to rule well, which at all times is the work of an excelling faculty, 
Greg. Niz. in Apolog, 1. In orat. ad patrem, Basilia praesente.  and it many times happens (saith the same Father) that grace itself begets Pride, and then we know that the corruption of the best is the worst. Secondly, Hierome was not inferior in learning, eloquence and piety to any of the Ancients, neither did any excel him in the knowledge of the antiquities of the Church. And he, that doth not look very narrowly into the works of Epiphanius, may find him defective in this last. Hierome's testimony concerning the original of Episcopacy, although in formal expressions it differs from Epiphanius', yet perhaps by the distinction of extraordinary and ordinary Episcopacy, the difference in words may be brought into an unity in sense; and if there be a difference in the sense between them: Yet Hierome affords a more immediate, direct, and efficacious argument for Episcopacy and its contiruance than the other. I am much deceived, and have Crossed mine own resolution, if I have not delivered the truth impartially, as I found it in the holy old Doctors. And although a lover of the Presbytery may dislike some passage of this little book singly considered, and a lover of Episcopacy dislike some other passage in like sort apprehended; yet I have good hope that, when both have read the whole, and laid before them the entire series of the discourse, they may see good reason to like well in the whole, what they disliked apart, and by itself considered, and will candidly acknowledge that every thing therein tends to the same good end which both profess to aim at.   

A Treatise of the Primitive Episcopacy, Liturgies, Rights, etc.  
IT having pleased God to choose for himself out of sinful men a peculiar people to set forth his glorious praises, he never left the world destitute of heavenly institutions and Laws, whereby men might be translated from the state of sin and misery, to the state of holiness and Salvation, and be made and preserved answerable in conversation to the blessed condition of their translation and change.  
These willing and obedient people addicted to the Service of Almighty God, were, are, and will be by him reputed, his house, Family, and Kingdom, which therefore cannot be imagined to be without order and rule, without some certain persons set apart to teach the Divine Laws, and execute other Divine institutions, and with consent of the concerned, to make Ecclesiastical Ordinances, which times, places, and other circumstances require, agreeable to the Divine, and subservient to the due and most decent execution of them.  
Of the number of these teachers and rulers of God's house were, Adam, Noah, Abraham, and other heads of numerous Families unto the time of the giving of the Law by Moses; after the Law, partly fit persons of the tribe of Levi, partly the Prophets, partly men bred in the Schools of the Prophets, and John the Baptist, performed the Divine and Ecclesiastical functions unto the time of our Saviour's Baptism: after which time he himself the Builder and Master of the house and Family, (whose servants and under-officers all other rulets acknowledge themselves to be, deriving from him not only their authority, but also all their abilities, whereby they are made able in any measure to fulfil the holy offices) he (I say) in his own person and in our nature, was pleased to execute such parts of his own institutions as he saw convenient for himself to perform, and to choose, besides seventy Disciples, twelve other men to be his Apostles and Ministers of the heavenly doctrine, and annexed ceremonies.  
It appeareth, that it was the intention of our Saviour, that the number of twelve Apostles should be his primary instruments in founding the Original Churches of Christ, the Mothers of all other Churches to succeed unto the end of the world; It was also his purpose to make them parents of all other Ministers which should succeed in an ordinary course; which is hereby manifest, because Christ promised to be with them unto the world's end, which cannot be verified of their persons, and therefore is to be understood of them in the persons of their successors, proceeding from them by successive ordination, 
Basil. constit. Monast. c. 22. & Chrysost. in Epist. ad Coloss. hom. 3.  and represented in their persons; wherefore the ordination of the Apostles, was in some sort the ordination of their successors, and their mission to teach and baptise, was a virtual or legal mission of the other.  
There were three Editions of the covenant of grace, the one from Adam to Abraham, the second from him to our Saviour, the third from our Saviour unto the end of the world. In every of these, the substance and kernel of the Covenant was, and is the same, the difference is in remarkable accidents and circumstances; the Ministers of the heavenly Doctrine in the first and second, preached Christ to come, and had the Spirit accompanying the word, and seals of the Covenant ministered by them, as an incident annexed by Almighty God to their ordination: but yet so, as the spirit was ordinarily given in a lesser measure to the ministry of the first, then or the second Edition; The Apostles were in their call to the Apostleship before the death of our Saviour ordained ministers of the third Edition of the Covenant, because Christ was now come in the flesh, and had begun to publish the great Salvation, and therefore they had a proportionable increase of the spirit added to their ministry, for the working of repentance, faith, and holiness in men above the ordinary measure granted to the ministry of the second Edition.  
Notwithstanding that the Ministers of the first and second Edition of the Covenant of grace, 
Sect. 2.  had a power of binding and losing, in having the spirit accompanying their office and service, and that the Apostles in the mortal life of our Saviour, had the same in a higher degree; yet the promise made to the confession of St. Peter, of giving unto him a power of binding and losing with the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven was not in vain, as of a thing which he had already received; for he had received the same only in the measure and degree meet to be dispensed at that time, and not in the ordinary fullness promised to the ministers of the new Testament, fully confirmed by the death and resurrection of Christ: and therefore our Saviour after his rising again from the dead, bestowed upon them that promised fullness of the Spirit, which was in ordinary to accompany their ministry of the word, 
Chrysost. in 2 Cor. hom. 6. Conc. Forojuliens. an. 791. c. 13. Athanas. dicta & interpret. parabol. S. Script.  sacraments and censures, etc. breathing upon them and saying, receive ye the Holy Ghost, whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them, and whosoever sins ye retain, they are retained; hence it is, that the ministry of the new Testament fully confirmed, is in an eminent way the ministry of the spirit, and so called; and hence it is that the Apostle saith, that the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God, to the pulling down of strong holds, casting down reasonings and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.  
This measure of the Spirit going along and operating in the ministerial preaching, prayer, baptising, blessing, absolving, etc. was now very necessary, as in other respects, so in this, that the world that had been so long captivated by Satan, and mightily habituated in all sinful ways, 
Semen Sermonis Christi cum in animam audientis inciderit per gradus suos crescit-tam diu in ancipiti est, quamdiu pariat quod concepit. Hierom. in Epist. ad Gal. c. 4.  might be converted unto God, and preserved in his grace.  
Some will say, why are not all hearers of the Gospel converted? to which it is soon answered, that the Holy Spirit worketh in all them that hear the Gospel preached to them, yet gradually; first, that they may cowork, and then that they may continue coworking, until the work of saving faith be perfected in them. He gives an eat able to hear, to the hearers he gives ability to understand, and gives ability in some degree to will the good, and where the good is willed, he hath given the will and the deed; and where the Good we are enabled to understand and Will, is not understood or Willed, that comes from the natural corrupted freedom of man's will, which the spirit doth not take away against our will, because he will not destrey his own work; namely, that good natural freedom of will, conferred upon man in his creation, capable of being a subject of good or evil.  
A person not ordained to the holy ministry may in time and place teach and exhort with a speech no less Orthodox, wholesome and persuasive, than any ordained minister of the Cospel can use, and yet it must be acknowledged to be far inferior in its operation tending to true edification, than the speech of a minister seeming less persuasive; because this is always accompanied with the spirit, the other is not, but supposeth some grace in the hearer which it stirreth: or if it be accompanied with a quickening or healing grace, it is of God's mere indulgence, and not by virtue of God's ordinary constitution and promise; and therefore the spirit going with the exhortation of the minister doth always edify or is resisted; and so the word preached by him is a sweet savour of Christ in them that are saved, and in them that perish; to the one the favour of death unto death, and to the other the savour of life unto life.  
The Apostles all this while had not received the gradual compliment of the gifts ordained to be bestowed upon the ministers of the new Testament; 
Sect. 3.  it was meet that Christ should in our entire nature open heaven and enter into it, before the fullness of the ordinary or extraordinary gifts subservient for the right using of the Keys of Heaven, should be granted to his Vicegerents upon earth.  
Wherefore after his opening and possession of Heaven, he gave those gifts unto men, both extraordinary in the Apostles, Evangelists and Prophets, and ordinary, in the Pastors and Doctors.  
The first ordinary Pastors, received their ordination from the Apostles; of the Apostles we know no other ordination than Christ's immediate calling of them to that office, in which they were by the foresaid degrees perfected; the Pastors received in the Apostles ordination their seminal or virtual ordination (as was said) to their function, which received its perfection of degrees in the effusion of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles.  
The Author of the Comments upon St. Paul's Epistles attributed to St. Ambrose saith, that it was lawful at the first for Laics and Deacons to preach in the Assemblies and Baptise; yet of that his assertion he brings no sound proof; Philip was ordained a Deacon, and he baptised the Eunuch; Ananias a Disciple baptised Saul, after called Paul; did Ananias do so only in the capacity of a Disciple, and the other only in the capacity of a Deacon? No surely; for it appears that they had an immediate mission from God to teach and baptise, which is equivalent to an ordination, to the office of a Pastor, either as to those acts only, and for that time only, or as to the whole pastoral function to be constantly exercised. If any examples be found in the Acts of the Apostles of any Laics or Deacons performing pastoral offices, whose ordination ordinary or extraordinary is not mentioned, it's meeter to judge and believe, that they had either the ordinary call or the extraordinary, according to the examples of Ananias and Philip (when the contrary cannot be proved) then to affirm that any layman might then at his pleasure exercise the acts of that sacred vocation.  
Paul was no sooner a Christian, but he was instantly by Christ's immediate appointment made an Apostle (Act. 9.15, 20. cum Gal. 1.16, 17, 23.) and without any other ordination preached the Gospel of Christ; 
1 Tim. 2.7.  yet some years after he together with Barnabas were by the express command of the Holy Ghost ordained by certain Prophets and Doctors which then were at Antioch. In which ordination two things are observable. First, that the Apostles were ordained by their inferiors in office; but the extraordinary commission whereby this was done, makes an exception confirming the rule, which is, that without all contradiction, the less is blessed of the greater. 
Heb. 7.7.  The second thing to be considered in that ordination are the sacred ceremonies used in the ordination of Pastors, to wit, prayer, which is the principal; fasting to commend the prayer, and imposition of hands, as a visible demonstration of God's blessing them and their ministry with the gift of the spirit to accompany their service to the losing of men from the guilt and power of sin, and setting of them at liberty, to walk in the ways of God's commandments.  
An ordination of Pastors celebrated without any one of these ceremonies, cannot be accounted right and regular: St. Paul with other who were Presbyters ordained Timothy by the joint imposition of his and their hands; we find imposition of hands placed by the Apostle among the fundamentals of Christian Religion; 
1 Tim. 4.14. cum 2 Tim. 1.6. Heb. 6.1, 2.  and there, although it followeth the immersions in the names of the blessed Trinity, and therefore may seem to import confirmation; yet it need not denote confirmation alone, but any other perpetual ordinance of God, wherein this ceremony was to be used, by the authority of the Apostles exampled and practise.  
They which say that this ceremony was to last no longer in use then God was pleased to continue the miraculous operations usual in the Apostolic times, seem to impute inconsiderateness to the Apostle, in reckoning that one of the fundamentals of Religion, which was not to be perpetually continued in the militant Church: but we are assured, that the Apostle being moved by the Holy Ghost, could not speak inconsiderately, and that every fundamental of Christian Religion, shall continue in Christ's Church unto the end of the world, as this ceremony both in confirmation and in ordinations of Pastors hath hitherto been always used in the universal Church, and without doubt will so continue unto the end of time.  
Pastors are called in the Apostolical Epistles by two other names, 
Sect. 4.  that is, Bishops and Presbyters; the Apostleship contained in itself the pastoral offices, and therefore an Apostle was also called a Bishop and Presbyter. The first mention of Pastors by the name of Presbyters of Elders, is in Acts 11.30. where the Church of Antioch is said to have sent relief by Barnabas and Saul unto the Elders of the Churches in Judaea, in the time of the great dearth, which was in the days of Claudius Caesar; in the 15 Chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, we find the controversy concerning the necessity of circumcision and keeping of the Law of Moses, brought by Paul and Barnabas before the Apostles and Elders or Presbyters in the Church of Jerusalem to be by them determined: We see in the chapter of the Acts, how that Paul with some of the brethren, went in unto James and all the elders were present; whence we may observe, that the Apostles did not discuss and end the controversy concerning circumcision and keeping of the Law without the presence of the Presbyters of the Church where they than were; nor did James alone heat Paul, but together with his Presbyters did both hear him, and give him that seasonable Council, to purify himself for the avoiding the offence of the believing Jews, which were numerous in Jerusalem.  
Here ariseth a question, 
Sect. 5.  whether St. James was head of the Presbyters of the Church of Jerusalem only as he was an Apostle, having his ordinary residence in that Church, or also as having an ordinary authority over the Presbyters, which was to be continued to successors over the succeeding Presbyters; it is certain, that as an Apostle he was the head of the Presbyters, having a superiority over them; but as the Apostleship was not to pass to successors, so neither was his authority to be conveyed to any in succession; but to be terminated with his life: it is more than probable, that at that time he was their superior, only as an Apostle settled in that Church, neither had we need to conceive him in any subsequent times to become their head in any other sense then this, if the unanimous testimony of the ancient Doctors of the Church did not constrain us to be of another judgement, unless we will reject the witness of the Catholic Church constantly persevered in from the beginining of the second Centuary after our Saviour's birth unto this day. For the Fathers do constantly affirm that St. James was (for some time before his decease) Bishop of the Church of Jerusalem, not only in the sense of the word [Bishop] common to an Apostle and every Presbyter, but in the sense which soon after the time of Clemens Romanus was appropriated to it, that is, signifying such a Presbyter, as had a superiority over all the rest of the Presbyters of the same Church, to continue in him during life, and to be transferred to some other after him.  
Hegesippus an Historian, 
Apud Euseb. hiss. l. 4. c. 21. Ibid. l. 3. c. 29.  who flourished about the year 170, relateth that after the death of St. James, Simon Cleopa being chosen Bishop of the Church of Jerusalem, one Thebulis begun to corrupt the Church with vain Doctrine, because he was not made Bishop there. And the same Historian writeth, that Simon Cleopa lived Bishop of that place, until the times of Trajane the Emperor, under whose government Simon suffered Martyrdom, and John the Apostle died; by which testimony of an historian who lived within 60 years after the death of the Apostle St. John, it plainly appeareth, that Simon was not (after the death of St. James brother of our Lord) constituted only a single Presbyter of that Church, nor James before him head thereof only as an Apostle or an extraordinary governor, but that both were ordinary rulers of the whole Church, as well Presbyters as the other members thereof.  
Clemens Alexandrinus, 
Paedagog. l. 3. c. ult. Strom. 6.  who lived before the year of our Lord 200, makes a clear distinction between a Bishop and a Presbyter, saying, that in the Scriptures some precepts pertain to Bishops, some to Presbyters, and some to Deacons; and in another place, that a Presbyter doing and teaching according to Gods will, although he be not on earth honoured with the first chair, shall sit on the 24 thrones judging the people: and a little after he saith, that here in the Church the provections or proficiencies of Bishops, Presbyters, Deacons, be imitations of the angelical glory. Tertullian, who flourished in the year of our Lord 200, 
De Monogamia c. 11.  mentions an use in his time of ask leave of the Bishop, of the Presbyters, and of the Deacons to marry: Elsewhere he calls upon the Heretics to show the beginnings of their Churches, and so to reckon the order of their Bishops, running from the beginning by successions, that the first (Bishop) have an Apostle or an Apostolical man for his auctor or antecessor, as the Church of Smyrna relates Polycarpus to be placed there Bishop by John (the Apostle;) and the Church of Rome reporteth Clement to have been ordained there by Peter (the Apostle. 
Adversus Valentin. c. 4. ) In another place the same author saith, that Valentinus because he was ingenious & eloquent had hoped an Episcopacy, 
De Baptismo. c. 17.  and being angry that another by prerogative of Martyrdom had obtained it, he departed from the Church. In another place he hath this observation, viz. the emulation of Episcopacy is the mother of Schisms. 
Adversus haeres. l. 3. c. 3. & apud Euseb. l. 5. c. 18.  I must not forget the testimony of Ireaaeus, who affirmeth of himself, that he was a hearer of Polycarpus, who was not only taught by the Apostles, and conversed with many of them which saw the Lord, but was also by the Apostles in Asia, 
Advers. haeres. l. 3. c. 3. Edit. Paris. 1567.  (in which is the Church of Smyrna) constituted a Bishop: the same Irenaeus doth enumerate the Bishops of Rome which succeeded one another from Peter unto Eleutherius, who was the twelfth successor of Peter. Polycrates (who was 65 years in the Lord when he wrote his Epistle unto Victor Bishop of Rome, concerning the time of the celebration of the Pàsche, which was about the year of our Lord 197, whereby it appeareth, that he began to flourish about 50 years after the death of John the Apostle, if not much sooner (if he was come to years of discretion before his Baptism;) Polycrates (I say) who was so near the times of the Apostles saith, that he was the eighth Bishop of Ephesus. Now it is acknowledged by all, that in the time of Victor, a Bishop had the pre-eminence over the Presbyters in every Church; and therefore it is consequent, that Polycrates by the seven Bishops preceding him in Ephesus, meaneth not single Presbyters, but such Bishops as were in the Church at the time of his writing that Epistle to Victor.  
If the principality of the Ecclesiastical regiment had been in the College of Presbyters; until the death of the Apostles, and after their decease the principality of that government was committed to one, and not before; surely Polycrates, Irenaeus, and Hegesippus had egregiously prevaticated in attributing the principality of one to some part of the time of the Apostles, which (they living with thousands who must have seen and consented to that change made after the Apostles decease, if any such had been then first made,) could not be ignorant of. But that these holy men were not unfaithful in their relation, doth evidently appear by this; namely, that all the Fathers, none contradicting, agree with them, affirming Bishops having in an ordinary way a superiority over Presbyters, to have been ordained in the times of the Apostles.  
Concerning Archbishops, 
Sect 6.  (omitting the guesses of some ancient Doctors concerning the Archiepiscopacy of Mark, Timothy, and Titus,) we may find some intimation of their being in the end of the second century, partly, by the act of Victor Bishop of Rome, in his attempt to excommunicate the Churches of the East, and partly by a passage in Tertullian, where he saith, the Bishop of Bishops hath made a decree, etc. but certain it is, that before the year of our Lord 250, wherein Cyprian Bishop of Carthage flourished, 
l. de pudicitia c. 1.  Archbishops were ordained in the Church: For Cyprian writeth, that there were many years and a long age since many Bishop's convening under Agryppinus (Bishop of Carthage) decreed, 
Epist. ad Jub●in. ad Cornel. l. 4. Epist. 8.  etc. and in one of his Epistles to Cornelius Bishop of Rome, he saith, that his adversaries boasted, saying, that twenty five Bishops of Numidia would come to Carthage, who would make unto themselves a Bishop there.  
Among these Archbishops, (who were such indeed, but not yet in name, that we can find in any approved auctor of that age) were some more eminent than other; each of which had some Archbishops subordinate to them, which in following times were called primates: for in a province was one chief City, under which were divers mother Cities, which had lesser Cities under them; In these were the Bishops, in the Mother-cities were the Metropolitans or Archbishops, in the first, the Primates; privileges made some variations.  
Of Primates and Metropolitans, the Council of Nice saith, it is manifest, that, if any be ordained without the will and conscience of the Metropolitan Bishop, this great and holy Council hath decreed, he ought not to be a Bishop. And in another Canon, the ancient manner (or custom) doth last in Egypt, Lybia and Pentapolis, that the Bishop of Alexandria have the power of all these; for the Bishop of Rome hath a like custom, in like manner also at Antioch and other provinces: let the due honour proper to every Church be preserved to it. These Primates and Archbishops had no power in things proper to the cognizance of a Bishop in his own Diocese, but only in those things whereof the Canons of the Church had committed to them the hearing and Judgement, or which were of concernment to many Dioceses: And this is it which Cyprian meaneth, where he saith, 
Epist. ad Quintium.  none of us (Bishops) doth constitute himself to be a Bishop of Bishops, or doth compel this College by tyrannical terror to the necessity of obeying, seeing every Bishop hath according to his own liberty and free will, that he may not be judged by another. Adrian the Emperor, 
Apud Vopisum in Saturnino.  who reigned from the year of our Lord 117, to the year 135, writeth in a certain Epistle horrible untruths against Christians; as that there was never a Presbyter of the Christians which was not a Mathematician, a Soothsayer, etc. that the very Patriarch, when he came to Egypt, was by some compelled to adore Serapis, by others to adore Christ; that they, which said themselves to be Bishops of Christ, were devoted to Serapis. It seems this Emperor had taken notice, that Christians had Ecclesiastical officers, whereof some were-called Presbyters, some called Bishops, and (perhaps) that the Bishop of Alexandria was over all Egypt, etc. and Bishops thereof; and therefore calls him by the name of a like civil Magistrate, (Patriarch,) which was afterward used by Christians in a like sense: but too much hath been said to show that it was ordained in the times of the Apostles, that the principal authority in every Church should be in one Presbyter advanced above and over the rest, unto whom in a short time after, the name of (Bishop) was made proper. This truth is so clear and written, as it were, with capital or uncial letters in the writings of all the ancients, that he that runneth may read it in them.  
In the next place it should be considered, whether that Ordinance constituting Episcopacy made in the Apostolical times, was not, in proper sense, an Apostolical constitution; 
Sect. 7.  and if so, whether therefore it be unalterable? But that this matter may be better understood, it is convenient first to speak of the Authority and Power given to the Bishop, what it was, and how ample in those times. 
De baptism. c. 17.  Tertullian gives us some information in this point, when he saith, that the chief Priest which is the (Bishop) hath the right (or power) of giving Baptism; then the Presbyters and Deacons, but not without the authority of the Bishop, for the preservation of the honour of the Church, which remaining safe, peace is safe maintained. For the understanding of this, we must consider, that, where the exercise of the power of preaching, baptising, etc. in such place and among such persons was not by some ordinance of the Church determined to this or that particular Presbyter, there it pertained to the Bishop to do it, and not to any other without his leave; yea the very Ordinances and Canons could not be made without his consent and authority, as their principal author under Christ. 
In Epist. ad Titum. c. 1.  For as Hierom saith, the whole care of the Church belongs unto the Bishop; and therefore he was to see that all the Presbyters did their duties assigned to them, and that the ministerial acts not allotted to any special Presbyter, were to be done by the Bishop himself, or by him whom he would appoint to do them.  
Hierom mentions one thing proper to a Bishop; 
Epist. ad Evagri●m.  what doth a Bishop saith he (excepting Ordination,) which a Presbyter doth not do? where he maketh ordination of Presbytery to be the proper work of a Bishop, which the Presbyters were not to perform (except perhaps in the Bishop's place, and by his commission in some cases of necessity) as shall be showed hereafter; not that the Presbyters had no hand in Ordination, but that the principal act in it, 
Can. 3.  was only the Bishops. For the fourth Council of Carthage saith, 
Sed sola propter auctoritatem summo sacerdot o Clericorum ordinatio & consecratio reservata est, ne a multis Ecclesiae Disciplina vendicata concordiam solveret, Scandala geneventur. Isid. de Eccl. offic. c. 7. Can. 5. circa an. 656.  when a Presbyter is ordained, the Bishop blessing him and holding his hand upon his head, let the Presbyters also which be present, lay their hands by the hand of the Bishop upon his head. And it follows in the fourth Canon: when a Deacon is ordained, let the Bishop alone which blesseth him, lay his hand upon his head, because he is not consecrated to the Priesthood, but to a Service. Where we are to observe, that the imposition of the hands of the Presbyters, is a condition antecedent requisite to the consecration of a Presbyter, and so proper to it, that it may not be used in the ordination of a Deacon, much less of any other inferior officer; the blessing is the act in ordination, which is appropriated to the Bishop. And therefore in the second Council of Hisp●lis, the Presbyters and Deacons consecrated by a Bishop, who having sore eyes could not read, were deposed from the degrees which they had ill gotten; a presbyter having contrary to the order of the Church read the benediction.  
The Bishop performed in the Church the chief offices of preaching and administration of the Communion, if he pleased, none other being to do either in his presence, but by his call: sometime to show his power, or out of envy, idleness, or disdain, he neither would himself exhort the people, nor require a presbyter to do it. 
ad Nepotianum de vita clericorum.  Which great fault Hierom reproves; in some Churches (saith he) is a bad custom, that the Bishop being present, the presbyters hold their peace, as though the Bishop envied or disdained to hear them.  
Some other things were in some sort appropriated to the Bishop, but were not made so peculiar to him as ordination was; nor were they all of them so ancient privileges, nor of that weight; for confirmation was the chiefest of them, 
Greg. Epist. l. 3. Ep. 26. Conc. Carth. 3. c. 32. Pseudambros. in Ep. ad Eph. c. 4.  which in some cases and places presbyters might and did usually perform: The making of the Chrism, the signing of the baptised in the forehead with the sign of the Cross, consecration of Virgins, of the altar, etc. were ceremonies of less moment, and some of them of a latter institution.  
But notwithstanding that the Bishop had in some things a propriety, and in all things Ecclesiastical a principality, yet the presbyters had a subordinate power ordinary or extraordinary in the one, and in the other; for the Bishop could ordain no presbyter without the consent of the presbyters, and the imposition of their hands. Cyprian affirmeth, that the Clergy of Rome presided with Cornelius their Bishop. 
Cyprian Ep. ad Cornelium.  The fourth Council of Carthage prohibits the Bishop to hear any man's cause without the presence of his Clergy, and forbids him to give, 
Can. 22. Can. 23.  sell or change any thing belonging to the Church, without consent and subscription of the Clergy. And that there was not so great a distance between the Bishop and presbyters, as hath of latter times been kept, nor as is between a presbyter and a Deacon, 
Can. 34. Can. 35.  doth appear by some Canons of the same ancient Council, which ordain that the Bishop sitting in any place, suffer not a presbyter to stand: and that the Bishop in the Church sit among the presbyters in a higher seat, but in the house must know himself to be a College (or companion) of the presbyters. Concerning the distance between a presbyter and Deacon, the Canons of the Synod say, that a Deacon is minister as well of the presbyter, 
Vide Conc. Nicenum. c. 14. & Arelat. 1. c. 21.  as of the Bishop; that a Deacon in the convention of the presbyters may speak only when he is asked, and that he is not to sit but when he is commanded by the presbyter. 
Can. 37. Can. 39 Can. 40.  Therefore it may seem, that if after 300 years since the decease of the Apostles, (at which time the power of Bishops was much enlarged) there was no more difference between a Bishop and a presbyter, the difference was far less at that time between the Bishop and the College of presbyters, than the birth of popery hath made between them. 
Esai. c. 3.  Hierom calls the College of presbyters the Bishop's Senate; intimating thereby, that the Bishop ought to hear and determine Ecclesiastical causes, in the presence, and with the advice and consent of his presbyters. Hence it was, that, 
l. 3. Epist. 22.  long before the time of St. Hierome, the holy Martyr Cyprian (having with consent of the Clergy of the place where he than was (being absent from his own City and presbyters) ordained one a reader, and another a subdeacon, he) excuseth himself by his Letters to the Presbyters of his own Cathedral, saying, that nothing new was done by him in their absence, but what was begun in their Common Council, was promoted by urgent necessity; their Council therefore that was requisite in so small a matter, was much more necessary in matters of greatest weight.  
It is opportune here to consider the famous question, 
Sect. 8.  whether in the first twenty years of the Apostles preaching (something more or less) the whole care of the Church did in common belong to the College of presbyters of every Church where no Apostle was present, nor Evangelist, nor any supplying the place of an Apostle; or did the care and government of every Church (except where some invincible hindrance withstood) belong unto one as principal and head, and to the presbyters only as his Senate and Counsellors?  
The Ancients vary in this point: 
Contra haeres. Aerii.  Epiphanius and some others affirm, that the office of a Bishop was instituted by the Apostles, distinct from the offices of the Apostles, Evangelists, prophets, and presbyters; 
Ultra sacerdotium non est gradus ordinis & tamen intra hunc gradum & ordmem contingit esse distinctionem dignitatum & officiorum, quae tamen novum gradum vel ordinem non constituunt, ut Archipresbyter, Episcopus, Archiepiscopus, Patriarcha, pontifex summus, qui ultra sacerdotium non addunt ordinem nec gradum novum sed solum dignitatem & officium, & ita Episcopatus prout concernit ordinem sacer dotti benè potest dici ordo, sed prout distinguitur contra sacerdotium dicitur dignitatem quandam vel officium Episeopi annexum, & non est propriè nomen ordinis, nec no vus character imprimitur, nec nova potestas datur, sed potestas data ampliatur; unde sicut non recipit alias claves sic nec alium ordinem: & hoc sensit magister Hugo (de S. Victore) & Magister sententiarum. Bonavent. in 4. dist. 24. q. 3. Et postea— non ita propriè dicitur aliquis ordinari cum promovetur in Episcopum, sicut cum promovetur in sacerdotem, sed magis propriè dicitur consecrari, & postea— non datur ibi nova potestas sed solùm potestas ligandi & solvendi ampliatur. 
Solis sacerdotibus datur & in ordine sacerdotali potestas clavium, scilicet quantum ad solvendum & ligandum quasi mediatoribus inter Deum & subditos. Si objiciatur quod magis couvenit potestatem clavium dart Episcopo in consecratione Episcopi, dicendum quod nequaquam, quia Episcopus non dicitur novum ordinem, nec in consecrationem Episcopi datur novus ordo sed tantum ampliatur potestas. Alex. Halens. to. 4. de potest. clavium. q. 20. m. 8. a.  
Probatum est (scilicet disp. 140. c. 1.) inquit Vasques quod Hieronymus nullam constituat differentiam jure Divino inter Episcopatum & Presbyterium, sed censeat jure tantum ecclesiastico discrimen fuisse introductum. In 3. p. disp. 142. c. 8.  
Ego sanè (inquit Vasques) suspicor vehementer S. Thomam existimasse consecrationem cum qua confertur potestas Episcopajis jure humano esse introductam. In 3. p. disp. 143. c. 2.   and that in all Churches where fit men for that office were found, they were ordained and set over the presbyters, and that the Senate of presbyters did alone govern only in some Churches where no man was found fit to be made a Bishop.  
Hierom and some other taught, 
Episcopes solae ordinatione superiores esse Presbyteris. Chrysost. in 1. Ep. ad Timoth. hom. 11. Postea unus est gradus S. Hierom in 1. Ep. ad Tim. c. 3.  that the Apostles left at the first the whole care of every Church, (where none of them or their Vicegerents, or Evangelists resided) unto the body of the presbyters of each Church, which exercised all Ecclesiastical powers in common, until the presbyters began to divide the flock, and to make of one Church many Independent Congregations: For the avoiding of which inconvenience, the Churches unanimously agreed to commit the principal care of every Church unto one presbyter, without whose consent the rest of the presbyters were not allowed to exercise any part of their Ecclesiastical function; 
In Ep. ad Tit. c. 1. vide gloss. dist. 23. c. legimus.  and to that advanced presbyter some ministerial acts, and also the name of Bishop were after some time appropriated. Before Sidings in Religion (saith Hierom) were made by the instinct of the Devil; and that it was said among the people, 
El Amalarium de Eccles. offic. l. 2. c. 13. Et Steph. Eduens. Episcopum de sacramento altaris. c. 9  I am of Paul, I of Apollo's, etc. the Churches were governed by the Common Council of the Presbyters: but after that every Presbyter thought those whom he baptised to be his and not Christ's, it was decreed in all the world, that one chosen out of the Presbyters should be set over the rest, unto whom all the care of the Church should appertain; and so the seeds of Schisms should be taken away. A little after he affirmeth, that at the first the care of the Church was equally divided among many; and yet a little further (having cited out of 1. Epist. to Tim. and the Epist. to Titus, and the Epist. to the Philipp. etc.) these (saith he) were said that we might show, that the ancient Presbyters were the same with Bishops; but by little and little, that the plants of dissension might be plucked up, 
— In quos (delinquentes) nonnunquam Episcoporum & Presbyterorum censura desaevit. Hier. ad Demetriad.  all the solicitude was delated to one. Therefore as the Presbyters know themselves by the custom of the Church to be subject to him who is set over them, so let Bishops know themselves to be greater than Presbyters, more by custom then by the truth of Divine dispotision, and aught in common to rule the Church, imitating Moses, who when he might have alone ruled the people, yet chose other with whom he would judge them.  
The words of this ancient Father need no explication; for they say plainly that every Church (meaning wherein no extraordinary minister resided, Apostle, or his Vicegerent) was at the first governed by the College of Presbyters, and that their dividing one Church into many Independent Congregations, 
Quare in Ecclesia baptizatus nisi per manus Episcopi accipiat Spiritum Sanctum? id factum reperimus ad honorem potius sacerdotii quam ad legis necessitatem. Ecclesiae salus in summi sacerdotis dignitate ac veneratione consistit, cui si non exors quaedam & ab hominibus [omnibus] eminens detur potestas, tot in Ecclesiis efficientur schismata quot sacerdotes. Ind venit, ut sine chrismate & Episcopi jussione neque Presbyter neque Diaconus jus habeat baptizandi, quoth frequenter (si tamen necessitas cogit) scimus licere laicis. Hier. contra Lucifer.  first (that we can find) in Corinth, after, in many other places, put a necessity upon the Churches to provide a convenient remedy against so dangerous a disease; which remedy was the committing of every Church to one chief minister, to whom the rest were to be subordinate in the manner before specified.  
Here observe, 1. that, according to St. Hierom, every Bishop ought to rule the Church in common with the presbyters. 2. that Hierom saith, that the decree of making one chief in every Church was in all the world; whereby he intimates this institution of Bishops to have its beginning after the planting of the Churches in most parts of the then known world. 3. that he affirmeth, that Paulatim (by little and little, or by degrees) the care of every Church was committed to one; which doth insinuate, that the decree instituting a Bishop was not in a Synod of the Apostles or Churches; but enacted in every Church, first in some, then in other, and in a short time in all, over all the world, in such manner as a general custom is created; and therefore he saith, that the Presbyters are subject to the Bishop by the custom of the Church, and the Bishop greater than they, rather by custom then by the Lord's disposition. So Augustine writing to Hierome; although (saith he) according to the names of honour, which the use (or custom) of the Church hath kept, a Bishop be greater than a presbyter, yet Augustine (a Bishop) is in many things inferior to Hierome (a presbyter:) So modestly and humbly doth the most pious and wise Bishop Augustine writ unto the holy presbyter Hierome, his elder in years, and his inferior in dignity. They that affirm Episcopacy to be instituted by a Council, do not mean a Council taken in a proper sense, but for the unanimous votes of the Church's decreeing the same thing upon the same grounds and reasons, which are the principal things respected in a Council: and it is truly said, illud unumquodque dicitur quod est principalius in eo. Fourthly, it seems consequent to Hierom's  discourse, that it is not certain, which some affirm, that Bishops were set over the Churches before the time wherein St. Paul wrote his first Epistle to Timothy, or his Epistle to Titus, etc. out of which Hierome proves the identity of Bishops and presbyters, and the government of the Church by the College of presbyters. But of the exact time of the institution of Bishops it's not much material to know, seeing all agree, it was made in the time of the Apostles. By some of those places cited by him, it's likely he intended only to prove the name Bishop to be common at that time as well to presbyters as to their superior Ecclesiastical officers.  
But it might be thought that Hierome in this matter contradicts himself, 
In catalogue Scriptorum Eccles. in Jacobe.  because elsewhere he saith, that James the brother of our Lord was statim (quickly) after our Lord's passion ordained by the Apostles Bishop of Jerusalem, and that he ruled that Church for 30 years, until the seventh year of Nero: unto this difficulty another may be added, showing a seeming contrariety in this learned Father's speeches concerning the institution of Bishops; which is, that here he affirmeth the Episcopacy to be an Ecclesiastical and so an humane constitution, and in another place that it is an Apostolical tradition. It is not hard to reconcile these seeming contrary expressions: 
Epist. ad Evagrium.  for first, we must consider Episcopacy or government by one as chief among the presbyters, to have been either extraordinary, (managed by one extraordinary person, which was not by any ordinary rule of the Church to have a successor,) or ordinary, in the hand of one person, which, by a Canon of the Church, was to have a successor: an Apostle present in any Church had power over the presbyters, and the pre-eminence in all sacerdotal duties above them in that Church. Of Apostles some were primary, as the twelve, other secondary; and these were either indeed (as well as in name) Apostles, or only because they were conversant with the Apostles and their helpers, and many times left by them in some Churches, or sent to them as their Vicegerents, such were Timothy, Titus, Linus, Clemens, etc. all these by their Apostolical function, or by virtue of their Vicegerency, had the principal rule in the Churches wherein they abode, even then, when in all other Churches, the College of the presbyters took the care of all, having no Superior constantly resident over them. Afterward, when upon occasion of the presbyters abusing their power by reason of the Apostles absence, to the be getting of Schisms, the Churches by Apostolical consent agreed to give in every Church a principality to one presbyter above the rest (which in some time after had the name of (Bishop) made proper to him, and was made an ordinary officer in all Churches;) then the Apostles and their Vicegerents in the Churches of their residence had the power over the College of presbyters, not only by their Apostleship or Vicegerency, but also by the new decree, and institution of an ordinary Episcopacy. Now, because it was thought fit by the Apostles that James should reside at Jerusalem, (and that not long after the ascension of our Saviour) it might truly be said, that he was then ordained, that is, constituted Bishop (extraordinary) in that place for some particular reasons taken from consideration of some particular condition of that place, whose Episcopacy afterward was continued for the general reason of preventing Schisms; and consequently of an extraordinary Episcopacy was made an ordinary Episcopacy, which was to pass to successors. The same proportionably must be said of the Episcopacy of St. Peter in Rome and Antioch, of Timothy in Ephesus, of Titus in Crete, of Linus and Clemens in Rome, and so of others: all of which were first Bishops extraordinary, and after the general decree they were also made as ordinary Bishops in the Churches where the decree found them extraordinary Bishops. Hierom doth in many places speak as one that supposed Bishops to be above Presbyters before the making of that decree; but his meaning was not, that ordinary Bishops were before it (for then he had contradicted himself) but the extraordinary.  
If the rest of the Fathers be so understood (as it is not very improbable but that many of them may) the seeming difference between him and some of them may be perhaps in the main reconciled. Theodoret saith, that Bishops in the life time of the Apostles were called Apostles, the name of the extraordinary Bishops being also communicated to the ordinary Bishops, who also had some appearance of being Vicegerents unto those twelve general Pastors of the universal Church while they lived, as they were counted their successors after their decease.  
As to the other seeming contrariety in St. Hierom's writings affirming the ordinary Episcopacy to be of Ecclesiastical and humane institution and also of Apostolical tradition, it is easily answered.  
First, That the ordinary Episcopacy is not a primary tradition of the Apostles but of the Churches; to whose decree the Apostolical approbation added no new sanction, but ratified the authority of the Churches as prudently exercised in making that constitution.  
Secondly, that decree may be said to be of Apostolical tradition, because their extraordinary Episcopacy and the extraordinary Episcopacy of their Vicegerents established by them, were patterns, which the Churches had an eye unto for their direction and encouragement in the framing of that decree; hoping that the good of peace, preserved where the extraordinary Episcopacy was placed, would be best maintained in all Churches when the like government should be settled in all to continue by succession. 
3.  Thirdly, the ancient Fathers affirm many ecclesiastical observances to be of divine or Apostolical institution or tradition, upon other grounds than may beget a certain belief of their being truly divine or Apostolical. Augustine saith, that whatsoever the universal Church holdeth, and is not found in following Councils constituted, but always retained, is most rightly believed to be delivered by the Apostolic authority. 
De bapt. contra Donatist. l. 2. c. 7. & l. 4. c. ult.  Hierom affirmeth, that many things, which are by tradition observed in the Churches, have usurped to themselves the authority of a Divine law; as in baptism, to immerge the head thrice, and then to taste the concord of milk and honey, 
Adversus Luciferianos.  to signify infancy: and on the Lord's day, and in all the Pentecost not to pray kneeling nor to fast. Constantine the great exhorteth all to embrace the decree of the Nicene Council concerning the set time of the celebration of the Feast of Easter, as a gift of God, and a Commandment sent down from heaven: 
Euseb. de vita Constantini. l. 3. c. 18. Edit. Basil. 1570.  for whatsoever is decreed in the holy Councils of Bishops, that aught to be ascribed to the divine will. Hierom in another place saith, let every one judge the precepts of the ancients to be Apostolical laws. 
Hierom. Ep. 28.  It is not to be doubted (saith Leo Bishop of Rome) but that every Christian observance is of divine erudition; and that whatsoever is received by the Church into a custom of devotion, 
Serm. 2. de jejun. Pentecost.  proceeded from the Apostolic tradition, and the Doctrine of the holy Spirit. The Father's use very frequently to affirm some institutions or rites to be divine or Apostolical, because they seemed a agreeable to, and their lawfulness demonstrable by, the old Testament, the Gospels, or Apostolic Epistles: So the Lent Fast is by them said to be of Apostolical and Divine tradition, because it seems an imitation of the Fast of Elias and of Christ; and Monachism is affirmed to be Apostolic, because it hath an appearance of being an imitation of John the Baptist, 
Amalar. Alcuin. Pontifical. Damas'.  etc. yet many ancient writers make Pope Telesphorus (who flourished Forty years after the decease of St. John the Apostle) to be the author of the Quadragesimal Fast (although indeed it had a much later beginning,) and affirm Paul and Anthony to be the Fathers of Monachism. So that many institutes were counted Apostolic, because some example or reason of the Scripture did seem to warrant them. Whence Hierom and others intimate, 
Hierom. in vita Pauli.  that Episcopacy was instituted in imitation of Aaron and his Sons, or of the Apostles and 70 Disciples, affirming Bishops to be successors of aaron, and the Apostles and Presbyters the successors of the Sons of Aaron and of the 70 Disciples.  
Fourthly, it is a certain truth, acknowledged by all the learned, that the Apostles were authors as well of local and temporary or universal and temporary ordinances, rites, or ceremonies, as of universal and perpetual: for they were inspired by the Holy Ghost infallibly to discern both what the present condition (although variable) of some or all the Churches required, and what upon reasons arising from unvariable grounds and circumstances was needful to be observed in all the Churches of Christ: Polycarpus (a hearer of the Apostles, and by St. John made Bishop of Smyrna) celebrated the Pasche in the fourteenth moon, and so did the rest of Asia and some of the East: observing it the same time with the Jews, moved thereto by the countenance and example of St. John the Apostle; but Anicetus' Bishop of Rome, (who flourished in the life time of Polycarpus) and generally the Churches of the West; kept the Feast at another time, and on the Lord's day, induced thereto as they affirmed by the tradition and example of St. Peter the Apostle. We cannot with reason and charity think that either Polycarpus with the Asians and East, or Anicetus with the Western Churches, 
Apud Euseb. & Iren.  could be ignorant of the time when Peter in the West or John in Asia observed that Feast, Polycarpus being an eye witness of what the Apostle St. John did, and Anicetus being a hearer of the hearers of Clemens, who was contemporary with the Apostle St. Peter; or that they would considerately speak, and perseveringly maintain an untruth, imputing a fact to either Apostle which he had not done, especially, seeing the untruth, on either side, might have been confuted by a thousand witnesses: wherefore we must judge this to be an evident example of a variable apostolic institution. I might instance in part of the Apostles decree in the 15 chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, of things strangled, and blood; but lest I move scruples in weak consciences, which they cannot easily be rid of, I will only commend to the consideration of the judicious the judgement of some ancient writers quoted in the margin. 
August contra Faustum l. 32. c. 13. Et tractcti contra graecos in biblioth. patr. to 4. pag. 1308. et 1318.1319.1320.  There be many rites which the Fathers held to be Apostolical, which in the times of the same Fathers, were in many places altered or neglected; as the three immersions in baptism; the repairing of neighbour Bishops to the people where a Bishop was wanting, there to ordain one in the presence of the people; not to fast in the days of Pentecost, and some other; which prove that according to the judgement of those Fathers, the Apostles, (guided by divine inspiration) made some decrees alterable, and which were upon just reasons accordingly changed or disused: and therefore if it were proved, that the Apostles by divine motion were the primary Author's of Episcopacy and not the Church; yet if it cannot appear to be a constitution built upon perpetual reason, and in its nature independing upon variable circumstances, it may possibly be changed by the Church.  
Here it may be demanded by what members of itself did the universal Church abrogate the Presbyterian and institute Episcopal Government; and what power was taken from the Presbyters by that abrogation? For answer to these demands, we must distingnish between the power given to ministers, to do some things; as to preach, baptise, ordain Pastors, excomunicate, absolve, etc. and secondly, the free exercise of those acts, and thirdly, the regulation of the exercise of them, as to the persons about whom, time when, the place where, the manner, decency, etc. To the regulation belong, 1. The making of laws concerning the due exercise of the power, agreeable to the divine laws, and secondly the superintendents of the execution, and thirdly the executors of them. As for the power, it doth not appear, that any of that was taken from the Presbyters or their College by the institution of Episcopacy, if they were deprived of any part of it, 
can. 13.  that must be the ordaining of Presbyters; but the Council of Ancyra seems to demonstrate, that the power of ordaining Pastors did and doth remain in them, which they did exercise by the leave, 
Et Synod Antioch c. 16. vide Vasque. in 3. p. Disp. 143. c. 4.  and in the place of the Bishop which Can not at his pleasure give them, but supposed the power continuing in them. The words of the Council be these (according to the Greek Original and not their vulgar translation) it is not lawful (say the Fathers of that Synod) for the Choropiscopi (Country, or Village Bishops) not for the Presbyters of the City to ordain Presbyters or Deacons, unless that be committed to them by the Bishop (being absent in another Diocese) by his letters. And therefore the Churches decree constituting Episcopacy, abridged the Presbyters whether dividedly, or conjunctly considered, but only in the exercise of their power. Surely it must be believed, that no ordination would be made by the Apostles excelling the ordination which our Saviour celebrated, breathing upon his Apostles etc. and giving them a commission to teach, etc. with promise to be with them unto the world's end, whereby the Presbyters were virtually ordained and comissionated astruly as the Bishops, and therefore received thereby as much power as they in respect of the kind and nature; which hinders not, but that the exercise of some part of it might be taken from many of the persons ordained. But some perhaps may say, that Christ in that ordination ordained in the Apostles some as elder Brethren, and others as the younger, yet hence it will follow, that the kind and nature of the ordination is the same in all, (as the nature of the Father is in all his Sons) and that only a principality in the having and exercise of it belongs to the Bishops; which is granted. Others may say farther, that Christ in ordaining the Apostles did virtually ordain some as the Sons of the Sons of the Apostles, and others as their grandchildren; if this can be well proved, it will indeed evince, that the power of ordination, as well as the exercise of it, is proper to the Bishops; but until it be made clear, that this was the primary meaning and intention of Christ in that Act of ordination, and not an effect only of a consequent occasional providence of the Apostles and Churches, it is probable that the power of ordination remaineth still in the presbyters restrained in the use by the canon of the Churches and Apostles. The members of the Church, which made the decree of Episcopacy and limited the use of the Eclesiastical power, in the presbyters, were the greater number of the presbyters themselves which remained in the unity of the mystical body with the greater part of the people; and the Authors of it by way of approbation and confirmation were the holy Apostles. The Apostles and Presbyters, in the effecting of it, exercised the ordinary, Vicary Authority, 
Basil. constit. mona. c. 22.  which they had as being by their ordination made the Vicegerents of the blessed Mediator Christ Jesus (considered only as Mediator) according to his own saying, he that heareth you, heareth me and he that despiseth you despiseth me, & the saying of the Apostle, we are Ambassadors for Christ and we pray you in Christ's stead be ye reconciled to God. 
2. Cor. 5.20.  That authority when it is duly exercised aught to be obeyed. And because presbyters may err in the using of it, a spirit of discerning noxious doctrines and constitutions is given to Christians to examine and try, 
Bas. l. reg. 72. c. 1.  with command to reject the evil and receive the good: which good, if the major part refuse, being by their Pastors propounded to them, 
Aug. de temp. serm. 143.  they may do it upon their peril, & as they will answer it to God; unity and peace interceding and forbidding that no Ecclesiastical constraint or censure proceed against the civil higher power, or the major part of the people. It is therefore requisite, that constitutions to be made laws in the Church, be, by the leave of the supreme magistrate, if he be a Christian, propounded to the people, that their consent being given, the ministerial authority may make them laws Ecclesiastically obliging, if no higher authority hinder. Before these Lawmakers constituted Episcopacy, every singular Presbyter was to act according to the directions and rules of the Presbyterian College, which was the Church Lawgiver, and superintendent of the execution, having the supreme dignity under the Mediator, and pre-eminence in all things properly Ecclesiastical. What is spoken concerning the College of Presbyters must be applied proportionably to the several bodies of them in the Diocesan, provincial, imperial, or universal Church. The decree constituting Episcopacy, took from the College its high dignity and pre-eminence, and conferred it upon one, and so divided the exercise of the Legislative power among the Bishop and the College, that the one might not duly use it without the other. For although the dignity and precedency of the Bishop may give more weight to his vote, yet is the Vicary authority (which cannot be separated from Presbyters as long as they be Presbyters) as truly exercised in their votes, whether in deciding controversies of faith, or making of Canons, etc. as it is in the Bishop's vote: Which is manifest, as by many testimonies of antiquity, so by the practice of our English Synods, which are conformable, in the substance, to the best and most ancient constitution of Councils. The superintendency, which the College had over the execution of all Ecclesiastical duties and ordinances, was chief in the Bishop, yet so as without his Presbyters he could not regularly hear and determine Ecclesiastical causes, as before was showed out of the fourth Council of Carthage, and might be further demonstrated out of St. Cyprian and other ancient writers.  
Every suprem civil power on earth, as God's Vicegerent, 
Sect. 10.  is bound to advance, and preserve the true Religion, so far as the light of nature can manifest it, or divine revelation doth make it known unto him: so that a King, which hath embraced Christian Religion (which alone is the true Religion) is obliged to maintain it, and to cause that the Christian duties be by all in their several stations and charges duly performed; and therefore a Christian King is a lawgiver above the Ecclesiastical Lawmakers; but so, that he ought not to hinder the due exercise of their legislative power, and make laws purely or properly Ecclesiastical, without their concurrence in Counsel and consent: but by his Laws and power, partly to cause them to meet for the due exercise of their duty, partly to maintain and strengthen their right proceed in performance of their office, and lastly (if their Edicts be cosistant with the peace of the commonwealth, and meet for the edification of the Church) to perfect and make them full and complete laws, by putting the hand and seal of his highest Vicary authority, as God's Vicegerent, to the resolves of the subordinate Vicary, authority of the Vicegerents of our blessed Mediator, as Mediator God and man, the Lord Jesus Christ. God is a God of order, and hath ordained that this unity and harmony between these two authorities should be firmly kept, otherwise by a supine neglect of duty or by an exorbitant usurpation on either side, the unity and peace, both of Kingdom and Church are equally in danger of being broken. The propounding of the true doctrine in decision of controversies, or of constitutions of expedient or necessary to aedification are acts of religion most proper to the Bishops, and presbyters; the first an act of the praedication of the gospel; the other an act of ecclesiastical Government. The embracing of the truth and ordinances seen to be profitable together with the confirming of them by his decree and sanction, or addition (where he seethe it needful) of a reward or mulct, is the part of a Christian Prince discerning upon due search, the truth and the usefulness, of the ordinances propounded unto him; whose embracing is his act of subjection to Christ; and confirmation and sanction, an act of his Vicary authority. To make laws bestowing civil gifts or privileges on the Church, and ordaining civil punishments for offences committed against Christian religion and Ecclesiastical Canons, and constituting Courts for the cognizance of such causes, and the execution of those Laws, is the peculiar and proper work of a Christian King, which he may well do without the authority of Bishops and presbyters; but which he may best do with their grave advice and counsel.  
In the unanimous Votes of the King's Majesty, the honourable Houses of Parliament, and the venerable convocation, all Powers and interests are fully satisfied, whether in decision of controversies in religion, 
Chrysost. in 2. Cor. hom. 18, etc. Sect. 11.  or making Ecclesiastical Canons, or any the like Ecclesiastical matters, because they are the conjunct Votes of all the concerned.  
Before the civil Magistrate became Christian, the Clergy and people according to their several rights, concurred personally in the elections of Bishops and Presbyters; and this remained in use under many Christian Emperors and Kings, until for the avoiding of contention and schisms and many abuses (which became familiar to popular elections in a corrupted state of the Church) and for the encouragement of Princes, Nobles and others to erect and endow Churches, it seemed good to Kings in their Parliaments, and with the convocation or Synod of the Bishops and Clergy, to ordain, that Kings should present to the College of Presbyters, meet persons to be chosen and made Bishops, and meet Presbyters to the Bishop for such Churches as they had built and endowed; and that all other persons should in like manner present to the Bishop a fit person for the Church which they had endowed. Patrons did indeed in some places put in whom they pleased without the Bishop's consent, 
Vide Epist. Alexandr. 3. ad Episcopos Angliae.  and for some time of public confusion this was very usually done in England; but this custom was no law, as some would have it, because it was an unreasonable custom, and destructive to the Church, and therefore always contradicted in all Councils where occasion was given to mention it.  
All humane laws have their mixture of some bad with many good: And certain it is, that our Ecclesiastical laws have many imperfections; and their ambiguous halting between the papal Canon-law, (whence their interpretation hath been wont to be fetched) and the laws of the Realm, is not the least; which hath been one of the principal occasions of some actings, which made the Clergy much abhorred by many, and brought infinite calamities upon the Civil and Ecclesiastical state.  
The ancient pure Episcopal government is much changed, and the beginning of its change was not of late days: 
Sect. 12.  for in the fourth Century the Bishops and Presbyters began to advance Arch-presbyters and Arch-deacons to some part of the exercise of the Ecclesiastical government. 
Optat. advers. Parmenian. l. 1.  The first Archdeacon we read of was Caecilianus, who reproved Lucilla a rich and proud woman, which being thereat vexed, became afterward a zealous promotrix of the Schism of the Donatists. The first Arch-presbyter, 
Greg. Nazianz. in land. Basil. crat.  that I can remember to be mentioned by the ancients, was Basile; who being made Bishop, offered that honour to his old friend Gregory, after the Bishop of Nazianzum. But these were at that time but in some Churches, and acted only in place of the Bishops and Presbyters and at their pleasure; whereas their power in time increased, and after some hundreds of years, the Canons gave them an ordinary jurisdiction, erected their Courts, added new names of Ecclesiastical judges, as Deans, Chancellors, Commissaries, etc. and filled them with numerous attendants, which were mostly to live by the sins of the people. If these had been Officers only of the civil magistrate, to execute the power which is proper to him over all persons, and in all causes Ecclesiastical, the Church could not in reason have been charged with their miscarriages: but because they exercised with the former, acts of the power proper to Bishops and Presbyters, and in which the civil magistrate had only a superintendency over them, all their misdoings were ascribed to the Bishops and the Clergy: their Courts heard the causes of excommunication, adjudged a person to excommunication, and caused a Presbyter, no judge in the cause, to excommunicate the party: whereas Christ by his Apostles made them judges in his place as well to hear the causes of the spiritual censures, as to execute the same by the sentence of excommunication. The spiritual censures are spiritual remedies, and the Pastors of the Church, are under Christ the Physicians; how then can it be congruous, to employ one that is no Physician to search and take knowledge of the diseases of the Soul, and leave or●y the application of the remedies to the Physicians? in the hearing of the causes of spiritual censures, pastoral acts are to be exercised, as of teaching, of redargution of sin, and conviction, which prepare the offendor for the due and profitable receiving of the spiritual Physic; which acts are all wanting where a person that is no Pastor condemneth a sinner to be excommunicated by a Pastor.  
There is another mischief that accompanies the mixture in one and the same person of the exercise of acts purely ministerial and acts proper to the civil magistrate in spiritual causes (as it is in Arch-deacons and the like) that is, commutation of paenance (as to take so much money, a Cow, a Horse, and the like, as it hath been used) be it in pretence of giving it to the poor, where suspension or excommunication was by the Apostolical ordinances to have been exercised. If the power proper to the ministers, & the power proper to the magistrate were in distinct persons, this too frequent abuse would be well avoided; For the sole spiritual power is not to meddle with body or purse: Cudgelling, whipping, imprisoning fining scandalous sinners were not at all in use before the times of Christian Emperors. And as to the redemption of the wholesome severities, which the paenitents were enjoined willingly to exercise upon themselves, it was not used until about the end of the fift Century.  
I might mention other mischiefs, as the intolerable abuse of excommunication for very small offences (of old condemned in the Canons of the Church) under pretence of contumacy, or the like: But I am weary of raking in this puddle, 
Concil. Aurelian. 5. c. 2. & Leo. Epist. 87.  where the many dependences upon those Courts seemed to require exorbitances, that every one might have a tolerable livelihood. If the excrescencies, which the corruptions of the times made to adhere to the primitive Episcopacy, were cut off, and the spiritual jurisdiction restored to the Bishop and Presbyters, it is not to be doubted, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (i.e. munus baptizandi) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Chrysost. in 1 Cor. hom. 3.  but that our brethren who dislike the Episcopacy in its present constitution, and the more, because they took an oath (whether well or ill I let go) to endeavour the abrogation of it, would be abundantly satisfied with the Apostolical Episcopacy, where one was ordained for the union & strengthening of the jurisdiction of Presbyters: for the defence of which Episcopacy, they had taken a former oath in the solemn Protestation, which, as taken lawfully and in lawful things, maketh all contrary oaths unlawful to be after either taken or kept.  
Although the Apostles ordained no governing Elders besides the Bishop and preaching Elders, yet the primitive Episcopacy will well bear, that some lay Elders be joined to the Presbytery, and in every parish, (where fit persons may be had,) to help the Bishop and Presbyters in the inspection of manners, in the instruction of the ignorant, in brotherly admonitions and teproofs, and in giving notice to the Bishops and Presbyters of the scandalous offences, to be proceeded against in an Ecclesiastical order, and also to represent the people and vote for them; where their consent is requisite.  
Here I desire it may be noted, that when I spoke of Presbyters which were the Senate of the ancient Bishops, 
Conc. Neocaesar. cum Ep. 7. Zachariae papae ad Bonifac. c. 4. etc. 15. Et Concil. Meldens. an. 845. c. 54.  I understood not all and every one subject unto the Bishop, but the more ancient, grave, pious, learned, discreet and moderate of them; for such were the City Presbyters in the old times which alone usually and mostly were the Bishop's assessors in the spiritual judicature, and which therefore in some places and specially in Rome obtained the name of Cardinal Presbyters.  
Some dislike the civil honour wherewith godly Kings have dignified our reverend Prelates: 
Sect. 13.  truly, if the taking of it had made them less able to fulfil the office of preaching the Gospel, or did widen the distance between them and the Presbyters, or made them less accessible by or condescending to their flock, or eclipsed the veneration due to their Con-presbyters, or involved them in civil affairs, which all the ancient Canons forbidden, the addition of that honour were not to be liked: but it is evident enough to the eye of every impartial judgement, and the lives of many most holy Bishops have made it good, that if any of these evils happened from the receiving of that dignity, as too often hath been seen, it proceeded from the evil of the person, and not from the innocent honour, which w●s conferred upon them by pious Princes out of their love to Ch●●●● and his Ambassadors, the better to preserve them from the contempt of the wicked, (who regard no goodness besides the civil and worldly) and to enable the better to maintain the great interest which in civil things belongs to the Ecclesiastical estate, and that the great Council of a Christian Kingdom should not sit without giving the Ambassadors of Christ an honourable place and privilege among them, that in them Christ might be seen to be the more present, and their ready spiritual Council might prevent some proceed not well agreeing with the interest of religion and the laws of Christ, which without them might more easily happen. But what was done in a heat, may be undone in a milder temper. Irenaeus who was born within very few years after the decease of the Apostles saith, that the Church nourished such presbyters, of whom the Prophet saith, I will give thy Princes in peace and thy Bishops in righteousness, where this ancient Father doth show that Bishops be princes. And so doth Hierom upon the place, the prophet (saith he) calleth the future princes of the Church Bishops. 
Esa. 60.17. Secund. 70. interpret.  It is then very congruous that the Christian Kings set over these Ecclesiastical princes, and by their ministry made partakers of the celestial dignities, should in a certain way of retribution dignify them with some eminent degree of civil honour, which cannot be well supported without some proportionable revenue.  
The Holy Scripture tells us, that it is a more blessed thing to give, then to receive: Surely God would have every of the presbyters of the Church enabled for that blessed work of giving, over and above a convenient maintenance for Wife and Children, which the Apostle supposeth to be in their families, for whom they are bound to provide, or in the judgement of the same Apostle to be deemed to have denied the faith, and to be worse than infidels. And if every Presbyter ought to be thus provided for (if possible) then the elder Brethren should have a double portion, besides the proportion which their civil dignity doth require; and where any of the rest are endued with more excellent ministerial gifts, it's very convenient they should have a larger measure of the matter and instruments requisite for the fu●l exercise of their more excelling virtues. What the revenue of the reverend Bishops is, I do not know, but I have good reasons to assure me that it is not excessive, at which any would grudge or envy, except the sacrilegious truckers, which would have the reverend Clergy live upon their leave and scraps. Certain it is that the maintenance of many hundreds of Presbyters is so small that they can scarce feed and  their Families, so that when they die, many Hospitals might be filled with their poor Wives and Children. And if no better provision be made for the poor Cures and Vicarages, it were an eminent work of charity to erect and endow Hospitals proper to poor Ministers Wives and Children. This starving of Christ's Ambassadors is the shame and great sin of the Kingdom: But now it is the hope and expectation of all good men, that his sacred Majesty and the most honourable houses of parliament will provide a remedy for this miserable disease of the Church, for it's only an act of parliament that can surely, sweetly, and fully cure it.  
There be not a few who complain against the canonical oath: 
Sect. 14.  concerning which I can find no mention until about the year 813. wherein the Fathers of the second Council of Cabilon say, it is spoken of certain of our brethren that they compel them whom they are to ordain to swear that they will do nothing against the Canons, and that they will be obedient to the Bishop, etc. which oath because it is dangerous; we do all with one consent ordain, that it be prohibited. A Canon of a Council celebrated an. 1355, comes to my mind, which saith, lest the faithful (whom the divine piety was mercifully pleased to put under a light burden and a sweet yoke) should be burdened with the weight of sin, by reason of their transgressions against the Canons; we ordain that the provincial constitutions of our predecessors, and those which shall be hereafter made, oblige not the trangressors to sin (ad culpam) but only to punishment (ad paenam.) Whether the moderation of these Synods be worthy of imitation, I leave to others to judge.  
Many have entertained a great fear, 
Sect. 15.  which hath alienated their minds from all Episcopacy; namely, that an innumerable company of unnecessary and burdensome ceremonies be inseparable concomitants of Episcopal government. Indeed the fear is not vain and without ground, if we respect the degenerated Episcopacy, as it is, if we regard the primitive, which hath and will be contented with very few, if need be. Witness Gregory the great, who saith, that it was the custom of the Apostles, 
Greg. Epist. l. T. Ep. 63.  to consecrate the Eucharist, using only the Lords prayer; with him agrees Walifridus Strabus; it is the relation of our Ancestors (saith he) that the Mass was wont to be made in the first times as now in the Good Friday, 
De rebus Eccl. c. 22.  i. e. after the Lord's Prayer, and the commemoration of Christ's passion, as himself hath taught us, the communion of the body and blood of our Lord was given to all that were prepared. About forty years after the death of St. John the Apostle, Justin Martyr relates, 
In Apolog. ad Auton.  that when the people of the City and Country adjacent met together on the Lord's day, the Reader read out of the Apostles and Prophets, and then the Precedent made a Sermon upon the Scripture then read; which ended, all stood up to prayer; which done they kissed one another: then bread and wine and water were offered to the Precedent; which he having received prayed again, and gave thanks as he was able; which ended, the people said, amen. Then the Deacons gave the consecrated bread & wine and water to every one present to receive, and they carried the same to the absent. Here we have the substance of the ancient Liturgy of the Church in use at that time, short and sweet: Where the Lords prayer was not alone used in the consecration, as in the Apostles time, but also the Bishop's prayer, whereof the words [as he was able] may imply, either that he prayed as well as his memory would serve him to utter a premeditated prayer without book, or that he prayed as devoutly as he could, which is the best construction of them. So that hence it may not appear whether it was a read, or a premeditated and memorially delivered prayer. The same old author saith concerning Baptism; as many as believe those things to be true which have been told and taught them by us, and promise to live accordingly, are instructed to pray fasting for the pardon of their sins, we fasting and praying with them; and then they are by us brought to the water and regenerated, as we ourselves were, in the name of the Father and our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Ghost, being washed in the water: Then we bring them to the Brethren who are met together making common prayers for themselves, the baptised, and all other wheresoever, etc.  
We are to note that he mentions a Reader, which whether he were a Presbyter or a Deacon, or a distinct degree instituted by the Church, cannot be gathered from his writings which are now extant. In the end of the second Century the Reader appears to be a distinct degree; the ordinations of Heretics (saith Tertull.) are rash, light, unconstant, therefore one is with them to day a Bishop, and another to morrow, 
De prescript. haeret. c. 41.  he is to day a Deacon which shall be the next day a Reader, he is to day a presbyter which is the next day a Laic. And it is to be seen in Cyprian about the year 250, 
2. Epist. 5. & l. 3. Ep. 22.  that he ordained Aurelius and Satyrus' Readers in his Church, and Optatus a subdeacon. At the same time Cornelius Bishop of Rome (writing to Fabius) saith, 
Apud Euseb. l. 6. c. 42.  that in the Church of Rome, there were of Presbyters forty six, of Deacons seven, of subdeacons seven, of Acolythes 42, of Exorcists, Readers, and Porters 52, of Widows and Poor above 1500, all which the Church fed.  
Here we find Exorcists and Readers (both which were in Justin Martyrs time about the year 150) to be reckoned among the Clergy of the Church of Rome, and the Reader distinguished from the Presbyter and Deacons. After this, about the year 400, the distinct ordinations of Bishops, of Presbyters, of Deacons, of Subdeacons, of Acolythes, of Exorcists, or Readers, and of Porters or Dore-keepers, and of Singers, are set down in the fourth Council of Carthage. 
Conc. Carth. 4. c. 1. ad 10.  It must not be imagined that any of these, besides a Presbyter and Doorkeeper, was in every Parochial Church, but only in the Cathedral or mother Church of the Diocese, and in some such parochial Churches as were able to maintain a greater or lesser number of them. And therefore it seems hard to lay upon one minister in the parish Church the burden of all the offices, to be born by himself alone, which in the Cathedral were executed by many. As to read every Lord's day all the service first and second, being a thing above the strength of most, if the Sermon be not omitted; as the Bishops and Presbyters bordering upon the times of the Apostles, with the people's consent, committed the office of reading the holy Scriptures in the Churches to men of an inferior ordination, so their successors shortly after committed the office of teaching the Catechumen to the like persons, but more learned and apt to teach. Both these (as also some others) were separated from the Laics and destinated for the Presbytery: They were the Bishops and Presbyters Scholars, bred up by them for the high and sacred ministry, and advanced thereto, if they became capable, and the Church had need of them. So that Readers and Catechisers were incomplete preachers of the Gospel, until by the higher and divine ordination Christ breathed upon them, giving them the Holy Ghost, which made them complete preachers; who do not perform a complete act of preaching, unless with the publishing of the text, wherein the Readers help them; they also publish an exposition and exhortation thereupon; as Justin Martyr did, and the succeeding ancient Fathers; who grounded their Homilies, or Sermons upon a portion of the Scriptures then read before them. One ordinance of God is not to be made to thrust another out of the Church, but reading and prayers, and preaching, etc. aught to be so proportioned to the time appointed for them, and the strength of them that officiate, that no necessity, that may be prevented, may compel to the omission of any divine ordinance that ought to be performed. In the sixth Council of Constantinople (at which time much corruption was crept into the Churches) the Father's present in it commanded, that the Bishops and Presbyters should daily preach, 
Gan. 19  especially on the Lord's day. It is commanded by another Council, that if a Presbyter cannot preach by reason of sickness, 
Conc. Vasens. Can. 4. sub Leone. 1.  that a homily or sermon of one of the ancient Fathers be read by the Deacon. In another Council, it's thus decreed; that if the Bishop be not at home, or is infirm, or is not able for some other cause, yet never let on the Lords days or Festivals any want to be of one which may preach the Word of God, so as the vulgar people may understand. 
Concil. Maguntiac. c. 25. circa an. 813.  The Primitive Bishops were preaching Bishops, and usually preached every Lord's day (as we see in Justine Martyr,) and in Festival days in the principal fasting days in Lent, as we find in Ambrose, Chrysost. Augustine and others.  
But I must return to speak of the Ceremonies of the Church. The Ceremony of standing and not kneeling in prayer on the Lords days, and the days between Easter and Whitsuntide, was in use in the Apostles days, and instituted by them; 
Apud anthorem Christian. resp. resp. 115.  as Irenaeus the hearer of Polycarpus Auditor of the Apostle John doth testify. In the time of Tertullian about the year 200, many other Ceremonies are mentioned by him, (which we find not in any approved Author before him spoken of) and are affirmed by him to descend from the Apostles; as the signing of the forehead of the baptised with the sign of the Cross, besides, 
Tertull. de corona militis c. 3.  the usual signing with the same sign upon sundry occasions, the tasting after Baptism of milk and honey, the use of having Sureties for Infants to be baptised, 
De Bapt. c. 7. & 18.  the anointing of the baptised with oil, Offering for the faithful deceased, which was thus: the friends of the deceased offered bread and wine in their behalf for the use of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, and the Priest by faith in prayer, in the celebration of the Eucharist, presented to God the Father the sacrifice of Christ once offered by him, and which was in some manner present in the Sacrament, beseeching him for that most holy and perfect sacrifice sake to take away the remainder of sin from the soul departed (which was not taken away in this life) both as to the guilt and inhaerency of it, and to grant to the soul the promised present blessed rest, and in the day of judgement, to make the person partaker of the public justification and possession of full felicity. Before the receiving of the Lords Supper they kissed one another with the holy kiss, the sign of true love and peace; which we are sure was used in the Apostles days, and seems to argue strongly for the use of significant Ceremonies. The Easter and Pentecost were the set and solemn times of the administration of the Sacrament of Baptism. 
de bapt. c. 18.  I need not speak of Confirmation, of the observation of the Feasts of Easter and Pentecost, of the fast in the days of our Saviour's death and burial, of the less perfect and voluntary fasts of Friday and Wednesday, 
Tert. de jejun. c. 2.  which be in part before touched; for my purpose is not to make an exact collection of the ancient rites, but of such as may give some light to see, whence those Ecclesiastical Ceremonies, which have been and partly are used in our Church, took their beginnings.  
As concerning the gesture of the body used in the prayers of the Church, 
de Orat. c. 12.  it was kneeling or standing; this last on the Lords days, 
Tertul. l. 2. ad uxor. c. 9 de Monogam. 6.10  and in all the Pentecost: For as Tertullian saith, it is a most irreligious fact to pray to God sitting before him, unless we upbraid Him that prayer hath wearied us.  
Concerning Matrimony; 
De Veland. Virg. c. 11. de pudicitia. c. 9 Ambros. Ep. 70. Nazianz. Epist. 57  in Tertullian's time, they desired of the Bishops, presbyters, Deacons and Widows, leave to marry; they were married by a Bishop or presbyter, the woman used a Veil, they joined their right hands, kissed; and Tertullian doth also seem to intimate the use of a ring, it is certain it was in use in Isidors' time and before: 
Isidor. de Eccl. offic. l. 2. c. 19  the Bridegroom (saith he) gave a Ring to the Bride, which was put upon her fourth Finger.  
We may gather from Tertullian, 
De bapt. c. 9 Apolog. contagent. c. 30.  that the Lords prayer was commonly used in the public prayers of the Church; for he calls it the legitime and ordinary prayer, which (saith he) being laid as a foundation, we may build upon it the petitions which our particular cases require. He shows, that our private prayers, wherein we express to God our particular wants and desires, must not be loud, not altogether set forms, but prompted to us, without such monitor, by our own hearts, which alone can tell us our particular necessities. When we pray (saith Cyprian) let the Father acknowledge the words of his Son: 
Cypr. de orat. Dom.  And we do (saith he) the more effectually obtain what we ask in Christ's name, if we ask using his own prayer. 
Hom. 42. ex 50.  The Lord's prayer (saith Augustine) is daily said at the Altar of God in his Church. The fourth Council of Tolet. 
Can. 9  called it a Quotidian, a daily prayer, and commanded it to be said by the Clergy, not only on the Lords days, but every day both in the public and private duty. Concerning prayer, 
de orat. dom.  Cyprian hath these remarkable words; when we stand to prayer (saith he) our mind must be only upon that it prayeth, and therefore the Priest, premising a preface before the prayer, prepares the minds of the Brethren; saying, Lift up your hearts; that the people answering, We have unto the Lord, may be admonished they ought to think on nothing but the Lord: By which words we learn two things; First, that in Cyprian's time (which was 250 years after our Saviour's birth) set forms of public prayers were used in the Churches. Secondly, that the people had other answers besides [Amen] to make to the minister in the solemn prayers of the Church. 
De bono perseverantiae. c. 13. & de Spir. & lit. c. 11.  Augustine discovereth what followeth those words of the public prayers mentioned by Cyprian; the Priest said (saith St. Augustine) let us give thanks to our Lord God, to which the people answered, it is meet and right so to do; and then the Priest went no saying, it is very meet, right, etc.  
Out of Authors now extant, who flourished in the three first Centuties, no more (that I can remember) concerning the divine service of the Church and the Ceremonies, pertinent to our purpose, is mentioned, than what hath been already touched. But the holy writers of the fourth Century and downward do affirm, both that many other rites have been used in the three first Centuries, whereof some were instituted by the Apostles (as they writ) others by some Bishops of Rome, and that many more were added in the fourth Century. One reason why the Ceremonies increased in the fourth Century may be this; because then the Church more flourished in prosperity, than any time before, and it might be thought convenient that the external glory of the Church should be proportioned to the glory of the Empite now made Christian.  
The use of singing Psalms and Hymns in the Churches, 
Epist. 119.  may (as St. Augustine saith) be defended out of Scripture, seeing of this we have so profitable instructions, examples and precepts of Christ and his Apostles: But the manner of singing was various. 
l. ●. c. 8. hist.  Socrates relateth that Ignatius, having in a vision seen Angels singing Hymns Anthemewise unto the praise of the Holy Trinity, delivered that manner of singing Psalms unto his own Church in Antioch, which was generally received thence by the Greek Churches, and then by the Latins and West, first by Ambrose in the fourth Century, and after by the rest of the Western Bishops. The Rubric in our Common-prayer Book before Te Deum laudamus (we praise thee O God) hath these words; that the people may the better hear, in such places where they do sing, there shall the Lessons be sung in a plain tune after the manner of distinct reading, and likewise the Epistle and Gospel. This Rubric puts me in mind of a place in St. Augustine's Confessions, 
l. 10. c. 33.  where he saith, that it was often told him, that Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria made the reader of the Psalm to sound with so mean bending or turning of the Voice, that he might be nearer a pronouncer then a singer: 
Epist. 119.  And in another place he saith; when the Brethren are met in the Church, when is it not time of singing holy songs, unless it be the time of reading, or preaching, or of prayer? etc. By which words it seemeth that the Chapters, Epistle and Gospel were not sung in those days. And in truth any manner of singing them seemeth incongruous. The Father's use to reprove the abuses which were too often found in singing Psalms in the Churches, especially, that they were many times more pleased with the sweetness of the voice than the divine matter, or when only a few of the Church did sing, that they so sung that few understood what they sung. 
In Epist. ad Ephes. c. 5.  Let the servant of the Lord (saith Hierome) so sing that the words which he reads may more please then the voice of him singing. It is no perfect singing nor pleasing to God, when men's hearts do not sing unto the Lord as well as their voices. I will not speak of singing with Organs in the Churches (not that I think that God refuseth to be hearty praised in and with the use of them, but) because they were not brought into the Churches until much later times.  
The Doxology, Glory be to the Father, to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, for ever, etc. is by St. Basile proved to be used from the Apostles times, both out of Clemens, Rom. Irenaeus, Orig. Gregor. Thaumaturg. Dionysius Rom. Dionysius Alex. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Basil. de Sp. S. c. 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid.  and the Evening-candle light thanksgiving which had been used time out of mind of man, wherein they said, We praise the Father, and the Son, and the holy Spirit of God. But this Doxology with the addition, as it was in the beginning, etc. was first 
a Epist. Hier. ad Damasum. Conc. Vasens. c. 7.  ordained to be said in the Divine Service of the Church after the Psalms, by Damasus Bishop of Rome, about the year of our Lord 370. He first commanded 
b Greg. l. 7. Epist. 63. & inter Ep. Hier. Aug. de temp. serm. 151. de can. observant. praeposit. 23. Gregor. l. 7. Epist. 63. Conc. Vasens. c. 5. Radulfs Vigres. de can. observant. praeposit. 23.  Alleluia to be used in the Roman Church, following therein the Liturgy of the Hierosolymitane and Greek Churches. Kyrie eleison and Christ eleison, Lord have mercy and Christ have mercy often repeated were in imitation of some greek Liturgies received into the Roman Divine Service-book by the authority of Pope Sylvester (about the year 330) saith Radulphus Tugr which many years after were omitted, and at last restored by Gregory the great.  
The collection of the Episties and Gospels for the whole year into the form like that in present use is attributed to Hierom, and by Pope Damasus commanded to be read in the Churches.  
The Symbol or Creed composed in the first Council of Constantinople was by the same Pope Damasus ordained to be said or sung after the Gospel. 
Rupert. l. 2. c. 21. Strab. c. 22.  It was received into the divine Service in Spain, by the command of the third Syno● of Tolet. The reasons brought to prove the Apostles or the Nicene Creed to have been said in the Liturgies of the fourth Century or before are of small weight, and therefore I omit them. How Damasus can truly be said to have enjoined the singing or saying of the Creed, and yet that it was not sung at Rome, until about the year 1014 is easily answered, if we conceive his command to be directed unto all other Church's subject unto him, 
Berno de offic. myssae c. 1. Vide Conc. tolet. 3. c. 2.  excepting Rome, for that special reason which Berno relates.  
Bishops, Presbyters, and Deacons, in the time of the celebration of the Lords Supper, 
Hierom. l. 1. dial. contra Pelag. Chrysost. in Matt. hom. 83. Conc. Carthag. 4. c. 41. Et vide respenss. Leonis 3. ad missos caroli M. sub Conc. aquisgranens , used the white garment, which we call the Surplice; whether it was in use before the fourth Century is not related by any approved author living in those times. Prayers composed after the manner of our Litany are to be seen in the Liturgies of chrysostom and Basile. In their time, 
* Chrys. in Ep. ad Eph. hom. 14, & 24.  glory be to God on high, etc. and 
† Idem in Epist. ad Coloss. hom. 3.  holy, holy, holy, Lord God of Sabbath, were wont to be said in the Divine Service. chrysostom saith, that the Bishop was wont often in the time of the public worship of God, to say to the people, 
* in 2 Cor. hom. 18. & in Ep. ad Coloss. hom. 3.  Peace be unto you, and that the people answered, And with thy spirit. The same author relating how the people did in another part of the Service answer the minister; saying, Let us give thanks to our Lord God, it is meet and right (say the people) so to do, addeth, 
† Chrysost. in 2 Cor. hom. 18. in 2. Epist. ad Corinth, hom. 2.  why should any marvel that the people should (thus in the public prayers) speak with the Priest, seeing they send up unto Heaven with the Cherubims and Celestial powers those holy Hymns? one reason of this is in the same place intimated by chrysostom, which is, to manifest unto the people, that the prayers of the Church are not proper to the minister, but theirs also by joining with him in them; which is more fully testified by their proper prolation of some part of them, then only by their presence and saying Amen. Another reason may be the same which the same Father giveth, of the Deacons exciting the people saying, Let us pray, and let us pray more fervently, and the reason is, because the Soul is wont to slumber in a long prayer. T●● Fathers of the Council of Bracar require the Bishop or Presbyter to salute the people in due place in the Divine service; saying, the Lord be with you; to which the people should answer, and with thy Spirit: which ceremony (saith the Council) all the East retained as delivered by the Apostles. The Song of the three Children was generally received into the Liturgies of the Churches in this fourth Century. 
Conc. toletam. Ep. c. 13.  It is a tradition that the Hymn Te Deum landamus, etc. (We praise thee O God We acknowledge thee to be the Lord, etc.) was comdosed by Ambrose, and sung by Ambrose, and Augustine after his Baptism. Anastasius Bishop of Rome enjoined all to stand at the reading of the Gospel; after which followed the custom of standing at the reading of the Creed.  
Hierome writing against Vigilantius affirmeth, that in all the Churches of the East, when the Gospel was to be read, candles were lighted the sun shining; not surely to drive away darkness, but for a sign of gladness.  
In the time of these last named Doctors, the Feasts of Saints were more in number, and celebrated with more solemnity then in former times. Therein the Feast of our Saviour's Nativity was generally observed, and in the ancient Father's sense, said to be instituted by the Apostles; whereas not approved Author of the former Centuries make mention of it. chrysostom, in a sermon of his preached by him not long before the year 400, affirmeth, 
Chrysost. serm. in natalem.  that Feast not to have come to the knowledge of the Churches among which he lived, but ten within years before the preaching of that Sermon. 
Tert. de idololatria. c. 14. Vide Georgium in locum & alios.  And many Learned men collect from Tertullian, that in his time no other Feasts were commanded to be celebrated in the Churches (that he knew of) save only the Lords day, Easter and Pentecost.  
I say not this out of any dislike of this holy Feast, 
Ubi multorum strages jacet subtrahendum est aliquid severitati, ut addatur amplius charitati, vide conc. Rom. 3. an. 1099.  or any other, which we receive from those ancient times, (which without the adherent abuses, I do hearty wish to be celebrated with due solemnity) but by this example to show, that every thing had not a beginning in the Apostles time, which is affirmed to be thence derived and descended by the testimony of some Fathers, who were both in this matter and other things deceived by the counterfeited Canons and constitutions and other writings bearing the names of the Apostles 〈◊〉 Clemens Romanus, or Dionysius Areopag. whereof none ●●re written before the year 300, yet being not well examined were received as genuine by Epiphanius, and some other old Doctors of the Church.  
We read in this fourth Century of divers consecrations and benedictions which we do not read to be used in the former times, 
Sect. 16.  as of consecrated Churches, Altars, Paschal. Wax-candles, etc. and we find therein more regard and honour given to 
a Chrysost. in Epist. ad Rom. hom. 32.  relics of Saints, to the sign of the Cross, to the 
b Nazianz in laudem Gorgoniae & in laudem Basilii.  Altar or Communion Table, the Bible, and the 
c Chrysost. in Eph. hom. 3. In Epist. ad Orthodox. & in apoleg. 2.  Vessels used in the Divine Service and the like, than we can see to be given them in former ages; yet piously without passing the bounds which in those things Christian religion had determined, excepting perhaps in some particulars which humane frailty might extort from them. Willingly to break the holy Communion Cup, who can say but that it is a very great offence? it was (as it was said in Athanasius) to do impiously against Christ, to commit a sin than which none was greater.  
Against the Carelesseness of these times in the administration of the Lords Supper, 
August. hom. 26. ex 50. Et Cyrill. Gatech. Mystagog. 5.  the saying of Augustine is worthy of observation: with what care or solicitude (saith he) do we observe, when the body of Christ is ministered unto us that nothing of it fall to the ground from our hands. It is likely that Tertullian spoke before him to the same purpose: we take it heavily (saith he) that any of our Cup or Bread fall to the ground. Gregory Nazianz. (treating of the Birth of our blessed Saviour) saith, Adore the Manger (wherein he was laid. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nazianz. orat. in Christi nativitatem. Hieron. ad Marcellam ut commigret Hieros. idem in Epitaph. Paulae. ) The cross and the sign were had in no less honour: Without the sign of the Cross (saith Augustine) neither Baptism, nor Confirmation, nor the Lord's Supper can be rightly (as to the customs and Canons of the Church in those times) performed. The Cross was kissed, people fell down before it, 
d Paulinus l. 2. Epist. 3. & Chrysost. in act. hom. 12.  adored it: yet Ambrose saith of Helen the mother of Constantine the great, that she found the title (of the Cross) and adored the King (Christ) surely not the wood; that is the error of the Gentiles. Minutius long before Ambrose said in the name of all Christians, we do not worship the Cross.  
We see then, that in those days the Cross was adored by Christians, and yet that it was not adored by them: It was adored by an Ecclesiastical adoration, which was wont to be exhibited to things or persons accounted excellent, by reason of some dignity and notable usefulness, in being occasions, causes or instruments of some very singular benefit; it was not adored by an adoration proper to God, 
Aug contra Faustum Manich. l. 20. c. 21. Super Genes. quoest. 60.  nor was it made either improperly or analogically or by accident partaker thereof. Augustine, mentioning Abraham's adoring the Ancients of the people of the Land where he sojourned, saith, that therein he did not transgress God's command; who did only forbid men to serve the creature with the service and adoration called Latreia. So Augustine. Latreia is when the Divine excellencies are the objects of the adoration, and the outward acts of adoration, are symbols of the submission of the heart to them. The ancient Fathers did not of their own heads make a creature to supply the place of any Divine person, (as men do, and may make a fellow-creature to supply the place of another, and perform such acts of veneration to it as are due to the person represented, such be the statues of Emperors, and perhaps images and relics of friends and benefactors) Nor did the Fathers offer so to couple any creature unto the Divine person of our Saviour to partake in some sort of his adoration, as his apparel, when he lived on earth, was by conjunction with his body made near to his person, even, (as many judge) to an accidental participation of his Divine adoration. It cannot be proved that it was the intention of the Church in those times, to exhibit the external acts of divine adoration unto God, in, by, or through any created thing as co-subjects or co-objects of them: in all which cases the inward adoration proper to God is in some sort rendered to the coadored creature. The intention of those holy men was to adore the cross only with an ecclesiastical adoration, and so adore it for the sake of Christ, and for the benefits sake redounding from the cross of Christ. They adored its excellency, 
Concil. Constantinop. quintesext, Can. 73.  which consisted in being an instrument of the meritorious triumph of Christ, and in adoring, they professed a service convenient to it, in order to the commending and maintenance of that its excellency: only a created excellency was the object of this adoration. When Christian subjects exhibit to the King acts of civil worship or adoration, as kneeling, etc. they do this from a dutiful affection to God, and a like affection of love to their prince, which is God's Vicegerent; yet they do not perform those individual acts of adoration to God, in, by, or through him, that is, they do not perform them to God and the King, as two distinct objects of one and the same external, and of two divers inward adorations, but terminate them only in the King. It is true, that the Fathers many times seemed to present the same individual acts both to God as symbols of their inward adoration of him, that is, of their affection of submission to the divine excellencies, and also to the cross as symbols of their inward adoration of it, that is, of their affection of service to its excellency, so uniting too inward coordinate adorations in one and the same external adoration: but whether so near a conjunction between the Divine and Ecclesiastical adoration, (if used indeed by them) proceeded from humane frailty, or may be defended by the Holy Scriptures, or be not dissonant to them, I refer to better consideration.  
What hath been said of the adoration of the cross, may be easily applied to the like adoration of the relics of Saints, of the Altar or Communion-Table by bowing, 
Chrysost. in 2 Cor. bom. 20. Et Basil, Liturg.  etc. of the book of the Evangels by kissing, etc. and the like, which were used in the same time. It may be easily discerned that these adorations of the Cross, Altars, Evangels, Relics, and the like Ecclesiastical worshippings were very lubric, 
Liturg. Chrys.  so that it was a difficult matter to stand upright in them, and not to fall to superstition or idolatry, as too many Churches did in after times. 
Chrysost. in 2 Cor. hom. 20.  The bowing to the Altar, which was done for the sake of the Sacrament (which was much more to be partaker of the same adoration) when it became idolatrous, it easily advanced the Heresy of Transubstantiation. The degeneration likewise of the adoration of the Cross and Relics added to the former brought in, in subsequent times, the idolatrous adoration of images.  
And all these idolatrous adorations brought in the idolatrous adoration of the name of Jesus, either prolated or written; but not before about the year 1300. 
Conc. Lugdunens'. an. 1374  Our Church admitted this last adoration of the name of Jesus purged as much as might be from idolatry and superstition, restraining also the bowing to the naming of that comfortable name in the Divine Service. Yet it is a slippery Ceremony, and made the more slippery by the gloss of some of our own Divines upon Philip. 2. Whence they would prove the bowing of our knee due to that blessed name Jesus, affirming the Fathers so to expound that Text. To speak in sober sadness and truth, there is not one Father that so expounds it, although you produce the Catalogue of the Fathers to sweet and holy Bernard. There is not one Orthodox Author in all the length of that Catalogue of Fathers, who speaks of any adoration given or to be given or exhibited to that most sweet name Jesus. The places produced by some late Schoolmen out of the Fathers to make good their novel exposition of that place in the Epistle of the Philippians, (which our men believed, and were thereby deceived) have in them very small appearance of proof, and nothing truth, as the inspection of the places themselves, (and especially if compared with other plainer places of the same authors) will manifestly discover. All the latter Schoolmen maintain that adoration of the good name Jesus, whether spoken or written but all have not the brazen Foreheads to produce the ancient Fathers as Patrons of it, or to expound the foresaid text to prove it a duty. Let Vasques a Learned Jesuit be heard; 
In p. 3. q. 25. disp. 111. c. 11.  where it is said (saith he) in the name of Jesus let every knee be bowed, (so many Ancients read the text) etc. by name, not the word [Jesus] but the thing itself, that is, [Christ] is understood. And a little after he faith, out of this place it is not sufficiently proved, that any honour (no not by accident) is to be exhibited to the word [Jesus] written or spoken, as to an image with its prototype. Therefore although there may be an innocency in those adorations used in the right manner and sense, yet it is hardly preserved, (I had almost said morally impossible) by the vulgar: it is so easy a lapse from the use of one of them to fall to the use of the rest, and then to the abuse of every of them: For those Ecclesiastical adorations of the altar, Evangels and the name Jesus are used mostly in the time of divine service, when the like external acts of adoration are exhibited to God, which near conjunction in time and place, between the one adoration and the other, and the beholding the same acts of worship to be done to God and a sacred thing, doth puzzle the ignorant and unwary that either his zeal is as much to the creatures adoration, as to the Creators; or mingles in his mind both the adorations, whereby the best is debased and corrupted.  
Some may say, may we not bow to God, and kneel to him at the altar, without danger? It is soon answered; That without doubt we may, and must do so, and in so doing, our mind doth not intent the altar, as the object of our bowing: The danger is in bowing to the altar, for than we make it the object to which we bow.  
It may be demanded if the Magistrate make the naming of the name Jesus, the name of the Saviour of the world, to be a sign when, in the divine service, we must bow to the person of the Lord Jesus, God and man, and not to the name Jesus, may we not without danger so do? I answer, first, That it is our duty to bow our hearts, and also in convenient time and place, to bow our bodies to the man Jesus Christ, in the unity of the divine person. And this is intended in Philip. 2. Secondly, to bow our bodies at the naming of the name of Jesus is no duty that we are bound unto. It is indifferent then to bow or not to bow, as it is at the naming of the name of Christ. Thirdly, if the magistrate command us either at the naming of the name Jesus, or at the naming of the name Christ in the divine service, to worship Christ, God and man, by bowing unto him, and not intending the name [Jesus] or [Christ] as an object of our bowing, it is our duty to obey our Superiors command. Fourthly, from the bowing [at] the name the vulgar easily fall to the bowing [to] the name.  
These adorations of the Cross, etc. inward and outward may not be counted divine or properly and of their own nature, religious, because no rule of true religion doth require them, but they are properly Ecclesiastical, because the Churches did sometime create them; and as things Ecclesiastical, and things any way made pertinent to religion, are counted religious things, so may these adorations be accidentally called religious. There is not that kind and degree of excellency in the Cross, Communion-Table, or name Jesus, or in any such sacred thing, which may in proper sense merit and require that mental regard from us, which should of right be testified by those acts of worship. Neither do we find that the Churches acknowledged any obligation upon them, to make any Canon requiring those adorations, but only, as circumstances than were, a congruity to command their use: under which command and judgement of the Church, individual persons were to acknowledge those sacred things worthy those honours. Wherefore if it please our Superiors to continue the use of these Ceremonies, which are so easily abused, it will be very necessary to state and determine the right use of them, and to point at the dangers to be avoided, and to command that the cautions be at set times read in the Churches, that none may err for want of knowledge, or by forgetfulness.  
The discreet followers of the holy ancient Fathers of the Church are worthy commendation, but their apes are ridiculous. To sow the foul rags of some late slovenly Schoolmen to the comely garment of our Church (as the misinterpreters of the text in Philip. 2. have attempted) is an act disgraceful to the authors, derogating from the honour and dignity of our dear Mother and introductory of unwarrantable adorations, being pretended to be commanded by Almighty God. For, if it be once obtained that the adoration used to the name Jesus is of divine institution, it will by the necessity of like reason follow, that the bowing to the cross and the Communion-Table, and especially, to the holy bread and wine, is a duty which of divine right doth belong unto them.  
But it is time to proceed to speak of some other Ecclesiastical Customs of the fourth Century, 
Sect. 17.  whereof one was derived from former times, 
Chrysost. in 2 Cor. hom. 2.  that in the Churches no Our Father was said in the prayers, so long as the Catechumen and Penicents' (for whom special prayers were made) were permitted to stay in the Church. 
Concil. Leodicen. can. 19 Et Chrysost. in Eph. hom. 3. Aug. de temp. ser. 38. Amalar. de office. missae c. 19 Vide council. Valentin. c. 1.  After their departure out of the Church began the second divine Service and prayers proper to the faithful, among which was the Lord's Prayer, most of the rest were subservient to the blessed Sacrament of the Lords Supper. When that Sacrament was to be administered (which was then usually every Lord's day) they offered bread and wine for the use of the Sacrament (instead of which we have offerings for the poor) and the Bishop or Presbyter went from the Pulpit or place where he prayed for the penitents or his seat, to the Communion-Table; where it is to be noted, that he had not so long and difficult a journey to go, as in most parochial Churches the minister hath, to pass from his reading Pew or Pulpit through a throng of people to the holy Table, and therefore there is good reason to spare him that labour in the days wherein is no Communion.  
Persons excommunicated were nor received into Communion of any Prayers in the Church, 
Conc. Ancyram. can. 6. & 25. Conc. Nicen. 6.11.  no not with the Catechumen, until they had humbled themselves before the Bishop, and earnestly besought that they might be made partakers of his council, concerning what was needful to be done by them, to the perfecting of meet repentance in them, and whereby they might give sufficient proof thereof, for the satisfaction of the Church offended by their transgressions, promising to follow his counsel, and to perform the enjoined penance. Upon this serious petition and promise the Bishops and Presbyters enjoined such works of unfeigned humiliation to be done by them, as they thought most agreeable for their case and condition, and praying for them admitted them to the number and order of the Penitents. When these had fulfilled the enjoined works of humiliation to be performed by them in that order, than they were admitted to the Communion of the prayers proper to the faithful, and after the works of repentance, which were commanded to be done by them in that rank, they were admitted to the Lords Supper, wherein was the perfection of Communion. 
Conc. Nicen. c. 12.  If any Penitent in the course of humiliation was in an eminent and imminent danger of death, it was always provided by the Fathers of the Church that perfect Communion with the Church of God (without which Church is no salvation) should be granted him in the participation of the body and blood of our blessed Saviour, except the governor's of the Church had observed in him a very notorious defect in fulfilling his duty; of which yet if there was any the least probable appearance of repentance, he was not denied the necessary viaticum (as the Council of Nice calls it.) The best men ready to departed to a better life desired and took this celestial meat for their comfort and refreshment in their passage to God.  
Some ministers are so strict and parsimonious in giving the Holy Sacrament, that they deny the same unto a considerable part (yea often, to most part) of their parish, which before had been admitted to it, without using the method prescribed by our Saviour in Matth. chap. 18. vers. 15▪ 16, 17. Which text requires public accusation and proof in the presence of the governor's of the Church, and their public condemnation before the public execution of so high a censure. They are also so hard hearted to dying men, earnestly desiring that soul-confirming & most refreshing viaticum, that although they cannot truly before God and men, (if put to it,) assure it, that they remain in a state of sin inconsistent with any degree of saving grace, (as in case of denial, they should be upon good grounds assured) yet they can be so uncharitable and unmerciful, as to deny it unto them. These extremes on the one hand, and on the other hand, partly the not forgotten great abuse of the holy censures by Chancellors and Commissaries, partly the late ejecting of the set public forms of prayers out of the Churches, and partly the general contempt of all the holy ordinances spread over the Kingdoms by the several Sects brought in and maintained by the Regicides, to strengthen and perpetuate themselves, (if they could) in their most impious usurpation and tyranny, these (I say) have made the Communion of Saints in the public prayers, and the holy Sacraments, to be of very small esteem with most; insomuch, that very many are brought to believe, they may go to heaven, notwithstanding the neglect of them; for which most pestilent disease, if seasonable and convenient medicine be not found out and wifely applied, the Church of England will be uncapable of receiving any benefit by the mere Ecclesiastical Discipline; and the only restraint under God against the growing sad effects of irreligious profaneness will lie in the sole power of the Regal authority.  
What gesture of body was used in those ancient times in receiving the holy Communion, 
Sect. 17.  whether standing, or kneeling, or at some times the one, and at other times the other, is not very clearly and expressly set down by the writers of that age, that I can remember. This only is certain, that they did not kneel in the receiving of it on the Lords days, because it was against a Canon of the Church, to adore God by bowing of the knee on those days: It is probable, that on other days (except in the Pentecost) they received kneeling, 
Hieron. in Esa. c. 45.  for St. Hierom saith, that it was an Ecclesiastical Custom to bow the knee to Christ, 
Idem in Epist. ad Ephes. c. 3.  which we may understand to be in the receiving of that holy Sacrament, as well as in the public prayers; notwithstanding that this holy Doctor saith in another place, that every one that is subject unto Christ, is said to bend his knee unto him; and citing the words of St. Paul [at the name of Jesus every knee shall be bowed] addeth, that the words do not pertain to the knees of the body, but to the subjection of the mind, and inclination of the soul, and obsequiousness of the heart to God: Which this most learned Father would never have said or written, if the Custom of the Church had been in his time to kneel not only unto Christ himself, but also to his name Jesus, or if he had thought that this place of the Apostle did signify it to be every man's duty to make the name Jesus a co-object with Christ of his adoration by the bowing of the knee, as some of the latter Schoolmen have taught. In the time of St. Hierom and before, the standing in receiving the Eucharist on the Lord's day was accompanied with a low bowing of the body even nigh to a prostration; for St. Augustine writing upon the 98 Psalm faith, 
August. in Ps. 98.  none eateth that flesh, unless he first hath adored it. And in the words following he speaketh of inclination and prostration to that earth, that is, the flesh of our Saviour (not considered as apart from, but as in, and with the most blessed Divine person.) 
Cyrill. Hierosol. Catech. Mystagog. 5.  Cyrill of Jerusalem speaking of the Holy Communion, saith, take the body of Christ saying Amen: and a little after, come (saith he) to the Cup of his blood, not extending thy hands, but incurving them (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) and in manner of adoring and worshipping, saying, Amen. But now, that the more urgent reasons, which moved the Fathers of the Primitive Church not to use kneeling in adoring God on the Lords days, are ceased, it seems most convenient to kneel in taking the Holy Sacrament, upon what day soever we receive it; for the nearer Christ comes to us, and the more he doth descend and condescend in coming to us, yea, and into us, mystically in those external weak Elements, the more should we descend, humble, and debase ourselves by the inward bowing of our souls, and the external bending of our knees in the receiving of him, thereby testifying our own unworthiness of that Grace, and commending the exceeding freeness of it. In the Kingdom of Prester John they stand when they receive the holy Communion. In giving the Sacrament the Bishop or Presbyter said, 
Francisc. Alvarus apud Cassandris liturg. De Sacrament. l. 4. c. 6.  the body of the Lord, and the receive said, Amen, saith Ambrose. About the year 600, in the Sacramentary of Gregory the great, it is said, while the priest giveth the Lord's body, let him say, The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ preserve thee to eternal life, Amen. And in giving the Cup let him say, The blood of our Lord Jesus Christ preserve thee to eternal life. In the mass of some Armenians in Russia, the priest communicating faith, 
Apud Cassand. liturg.  By faith I believe in the most holy Trinity the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. By faith I eat thy quickening and saving body, O Lord Jesus Christ; let it be unto me to the absolution and remission of my sins. And in drinking the Cup, I drink by faith thy holy unmixed blood, blotting out sins, 
Apud Eundem.  O Lord Jesus Christ, for the remission of my sins, and of my Parents and of all the world. Every Communicant of the Armernians in India goeth before the foot of the altar to receive. It is provided in the Council of Laodic. before the year 400, 
Can. 19  that only the ministers might go in to the altar, and there take the Communion. 
Can. 17.  In the fourth Council of Tolet. it was appointed that the priests and deacons' should communicate before the altar, the subordinate Clergy in the Choir, the people without the Quire. This Council drove the people far off from the rails of the altar.  
Many more Rites and Ceremonies were used in the fourth Century, which do not pertain to our purpose, and very many more were afterward added; especially in the Roman Church.  
From what hath been said, we may perceive, that the Composers of our Divine Service book made choice of the best things out of the most ancient Liturgies of the Churches, 
Sect. 18.  which flourished long before the birth of Antichrist, leaving many Ceremonies used in the primitive times, not very convenient to the present state of our Churches, retaining other, that the garment of Christian religion with us might not altogether vary from the ancient form so far as it could without prejudice to the body of religion be fitted to us.  
Tertullian saith, that the solemnities and mysteries of Idols gained credit and reputation with men, by the sumptuous rites and rich ornaments, whereby they were set forth and adorned. It is likely that the ancient Fathers, when miracles began to cease, saw it expedient (for the removing of some of the obstructions to Christian faith) to add to the divine Solemnities some agreeable Rites, whereby the Christian Doctrine might be commended to the rectitude of humane judgement, as not incredible or contemptible, and, it may be, thereby be commended as credible and worthy of good regard. The Schismatics in Tertullian's time, 
Tertull. de prescript. baeret. c. 41.  (as he saith) named the decent Ceremonious Discipline of the Churches, a bawd, and counted the prostration of that Discipline by themselves to be Christian simplicity: Whereas in very deed that prostration of edifying order and Ceremonies, caused the confusion of the holy ordinances among them, and sluttishness in the celebrations of the divine institutions; as Tertullian noted in those Schismatics, and we see now a days in ours. But on the other side we must remember, that we may err (as in the defect, so) in the excess of Ceremonies, or in the choice, or in accounting and compelling others to own them for unchangeable Apostolic institutes, or by too rigid pressing the use of every of them, especially upon people of weak capacity, humble, peaceable, and of a scrupulous conscience. 
August. Epist. 119. Placuit Spiritui S. nihil aliud oneris imponere praeterquam quae necessario servare oportet. At quidam, haec nihil curantes, omnem quidem fornicationem pro nihilo habent: De Diebus autem & feriis & institutis, perinde atque de anima ipsa, decertant, Dei mandata invertentes, & sibi ipsis leges ferentes, per Socrat. hist. l. 5. c. 21. Edit. Basil. 1570.  Augustine was grieved to see the transgression of a Ceremony to be more severely reprehended then the transgression of God's law: his judgement was, that the Ceremonies should not be many, so as by them to press with servile burdens the Church of Christ, which God would preserve free in the use only of few Rites commended by manifest reasons. Antiquity is venerable, yet it may not, ought not continue a Rite or Ceremony in any Church with whose edification and peace it is become inconsistent. There be but few ordinances merely Ecclesiastical, which have not in some Churches become noxious, or at least useless. And there is a vicissitude of profit or detriment growing from them many times in the same Churches, arising from notable changes in persons and circumstances.  
Augustine thought that those observances which the whole Church kept, and no diversity of manners had varied, were ordained by the Apostle St. Paul. 
Epist. 110.  This his thought holds forth a probability and no demonstration, for he himself in some place grants, that such universal (and de facto unvaried) rites might have been made by a general Council, and we may add by custom. Many Ceremonies were universal (as many then believed) and unvaried in Augustine's time, which were in following times, either altered, or altogether disused. Wherefore? surely because they ceased to be useful, or became hurtful. And therefore if St. Paul was the author of them, he gave them with consent of the Churches to be used so long as they saw them to continue serviceable, or at least not hurtful to Christian religion. It was difficult in the ancient times to know which rites descended from the Apostles, and which not, or which were universal in such an age by them that lived therein: They many times said some Rites to be universal, which were so only in the part of the Christian world where they lived, as in the Eastern or Western Churches. 
Socrat. hist. l. 5. c. 21. Et Sozom. l. 7. c. 18, 19  It was before showed, that many things were said by the Fathers to be of divine or Apostolical institution, which were not so indeed, if we speak of divine or Apostolic institutes in a proper sense: Sometime what was by one of the Fathers affirmed to be so, was by some other ancient writers referred to a more recent author, 
De offic. Eccl. l. 1. c. 15.  as to one Pope or other. So some ascribe the Roman Liturgy to St. Peter, as Isidore, every part whereof is assigned to other authors by Gregory the great, or Amalarius, or Alcuinus, or Strabus, or some other which have written of the Roman Service. I find none to determine in particular what part of that Service was made by St. Peter, 
Duran. rationale div. offic. pricip. l. 4.  but only a few affirming that he composed three prayers of it. But if he had been the author of it as Isidore relates, it is not to be doubted, but that the Western Churches or most of them, had used only that Liturgy. But the Church of Milan had a proper Liturgy, the Churches of Spain had another proper to them, 
Concil. Milevit. Can. 12. Et Carth. 3. Can. 23. Cur cum una sit fides, fint Ecclesiarum consuetudines diversae? & altera consuetudo missarum in Romana Ecclesia, atque altera in Galliarum Ecclesiis teneatur? huic interrogationi Augustini Anglorum Episcopi sic resp. Gregoriu● Papa. 1.  and the Africans had divers in divers Churches; some of which had unawares put into their Liturgy some prayers composed by Heretics; which caused some African Councils to ordain, that no prayers should be received into the Liturgy, but such as were examined by Learned men or approved by a Council. 
Novit fraternitas tua Romanae Ecclesiae consuetudinem in qua se meminit eruditam; Sed mihi placet, ut sive in Romana, sive in Gallicana seu in qualibet Ecclesia aliquid invenisti quod plus emnipotenti Deo possit placere, solicit eligas & in Anglorum Ecclesia, quae adhuc ad fidem nova est, institutione praecipua, quae de multis Ecclesiis colligere potuisii, infundas. Non enim pro locis res sed pro bonis rebus loca amanda sunt. Ex quibusque ergo Ecclesiis, quae pia, quae religiosa, quae recta sunt, elige; & haec quasi in fasciculum collecta apud Anglorum mentes in consuetudinem depone.   
Every Church, at least every Provincial Church, composed their prayers, or other parts of their divine Service, as seemed most conducible to their edification and after altered the same, or made a new form, 
Vide Bern. Augiens. de quibud. rebus ad missam pertinent. c. 2. Vide Sozom. hist. l. 7. c. 19  or received a form used in another Church, as they pleased: Spain or some part of it received the Roman Liturgy. And therefore if it should seem good to the Church of England to mend their Liturgy, or compose a new one (if need be) more agreeable to the present time, they should do therein no more than the most famous Churches have done before, and which can be no disparaging of the wisdom and piety of the Composers of it, which intended only to make it as fit as could be for the state of the Church in their time (which I believe they performed very exactly) and not to frame and impose an unchangeable form which could never prove incongruous to any possible variety in the state of the Church; for this is not in the power of any persons or Churches. Howsoever Ceremonies and a form of Liturgy, are no more necessary for Episcopal, than a Presbyterian Government, which may equally err in defect or excess, or quality of the rites and divine Service.  
Now although both the forms of government and all Ecclesiastical rites be in their nature changeable, 
Sect. 19  because of their dependence upon variable circumstances, yet some have been less subject to change or abrogation then other, either because they be of small efficacy to hurt or profit, or because the hurt done by them is hardly discerned, or because the circumstances, which are apt to make them noxious, seldom happen, or because they are believed to have the Apostles for their authors or approvers.  
Of all other, Episcopacy seems least subject to abrogation. First, because the Churches in all parts of the world, were always firmly persuaded, that the institution of Episcopacy, had the Apostles hand and seal joined with the mother Churches for the confirmation of it. Secondly, because many believed that the Apostles never permitted the College of Presbyters to ordain Presbyters in the time that they ruled in the Churches, this they received by tradition, to which they easily gave their assent, because they found not in the Acts of the Apostles, or the Apostolical Epistles, that sole Presbyters ordained any (except perhaps by an immediate command of the Holy Ghost, which is extraordinary) but with a Precedent either an Apostle or an Evangelist, or a Vicegerent of an Apostle, as Timothy, Titus, etc. whence they thought it might be very probably collected, that the Apostles would have given a principality of the exercise of the power of ordination unto one Presbytet only in every Church, so as without him the whole College could not ordain, and would have left the government to be exercised in common, equally by all, if the College had not so grossly abused their ruling power, whereby it was seen that the College had need of a Precedent both in the Government, and the Ordination, which was accordingly given them by the decree of the Church, approved by the Apostles. St. Hierome himself hath some passages, which seem to favour this opinion, 
●i passim omnibus (Presh.) esses concessum (ordinare,) tot admitterentur ad ordines, quod non servaretur ordo; immo potius generaretur confusi●: & ideo dispositum est Dei consilie, quod solis Episcopis ordinum dispensatio & aliorum officiorum, ut consecratio abbatum, monialium & ecclesiarum & consimilium concedatur. Bonevent. in 4. d. 25. q. 1.  and therefore the Churches never suffered a Presbyter, or Chor●piscope, to ordain, except he supplied the place of a Bishop, when he could not be present, and the Ordination could not be delayed; Thirdly, The Presbyterian Government was in use in the purest purity of the Churches, beginning to spread abroad over the world by the preaching of the Apostles, and yet in less than twenty years' space Schisms grew out of it, which caused the Churches to out it, and to establish Episcopacy as the best antidote against Schism, and for the restauration and maintenance of the Church's peace.  
Now if the Presbyterian Government was uneffectuall for the preserving of peace among the most godly, and consequently the most addicted to peace, who can expect it should be effectual to restore union and peace, and to preserve it in Churches too full of pollutions and stains, very much degenerated from the holiness of the Apostolical times? It seems a desperate and preposterous course, to use that as a sovereign Antidote in our time, which had the effect of a Poison upon the Churches in the Aposties' time. A hurnt Child dreads the fire; and should not the weaker members of the body dread the fire, that burned the strongest and best able to resist its force? Seeing the remainder of natural corruption in the most holy Churches drew the Poison of Schism from the Presbyterian form of government, we cannot, without high presumption, think that the far higher degrees of sin remaining in us, will be idle, & suffer grace to make of it an Antidote against Schism. Mountebanks are seen sometime to heal by improper Medicines, where the strength of nature, and the concurrence of some other secret causes do perform the cure, and not the nature of the Physic. So may the Presbyterian government have in some place the credit of healing Schisms & maintaining peace, when in very truth those good effects proceed from the confluence of other causes, and not from the aptness of that government to effect them: For it seems incredible that it should have in it an aptness to keep us in peace, that had in it an ineptitude to keep the most peaceably disposed Apostolic Christians in unity and peace. Whence we may conclude, that although the ancient Episcopacy be in its nature changeable, as being of the Churches, and by consequence of humane constitution, yet morally and practically it may not be abrogated without damage to the Church; which will assuredly follow, if some accidental benign influences of some other causes do not for some time hinder its birth.  
I am very apt to believe, that the Churches, which seem to use the Presbyterian government, never intended by any Law, deserving the proper name of a Law, to settle the primitive Presbytery in their Churches, whence the sad Schisms arose in the primitive times; much less to abrogate the ancient Episcopacy, which in the judgement of the best Christians, and of the Apostles, is the healer of Schisms, and the preserver of peace: But that they intended (as they had good reason) to abrogate the corrupted Hierarchy, with the multitude of its oppressing attendants, and (as necessity compelled them) seemingly to suspend their reception of the ancient Episcopacy, but in very deed receiving in some hidden sort the substance of it, secretly giving that Authority to the moderator of the College of Presbyters, which tantamounts the Authority of the ancient Bishops. This was done by them in their Emergency, out of the Gulf of the Babylonish Idolatry and Heresies, when the state of persons and Circumstances would not permit them directly and manifestly to set up the ancient Episcopacy, but covertly and clothed with the apparel of Presbytery; Because the appearing of it in its native clothing seemed to threaten an extreme danger of returning again to Idolatrous Babylon. Thus when two duties became inconsistent, the keeping out of Idolatry, and the open and manifest use of an Ordinance inferior to the maintenance of the purity of God's worship; they did, as it was their duty, so far forbear the open use of Episcopacy as seemed needful, that they might preserve the truth and sincerity of the worship of God. I know many writers are of another mind, but the intentions of Churches are better seen in the causes of their actions, and the managing of them, then in the letter of a Law, or in the speculative opinions of private persons.  
Some think the present condition of our Church, to be almost the same with the state of those Churches, when they first began their Reformation, and therefore that we stand in need of the same cure under the habit of the Presbyterian Government. Surely these are much deceived; first, in their opinion of our present state; secondly, in the sequel, if our case were like theirs: for, when we were like them in departing from Babylon, we were unlike them in many other respects, and needed not the habit of Presbyters, but fall to purge the ancient Episcopacy from as many of the foul excrescencies which the sins of men made to grow to it, as the condition of that time would permit, whereby our Church kept more uniformity with the primitive Churches, and by the blessing of God upon our endeavour, obtained more measure of the Heavenly light, and of the power of Godliness in peace, and that for a longer time, than any part of those Churches attained unto, which were necessitated to shroud themselves under another habit of Government. This I say not any way to disparage any other Church of Christ, (whom I honour and pray for from my heart) or to ascribe any thing to our own wisdom and providence, but to honour and glorify the grace of God for his great mercies to our Church, and to defend her honour against the mistakes of some.  
But now our condition is changed our sins have brought us to misery, the light and glory of our Church is turned to darkness, confusion, and contempt; from which (notwithstanding our unworthiness) Gods infinite mercy (which hath most graciously restored our Sovereign Lord the King unto his Kingdoms and Subjects) will be pleased, I trust, to deliver us, and to beautify our Church with the primitive Apostolical Episcopacy, attended by his assessors and Senate, the reverend, grave, wise, learned and pious College of Presbyters, to govern the house of God, after the best pattern of the primitive holy orders and discipline, for the obtaining whereof, God would have us assisted by His grace to contribute our endeavours, improved to the uttermost of Christian Wisdom and moderation, to be crowned with his rich blessing. And because this business is about things for the most part spiritual, tending to the edification of God's house, it will, no doubt, please our gracious King and his great Council not to proceed in this work without the advice and counsel of them, whom Christ hath ordained under Himself Minister all bvilders of His House; lest the neglect of His Ordinance and Ministers cause the Lord to blast all other Counsels and endeavours, how probable soever they may seem to be in the eye of the world. Give unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and let the Vicegerents of Christ enjoy the things belonging to them, let all interests have their due part in this weighty work; and than whatsoever Government be settled, what form soever of Divine service, what Rites soever and Ceremonies shall be established, they will with all readiness and due submission be received and embraced by all the people, and all the obedient Sons and Daughters of our dearest Mother the Church of England: among whom if there shall be some whose judgements cannot acquiesce in some determinations of the higher powers, they will wisely consider; first, that in the remote conclusions of Divine maxims, all good men in this our infirmity will never agree, and that nature teacheth us that in controversies the resolution of the major part must be obeyed, without which debates would never be ended, and St. Paul saith, let the spirits of the Prophets be subject to the Prophets. Secondly, That God hath appointed the powers civil and Ecclesiastical in his stead to determine Ecclesiastical controversies, and to make Ecclesiastical Ordinances, from whose judgement there is no appeal but only to God by prayer. Thirdly, That to preserve the peace of the Church and Charity the bond of perfectness, is a duty to be preferred before the duty of public teaching, divulging, or preaching many of those Divine Truths, whose ignorance (if not voluntary) doth not exclude from Heaven, when that teaching or publishing doth disturb the public peace, and consequently the keeping of the peace requireth abstinence in that case from such divulging or preaching.  
And from these considerations good men will infer that it is good for them, and that it is their duty both for the sake of God's Authority, for good order sake, and for Charity and peace sake, & out of a Conscientious regard to the higher powers, to acquiesce in their determinations, and to desist from opposing their private opinion to the public judgement, and pursuing their private interest to the prejudice of public peace and Charity. For which Wisdom and moderation, that they may be in all, let all good men pray to the only wise and most merciful God, the Author of Truth and peace.   

An APENDIX.  
THe manner of the Ordination of Bishops (forgotten to be showed by me in due place) is declared by the fourth Council of Carthage in these words; 
Can. 2.  When a Bishop is ordained, lay and hold the book of the Evangelists upon his head and neck, and one Bishop pronouncing the Benediction over him, let the rest of the Bishops present touch his head with their hands. The Church never accounted any to be capable of this Episcopal Ordination that was not first ordained a Presbyter, the manner of whose Ordination, was that the Bishop blessing him (saying, receive the Holy Ghost, whosoever sins you shall remit, 
Council earth. Can 3.  etc.) and laying his hand upon his head, the Presbyters present lay their hands upon his head by the hand of the Bishop.  
There was a 
(a) Tert. de prescript. c. 41. Cyprian. Epist. ad Antonianum Hier. ad Heliodorum Conc. Sardicens. c. 13.  Canon in use in the second Century (when it was made it is not known) which required that every one that would be an Ecclesiastical Officer should begin with; and for some set time officiate in the lowest Office, and so by degrees ascend to the Episcopacy, if the Church did desire his advancement. Yet we find that some laics, yea some unbaptised persons have been by the Clergy and people chosen Bishops, as Ambrose, Nectarius, and other, 
Paulinus in vita Ambrosij. Niceph. Callist. Eccl. hist. l. 12. c. 12.  who leaping over the inferior offices, and the time wherein they should have given proof of their faithfulness and industry in the order of Presbytery, have been Baptised, made Presbyters, and then Bishops within few days, and some (it may be) took these two last orders in the same hour. But this was very rare, and by dispensation, or was liable to an Ecclesiastical censure.  
When any under the degree of a Presbyter, was by the ignorance or perverseness of some Bishops, ordained a Bishop, nothing done by him was esteemed valid, but what his former degree did warrant, or a Laic might in necessity do, until he was made a Presbyter. Bellarmine saith truly, that it is impossible that one should be ordained a Bishop (fit to officiate) which was not before a Presbyter, or did not take both orders together. For (saith he) Episcopacy includes Presbytery in its essence, and a Bishop, no Presbyter, is a figment, 
De Sacramento Ordinis. l. 1. c. 5.  a Bishop being nothing else but the first or chief Presbyter. Whence he doth rightly infer that the Ordination of a Bishop, compared with the Ordination of a Presbyter, is (being in itself precisely considered) inferior to it, as being of no efficacy as to acts merely Ecclesiastical, and which the civil Magistrate cannot execute.  
Here some doubts are raised which by divers are diversely resolved. As whether Christ did ordain the Apostles in the first place Presbyters, and after that Bishops? and if so, when was this done? or if it be said that Christ made them Apostles, Presbyters and Bishops, in one and the same Ordination, how can it be proved that Christ gave the Apostles the powers now proper to Bishops, not only as they were extraordinary Officers, but also as they were to have successors; and not rather that Christ reserved those powers as they were to be conveyed by succession to be given in a more convenient time? it is generally acknowledged that Presbyters were virtually ordained when the Apostles were ordained. If Christ made the Apostles both Presbyters and Bishops in one Ordination, how durst the Church alter our Saviour's Ordinance, as to ordain them by two actual Ordinations whom He Himself had ordained in one virtual Ordination? to say that our blessed Saviour ordained the Apostles first Presbyters, and afterwards Bishops, is to affirm that which the Evangelists do not mention. To Preach, Baptism, administer the Lords Supper, to feed the Sheep, to bind and lose, all these offices appear by clear Testimonies of the holy Scriptures, and the consent of the Catholic Church to belong to Presbyters; and therefore it may not be reasonably thought that any of those places of the Evangelists which promise those powers, or intimate them to be given, or require the execution of them, convey an Episcopacy to the Apostles supposed before ordained Presbyters. Some say, that St. Cyprian and some other of the Fathers affirm Christ in ordaining the Apostles to have ordained Bishops, and that Bishops are the Apostles successors, and Presbyters the successors of the 70 Disciples. To these Objections the answers are ready and easy. 
Ad Dr●●contiam in Ps. 44.  First, Athanasius saith, that Christ by his Apostles constituted and ordained Bishops, and Augustine saith, that the Church conceived Bishops, neither of them writeth that Bishops were virtually ordained in the Apostles Ordination, neither is this expressly said in any ancient Author. 
In Epist. 1. ad Timoth, c. 3.  Secondly, Ambrose the contemporary or elder than the true Ambrose saith, that the Ordination of a Presbyter and Bishop is one and the same, this may seem strange, for in his and the preceding times, they were distinct, but his following words declare his meaning when he gives this reason, namely, 
Cyprian ad florentium, etc. Epist.  because both Presbyter and Bishop are Sacerdotes, Priests, which shows that in saying, that the Ordination of a Presbyter and Bishop is the same, he meant quatenus Sacerdotes, as they were Priests or Presbyters, their ordination was the same.  
So the other ancient Doctors which say that Christ in speaking some things to the Apostles, as, He that heareth you, heareth me, 
Basil. constit. monast. c. 22.  etc. 〈◊〉 spoke in and by them to Bishops, or that in them Christ ordained Bishops, did mean, That our Saviour spoke in and by the Apostles to Bishops, (not as Bishops) but as they were Sacerdotes, Priests, and Presbyters, and only consequently and remotely, by the means of a subsequent Ordinance, as they were Bishops, that is, Presbyters, having a presidency over their Brethren, when the Pastors of that primitive Church say, that Bishops are Successors of the Apostles, and Presbyters successors of the 70 Disciples, their meaning was, That having respect to the Distinction which the Apostles made, between one Presbyter and the rest, by exalting one in every Church to a presidency over the rest: The Precedent Presbyter, which is the Bishop, succeeds the Apostles, whose Successors, and the subject Presbyters succeeded the 70 Disciples, in some likeness of superiority and inferiority.  
The Fathers could not mean, That the Presbyters were ordained in the Ordination of the 70. For  
First, None of them had any good ground to affirm, That the 70 either had so ample an ordinary power (if they had any ordinary power) as the Presbytery have; or that the power they received was rather the power of an Office to continue in them, 
Ad Rodolphum Archiepiscopum Senonens. in apparandarum rerum addend. post tom. 7. Council.  than a power only to do some acts for a certain time after, which the power was to leave them, although Pope Nicholas the first affirms, That the 70 Disciples had the Offices of Bishops, and could ordain Presbyters.  
Secondly, The Form of Ordination, both in our Church, and in the Roman pontificial, doth manifestly show, That Presbyters were virtually ordained in the Ordination of the Apostles, after our Saviour's Resurrection, when he said, Receive ye the Holy Ghost, Whosesoever sins ye remit, etc. the which entire words are used in Presbyters Ordination, and only one member of the words are used in the ordination of bishops, that is, Receive the Holy Ghost, which words do not serve to convey unto them all power to remit, etc. which they had received in their Ordination, to Presbytery, but they serve to give them the power of Presidency, whereby the Bishop is constituted: and therefore Presbyters and Bishops, as they be Presbyters, are the primary Successors of the Apostles, and Bishops, as Bishops, that is, as to their presidency are only secondary Successors of the Apostles.  
There is no great cause of doubt whether those words abovesaid, used at this time in the ordination of Bishops or Presbyters, 
Cum Ecclesia in ordinatione sacerdotum Christum imitata ritu perpetuo eisd. verbis & forma illa, Accipite Spiritum Sanctum quorum remiseritis peccata, etc. Semper usa fuerit, quis ambigat idem omnino quod Christum facere, etc. Vasq. in 3. p. disp. 239. c. 4.  were together with imposition of hands therein used in and from the Primitive times, because they are not expressly mentioned in any ancient Author, for a thousand years and above (for any thing I could learn) for first the Fathers do often say, that imposition of hands was used in those ordinations (and aught to be used) as also a benediction and prayers: which prayers (no question) were accommodated in each ordination to the distinction made by the Apostles between Presbyters and Bishops, and therefore the words [Receive the Holy Ghost, whosoevers sins ye remit, etc.] might be used in the prayers of the Bishop's ordination, for an increase of the grace and power received by them in their Presbyterial ordination, and omitted in the prayers of Presbyters ordination (wherein they constitute the benediction,) because the fullness of the exercise of the power given by the ministry of those words, and other parts of their ordination is something restrained by the constitution of Episcopacy.  
The reason why those holy men did not set down in their writings the very words of benediction spoken at the imposition of hands, 
In 2 Cor. hom. 6.  and the particular forms of prayers then used is declared by chrysostom; 
Nota, patres & concilia non consuevisse explicare totum ritum Sacramentorum (non enim scribebant libros rituales) sed solum attigisse unam partem essentialem ex qua caetera omnia intelligerentur. Bellarm. de Sacram. Ord. l. 1. c. 9  who, speaking of Bishops beginning the Act of ordination, saith, That such and such words were spoken which the initiated knew, for it is not lawful (saith he) to detect all before the profane.  
As for the forms of Ordination which were written between the years 700 and 1000 and the forms in Clement's constitutions, besides that they are of small credit, they are imperfect and disagree among themselves. In one form of Bishop's consecration the book is not remembered to be held over the head of the person to be ordained; in another form there is no mention of the imposition of hands. In a form of the ordination of a Presbyter, the Bishop and Presbyters holding their hands on the head of the ordained, it is said, & det orationem super eum, and let the Bishop pray above him, than many sorts of prayers follow. Whence we may gather, that the prayer to be made over him differs from the other prayers, and that under the word [Prayer] the words of benediction, which are, Receive the Holy Ghost, Whosoever sins ye remit, etc. are comprehended. For those words pronounced by the Bishop as the mouth of the Church are a virtual prayer; the heavenly gift signified by them, 
Manus impositiones verba sunt mystica quibus confirmatur ad opus electus accipiens auctoritatem teste conscientia sua, ut audeat vice Domini sacrificium Deo offer. Ambros. in Epist. 2. ad Timoth. c. 4. Homo imponit. manus, Deus largitur gratiam, homo imponit supplicem dexteram, & Deus benedicit potenti dextera. Ambros. de dignitate sacerd. a Greg. Epist. l. 7. Epist. 63.  and to be given in the use of them, being begged of God in the preceding, and also in the subsequent prayers. And as they are pronounced by the Bishop supplying the place and instead of Christ, they are Christ's benediction, and a signification of his operative will in giving the Holy Ghost unto some (that's Presbyters in their ordination) to authorize them to do the external acts of binding and losing, etc. and to accompany those acts duly exercised in the union and communion of the truly Catholic Church; and unto others (that is, Bishops, in their ordination) to authorise and enable them for the eminent, universal, and presidential use and administration of the power of binding and losing before received in their Presbyterial ordination, and for the sole exercise of the power of ordination, and to accompany their service duly performed in the union and communion of the true Church of Christ. So the words of the institution of the Lords Supper are in themselves no prayers, but considered as a part of the prayer preceding them (called by Gregory the great, the Canon, which is not reputed to be ended before those words be prolated) they are a virtual prayer being presented unto God in the supplication of the Church for the obtaining of an heavenly effect in the imitation of the act of Christ like unto that effect which was granted at the act of prolation of them by Christ himself.  
Major & Angel. affirm, that they saw some Pontificals which were both without the words [Receive the Holy Ghost, etc.] and also without imposition of hands. Therefore those omissions are no sufficient arguments to prove that the foresaid words of benediction were not used in the Primitive times. We may further prove them to be then in use by this, that of all the integral parts of Presbyters ordination, we find nothing proper to the Bishop, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Basil. ad Amphilock. Can. ●1.  but only those words of benediction; for the Presbyters impose their hands as well as the Bishops, the Presbyters and people fast and pray with the Bishop, there's nothing left but the prolation of the words of benediction, in the name and place of Christ. This is confirmed by the story of the purblind Bishop, who having laid his hand to ordain a Presbyter, and the Presbyters their hands, used the eyes and mouth of a Presbyter to read and pronounce the benediction. 
Cone. Hispal. 2. c. 5.  It's not said that the Presbyter read the prayers (although its most likely he read them) but the benediction. And why? surely because the prayers were the common prayers of the whole Church, and the benediction only proper to the Bishop, and therefore that ordination was rejected as unlawful and invalid, a Presbyter and not a Bishop having prolated the benediction: and the Bishop's commission was of no value, because prohibited by the Canons in force at that time. Above 300 years before this Bishop, in the time of Athanasius, all the Presbyters (and Ischyras among them) which were ordained by Colythus a pretended Bishop, were refused to be received by the Church in that degree, 
Athanas. in apolog. 2.  because Colythus was proved to be only a Presbyter, whose ordination, in the judgement of the Church, the constitution of the Apostles had made invalid. 
Serm. de extellent. sacrorum Ord.  Ivo Carnotensis speaking of the ordination of Presbyters, and having said, that the Bishop and Presbyters had laid their hands, he adds, and they invocate the Holy Ghost upon them which are ordained; where he leaves nothing proper for the Bishop but the words of benediction prolated by him, and only by him as in the place of Christ. The Bishop invocated in the name of the whole congregation, and blessed in the name and place of our Saviour. St. Ambrose writing to a Bishop whom he had ordained, 
Epist. l. 1. Epist. 3. ad Episcopum Comensem.  saith, the ordination which thou hast received by the imposition of my hands, and benediction in the name of the Lord Jesus is not reprehended. 
in Esa. c. 58.  Hierome saith that ordination is not fulfilled only by imprecation of the voice, but also by imposition of hand. Now because the benediction was and ought to be said, while the Bishop and Presbyters (in the ordination of these) impose and hold their hands on the head of the person to be ordained (the formal prayer going before the imposition and following after it,) and because it is the principal part of the ordination, to which the imposition of hand is subservient, as it is a virtual prayer, St. August. saith, 
De baptis. contra Donatist. l. 3. c. 16.  what is imposition of hand, but a prayer over a man? And as it is spoken by the Bishop in Christ's stead, delivering the Ecclesiastical power in Christ's name, Ambrose saith, 
In Epist. 1. ad Timoth. c. 4.  that the imposition of hands are mystical words whereby the elect (to the office of the sacred ministry) receiving authority is confirmed for his work, that he may be bold to offer Sacrifice to God in Christ's steed. Whereby we see that imposition of hand, and the benediction, are distinct parts of ordination, yet so conjunct, and the benediction so excelling the imposition of hand, that the whole is reckoned nothing else but a benediction or prayer.  
I confess that I did sometime begin to suspect, that when the Roman Court had determined ordination to be a Sacrament properly so called, as baptism, and instituted by our Saviour, they put in those words in the solemnity of ordination, for the better confirmation and propagation of their new opinion; but considering the reasons aforesaid, and especially that the blessed Reformers of our Church have retained the same words, and nothing doubting but that in so doing they did not favour the popish opinion, but were persuaded they did therein follow their pattern, which was the usage of the Primitive Church, I rejected that conceit and suspicion.  
The first Author that I can remember to have read, more expressly intimating the said words of benediction to be used in the ordination of Presbyters, is our Countryman Alexander of Hale, in these words; 
Summ. part. 4. q. 21. membr. 4.  the Keys (saith he) are given with the sacerdotal order, when it is said, whose fins you remit, etc. and when a Bishop is consecrated, another Key is not conferred upon him, but the use of that first Key is extended. Thus far he, who flourished about the year 1240.  
In the words [Whose sins ye remit, etc.] remission must not be taken precisely for the taking away the guilt of sin, or the reconciling of paenitents upon their private or public repentance for sins committed after baptism, but also for the taking away the power and reign of sin, which is done by infused grace, which having removed the spiritual darkness and death, illuminates the soul, and makes it alive to God. Every part of the Presbyterial function, tends to this last effect as well as to the former, although one pastoral office may be more especially directed to the former, and another in a more special manner to the latter effect.  
The Fathers do often apply those words in St. John now frequently remembered, and the like in Matth. ch. 16. and chap. 18. to the act of reconciling Paenitents to God and the Church, and much oftener than they do to any other kind of the ministerial losing or remission, and they had good reasons moving them so to do. For, first, Heretics began in the second Century to deny that Christ left any ministerial power in his Church for the remission of any great sin committed after baptism; and this Heresy was revived by Novatian and Novatus in the third Century, and quickened by the Donatists in the fourth Century. Against which, the Orthodox Pastors of the Church used those places of Scripture, to prove that the power of reconciling such Penitents was given to the Church of Christ. Secondly, the zeal of the people in the Primitive Times, and the encouragements of the Ministers, and after, the Canons of the Church inclined the people to make confession of their secret enormities to the Church or Pastors (not because necessary to salvation, but because it was found very profitable as the times and persons were then qualified,) and public offenders were brought to public repentance, and (this being duly performed) were publicly reconciled to God and his Church. These things being so frequent and solemn, yet very irksome and grievous to flesh and blood, it was very necessary for the Fathers of the Church to put the people daily in mind of the benefit of those confessions and penitence, and the necessity of both as to scandalous offences in order to a public reconciliation, which they could not otherwise do better than by making use of those places of Scripture for the Demonstration and proof of the people's Duty, and the certainty and comfort of their reconciliation.  
None of those holy Pastors denied the ministerial power of remission or loossing to be exercised in the other ministerial offices, instituted as the means which God would bless (if not abused) for the begetting and increasing of saving grace. Yea some of them have expressly taught, that the preaching of the word, baptism, and consequently the Lords Supper are Keys which open Heaven to some, and shut Heaven against others, and are the instruments of God's power to lose some from the bonds of the guilt and power of sin, and to bind those that refuse to be loosed by them. For, doth not the Lords Supper bind the unworthy receivers, who eat and drink their own damnation! and doth it not set at liberty and open Heaven to them, who in eating and drinking according to the will of Christ eat and drink their own salvation? but let's hear what holy Hierome saith, the Apostles do lose men (saith he) by the words of God, 
In Esa. c. 14.  the testimony of the Scriptures and exhortation of virtues. 
Epist. ad Hedib. q. 9  And again in another place, the Apostles (saith he) in the first day of Christ's resurrection received the grace of the Holy Ghost, whereby they might remit sins and baptise and make sons of God, and give the spirit of adoption to believers, our Saviour himself saying, Whosoevers sins ye remit, they shall be remitted. Thus far Hierome.  
The powers promised unto St. Peter in Matth. ch. 16. and the powers given unto the Apostles, when our Saviour breathed upon them and said, Receive the Holy Ghost, etc. and the powers mentioned in the 18 chap. of St. Matthew, supposed before given, or to be in a special manner given in time to come, are one and the same powers, 
Chrysost. de sacerdotio. l. 3. Ambros. l. 1. de●●aenit. c. 1. & 6. Hier. ad Heliod. de vita solit. Athanas. serm. in illud [p●●ofecti in pagum, etc.] Cypr. de simplicit Praelat.  and so taken to be by the Doctors of the Primitive Church, which they do unanimously acknowledge to be given unto the Apostles both in right and possession (as to the essential parts of the powers) before Christ's death: although there is some seeming variety among them concerning the punct of time before his death, wherein Christ gave them declaratively unto them, and the immediate subject to whom they were given.  
Considering their sayings concerning this matter, and comparing them together, and so expounding them that they may agree with the Scriptures and among themselves, these following assertions may be gathered from them. First, They do not deny the said powers to have been given (as to their essentials) unto the Apostles when he called them to the Apostleship, and gave them the name of Apostles; For they could not think, that Christ gave them the name of the office, without the office itself: And it appears that the Apostles preached and baptised before the promise of them was made unto Peter. They received with the name of Apostles the powers to minister all the doctrine and means of salvation which Christ intended in due time to deliver unto them. 
Act. 1.24, 25. Act. 26.16.  And therefore when the Sacrament of the Eucharist was instituted, they needed not a new ordination, but only a signification of Christ's pleasure, that they should use the power before given them in the administration of this ordinance, which is but an extension of the power to a new object. Secondly, they agree, 
Chrysost. in Joh. hom. 85. Cyprian. de simplicit. Praelatoruus. Aug. de Trinitate, & civitate Dei c. 4. & quaest. ex vet. & Novi Testam. c. 93.  that all the Apostles received those powers when our Saviour breathed upon them, etc. and that this was a solemn ordination of them, giving them more grace to accompany their ministry than they had in their first call and less solemn ordination, or in the subsequent manifestation thereof before his death. This is the more proper ordination of the ministers of the new testament, the full original and seminal tradition of the ministerial powers, whereby all future ordinations of the like kind are sanctified: and for these causes our Saviour iterated their ordination to the pastoral extraordinary and ordinary offices, and the rather lest his death might be thought to have made void their first more secret and covert ordination. Some late writers think, that Christ, lest his ascension into heaven might seem to have nullified the second ordination, did ordain the Apostles the third time in the day of Pentecost; 
Hier. epist. ad Hedib. q. 9  but it's more likely that he did then only complete their ordination in the measure of extraordinary and ordinary gifts of the spirit, enabling them, and in them the succeeding Pastors for the better execution of their pastoral functions. Thirdly, the fathers agree also in this, that Christ gave equal power and authority unto all the Apostles and made them all ministerial rocks and fundations, 
Cyprian. de simplicit. Praelat.  gave unto them the Keys of the heavenly Kingdom, and gave them with the Keys in their hands unto the Church, 
Aug. de verbis Domini serm. 11. & de doct. Christ. l. 1. c. 18.  for whose aedification only they and their successors were to use them. The eyes are not more the bodies, than Pastors and their Keys are the Churches; and as the body cannot see but by the eyes, so the Church cannot enter into heaven by any other member (under Christ) of the mystical body, without the service of the Pastors opening with their Keys the gates of heaven for her. As the Apostles were ministerial rocks, so was Peter's confession an instrumental rock: and in a second place, the confession and preaching of the rest of the Apostles were so too; by the means of which rocks the Church is built upon the foundation of foundations, the principal rock our Lord Jesus Christ. 
Hilar. in Math. Can. 11. Matth. 16.  Yet Peter's confession was not without a great reward: He had the first promise of the Keys to be given unto him after Christ's resurrection, with the more abundant measure of the grace of the Holy Ghost, which he then received with the rest of the Apostles; yet so that he was the first in order which received them before the rest. He had a name given him by our Saviour from the principal rock. 
Ambros. serm. 89. Cyprian. de habiiu virgin.  He was made the first in order and head of the Apostles: the first ministerial rock: and his preaching was made the first instrumental rock. He was made the first preacher to, and convertor of the Jews and Gentiles; 
Joh. 10. & Ambros. ser. 47. De Petro vide Aug. retract. l. 1. c. 21. Ambros. de incarn. Dom. sacramento Cypr. nbi sup. & ad Antonianum.  the Apostle and Pastor of the first Christian Church after Christ's ascension, which was the mother of all other Churches. And because it was believed that he had his choicest and longest residence in Rome, wherein by his ministry the Gospel was first planted, that Church was counted the Princess of Churches, the mother of Churches, as he was accounted and called the Prince of the Apostles. All these privileges did serve to show the unity of the Church, and the unity of the holy ministry and ministers thereof, and to commend unto all the sons of the Church, the preservation of unity in doctrine, worship, Discipline and charity. There be many particular Churches of Christ, yet all but one Church, as Peter's Church was one, there be many Bishops and Presbyters, yet as Peter was alone the Apostle of the first Church which represented all the succeeding Churches, 
Basil. constitut. Monast. c. 22.  so the many ministers of the Gospel are one in Peter, and the ministry one in him. And as the Churches and ministers were one in their fountains and roots, so they ought to preserve the like unity among themselves, the ministers imitating the faithfulness of Peter, and the flock imitating the obedience and holiness of the Church of Peter. If Rome had persisted in, and contented herself with the doctrine of St. Peter, and not added thereto Idolatry, superstitions and heresies, we would gladly have owned and honoured her Bishops as the prime successors of Peter, and the Church of Rome, as the like successor of Peter's Church: but, to our hearts unspeakable grief we speak it, the gold is become dim, the most fine gold is changed, the holy City is become an harlot. O that she would return to her first husband that we might return to her! there's Peter's chair where Peter's preaching is sincerely imitated, that's Peter's Church which imitates her faith and holiness, which when Rome shall do, she shall recover her precedency of succession.  
Thus Peter had a primacy among the Apostles, but no superiority of command over them: All pastors were in him first and secondarily in the rest of the Apostles. 
De dignitate Sacerd. c. 2. Jo. 21.  Peter (saith Ambrose) did not alone receive the sheep, but received them with us, and we received them with him. Christ in the Apostles gave unto all Pastors the power of ordaining Pastors; because he gave them the Keys to be conveyed to successors. But the power of appointing who among the Presbyters should exercise them, and how, and who among them should be governor's of the use of the Keys, was not conveyed with the Keys to all Pastors in the Apostolical ordination; because it was peculiar to the extraordinary office of the Apostles, either to leave that to the wisdom of the Church and ordinary Pastors to order, or to settle it in one Presbyter assisted with the College of Presbyters, or otherwise, as the Holy Ghost should guide them. We may not think that our Saviour did give unto every Presbyter power to ordain, preach, administer the Sacraments, excommunicate, or absolve, at his own will and pleasure, without any appointment of a flock, or calling him to account of his Stewardship, etc. for this is against the light of nature, unless God had given unto every Presbyter wisdom and a will which could not err in the orderly use of the Keys, as he gave unto the Apostles; without which extraordinary grace the house of God in that case had been full of disorder and confusion, which Christ would not permit.  
If the power of disposing and governing the act of ordination, and the exercise of the acts of binding and losing had been given to the body of the Presbyters by our Saviour, the Apostles and universal Church had never deprived the College of that authority: Wherefore as the first planting of the Christian Churches was proper to the Apostles, so the constituting of the form of government, and the governors of the exercise of the acts of ordination, and the Keys was committed only to their trust. And it was very congruous that Christ would not determine the form of the government of his Church and Pastors thereof before his ascension into heaven, and the taking full possession of his government and Kingdom at the right hand of his Father.  
The Apostles planted the Churches after this manner: When God had blessed their ministry in Cities and considerable Towns, and in the Country adjacent, in the conversion of many to God, they constituted one congregation or Church of all the converts in that City or good Town and the Country about it, So ordering Ecclesiastical Corporations as might, as much as could be, best agree with the civil corporations and their division. For the feeding of which Church they ordained Pastors, and those many in every City-Church, 
Ubi est Ecclesia nisi ubi virga & gratia floret sacerdotalis. Ambros. de Isaac & anima c. 7. Es Hier. contra Lucifer. Ecclesia non est quoenon habet Sacerdotem.  in which they left the College of Presbyters governors both of the Pastors individually considered, and the whole flock, yet with and under themselves or their vicegerents as precedents, when either of them were present. But within a short time, when Christianity was much spread in several Nations, and many City-Churches were grown populous, so that they had many lesser Churches under them; and the Apostles and their Vicegerents could be present but in very few in comparison of the far greater number which wanted their society, the Colleges in these began to be divided among themselves, and to divide the Churches, which caused the Apostles guided thereto by the Spirit of Christ to consent to a change of the government which was by the Colleges (bodies without a head, and so apt to swerve in ruling populous Churches) into a precedent in every Church chosen out of the Pastors, together with the College of the City and best Presbyters as his Senate and Counsellors. And then both the Apostles and Evangelists, or Apostolical helpers, which were extraordinary Bishops, become ordinary Bishops to be succeeded by others. And these last were like our Archbishops, having many Bishops under them, as Titus in Crect, etc. and the Apostles were like our Primates but of higher authority, and having more Archbishops under them. Here we may observe, that the original occasion of Episcopacy doth very much commend it, it being introduced to heal the evil of Schism, and, by preventing it for time to come, to secure the peace of the Church: And it hath and will be the more acceptable to the Churches, because it was instituted or confirmed by the Apostles at their desire.  
Unto the imposition of hands, benediction and prayers (which were of the essence of the ordinations of Bishops and Presbyters) many Ceremonies were in time added, some sooner, some later, which served to make a clearer manifestation of the Ecclesiastical powers received in and by them; which additional Ceremonies in time became occasions of foul mistakes: Some making the additions to be the essence of the ordinations, or part thereof; other multiplying the ordination of the Apostles according to the diversity of kinds of the powers, which they in very deed received, but in one ordination, although iterated for some special reasons.  
When the Schoolmen began to write, they found the Roman Court full of corrupt doctrine, which they thought themselves bound to maintain, mistaking & miscalling the evil good, and the good evil. They found in the ordination of a Presbyter the Patene with Bread, and the Cup with the Wine (both unconsecrated) to be delivered unto the party to be ordained, with these words spoken by the Bishop, 
Cont. Florent. Sotus in 4. d. 24. & Major & Tho. in 4. d. 24.  viz. Take power to offer, etc. which Ceremony added to that ordination about the year 700 (as is probable,) some Schoolmen, and also Pope Eugenius the fourth, affirm to be the matter and form of the consecration of a Presbyter, making the imposition of hands with the words, Receive the Holy Ghost, etc. to belong only to the solemnity thereof, and not to be essential to it; against the judgement of all antiquity.  
Other maintain the delivery of the Patene with Bread, 
Scotus in 4. d. 24. Vasq. in 3. disp. 239. Bellar. de sacramento ord. i. 1. c. 9  and the Cup with wine in it, together with the said words spoken by the Bishop, to be one part of the ordination; and the imposition of hands with the words, Receive the Holy Ghost, etc. to be an other part thereof; and both these parts to constitute the whole essence of the ordination: As if our Saviour had made the Apostles Presbyters by two distinct ordinations, the one before his death, and the other after his resurrection, whereof the first (if we will without reason believe them) made them Priests, the second gave them the power of binding and losing, and made them complete Presbyters.  
As concerning the ordination of Bishops, Divines (saith Vasq.) do not well agree at what time they were ordained, 
In 3. p. d. 242. c. 7.  Some think that Christ ordained them, when he said, Receive the Holy Ghost, Whose sins ye remit, etc. this opinion is justly rejected by Vasques; unless it may be made good, that Bishops and Presbyters had one and the same ordination; for all grant that Presbyters were ordained by those words. Other imagine Peter alone to have been immediately ordained by our Saviour, and the rest of the Apostles by Peter, etc. so Bellarmine and others: but this assertion doth not please Vasques and we cannot be pleased with such figments. Others do conceive our Saviour to have ordained them Priests and Bishops, when he said, Do this in remembrance of me; This opinion is as false as the last. Some think them ordained in the day of Pentecost; and Vasques himself thinks them to have been ordained, when Christ said unto them, Go teach all nations, etc. which is as groundless an opinion as any of the rest: Whereas in truth when they were ordained Apostles, they were made Presbyters, having the pastoral powers which were to be transmitted to successors, and were also made extraordinary Bishops, having as essential to their extraordinary function of Apostleship, an extraordinary presidency and superintendency over the use and exercise of all the pastoral offices, but were not made Bishops, which were to be succeeded, until they themselves, by confirming the prudent choice of the Churches, had instituted Episcopacy.  
The Schoolmen found the Laics impower'd by commission from Rome, etc. to excommunicate: Hence they distinguish between the power of the Order and the power of jurisdiction. We gather from the holy Scriptures and the practice of the Primitive Church, that excommunication was ordained to be a mean to bring a person, guilty of some scandalous sin committed after Baptism, to the degree of repentance and humiliation; meet first, to receive pardon of sin through faith in Christ's blood. Secondly, to satisfy and edify the Church by good example in proportion to the offence given and harm done by his bad example. Thirdly, to take away the evil propensity, the scars and blots made in the Soul by the sin committed, and to restore the offender to the degree of purity of Soul, and consequently of communion with God, and of God's love to him which he enjoyed before his fall; which are obtained when God is glorified and pleased by the humiliation in proportion to the dishonour done to God, and the divine displeasure incurred by sin. Fourthly, to receive more strength to make the penitent able to stand, and avoid the like fall in time to come. In the first four Centuries after our Saviour's birth, a full absolution was not granted to any Penitent (except in case of necessity) until the Bishop and Presbyters judged his repentance and humiliation to have restored him to God's grace and favour, 
Cyprian. ad clerum. De Presbyteris qui temerè pacem lapsis dederant.  the good opinion of the Church, and to his former spiritual strength in grace. And therefore we may be assured, that no man was excommunicated from the Church militant, but in order to receive grace to restore him to and fit him for the Church triumphant; and that it was the same Key which did shut the doors of both Churches against the offender, and was to open the doors unto him, having given sufficient testimony of a due humiliation. The Catholic Church in the Primitive times did not divide excommunication into two distinct kinds, that is, into excommunication from the Church triumphant, and excommunication from the Church militant, the first proper to the Bishop and Presbyter; and the other peculiar to the Bishops and his Committees, Presbyters or lay; this to be exercised by the power of Jurisdiction the former to be exercised by the power of order, that is, the power which Bishops and Presbyters received from Christ by their ordination. Whereby we understand the power of jurisdiction, in this sense as opposed to the power of order, to be the gift neither of Christ nor of his Apostles. If the Church gave this power, it was a corrupt Church that gave it, for by this ordinance of man the ordinance of Christ is made void; The ordinance of man, is exalted above the ordinance of Christ; for the excommunication which is Christ's ordinance may be executed by the Presbyter (in subordination to the Bishop, but) without his Commission; the humane excommunication is made peculiar to the Bishop the chief officer in the Church, to be executed by himself or some other by his commission. Much good do it to the Roman Bishops whose chief Bishop first invented it: our Bishops like it not, it hath been too importunate to stick (in part) unto them, but they will perfectly shake it off, as soon as they can.  
The excommunication which is Christ's ordinance hath parts or members, whereby it may be more or less full, greater or lesser; but it ought not to be coupled with a mate, a brat of man's invention. 
De paenitentia l. 1. c. 2. Munus Spiritu Sancti est officium Sacerdotis, jus autem Spiritus Sarcti in solvend ligandisque criminibusest. Ibi  Deus par jus (saith Ambrose) & solvendi esse voluit & ligandi: God would that there should be equally, as a right of losing, so a right of binding. And therefore he that hath not the right of losing (saith he) neither hath he the right of binding. And a little after, he that hath (saith he) a right to lose, he hath a right to bind. And a little after, the same Father saith, that this right (or power) of losing and binding, is permitted only to Priests (that is, Bishops and Presbyters) and thence concludes that Heretics which had no Priests could not challenge this power. Then this Holy man showeth the spring of the same power, he that receiveth the Holy Ghost (saith he) receiveth the power both of losing and of binding, as it is written, Receive the Holy Ghost, 
Jo. 20.  whose sius ye remit, etc. Therefore he that cannot lose sin hath not the Holy Ghost (that is, 
Si fictus est (Praesbyter aut Episcopus) Spiritus Sanctus Disciplinae effugiet fictum, deest saluti ejus, ministerium tamen ejus non deserit, quo per eum salutem operatur aliorum. Aug. contra epist. Parmen. l. 2. c. 11.  as making him an able minister of the New Testament, and of the spirit for the remission of sins.) Thus far Ambrose. Whereby we see that the Holy Ghost gives unto Bishops and Presbyters the power of binding by excommunication, and of losing by absolution, and that the Holy Ghost doth accompany their service to cure them that will not refuse to be healed. Away then with the excommunication that hath not the Holy Spirit to warrant it, nor the operation of the Holy Ghost to make it effectual to man's salvation. Away with the lay excommunication that makes the Holy Ghost a servant to denounce it. Away with Jeroboams Priests made of the lowest of the people, which are not of the sons of Levi, which have not received the Holy Ghost to make them able ministers of the new Testament, not of the letter but of the Spirit.  
It is the duty of the lay Christian magistrate to oversee, facilitate and corroborate the due execution of the spiritual censure of excommunication performed by Bishops principally and Presbyters subordinately: but if any ask, whether he may not excommunicate either by himself or by a substitute? although the answer is already given in the premises, yet I say, he may do so, and if he have the gift, may preach in public, and minister the holy Sacraments as lawfully as the 250 persons spoken of in the sixteenth chap. of Numbers, took censer and offered incense, 
2 Chron. c. 27.  and as lawfully as King Uzziah did the like: And as to the curing of the Leprosy of the soul, he may expect the like success as Naaman would have had as to the healing of the Leprosy of his body, 
2 King. c. 5.  if he had washed himself in any other river than Jordan, wherein the Prophet commanded him to wash himself in order to his cleansing.  
The King's Proclamation prevaileth more with many to leave their scandalous vices and to live soberly, than the Sermons of the best Bishops and Presbyters usually do with most men: Will any therefore conclude that the Proclamation of the King, is an effectual means for the infusion of Gods saving grace, as well as the preaching of the Gospel by them that are lawfully called to that sacred work? the Christian Magistrates power is versed about the externals of Christian virtues, and reacheth only accidentally and by God's indulgence sometime to the souls of men, and the life of virtues; Whereas the ministerial power of the Gospel, is primarily ordained to be a means always effectual for the infusion of the soul and life of all saving Christian virtues, if the operation of the Holy Ghost, which doth constantly work with the ministry of the Gospel (in all the offices thereof,) be not deliberately resisted. Men are saved by means instituted and sanctified by the wisdom and power of God, and not by means which only the wisdom of man judgeth to be most probable to effect our eternal salvation. We live by faith, and not by sense.  
The Independent congregations blame the reverend Bishops for some miscarriages about the heavy censure of excommunication, and exclaim both against them, and against Presbyters for being more zealous for ceremonies, then for the due execution of our function in the main offices thereof, and for the power of godliness. As for the abuse of excommunication, the blame was to have been imputed unto others, and not to the Bishops. And to say the very truth, in this matter of excommunication, the Canons of our Church are defective and require amendment, which perhaps some invincible hindrances would not permit to be done in times past. As for the misplacing of the intention of our zeal; First, as being myself a Presbyter, although one of the meanest, I must answer for myself, that although (it may be) no man will or can condemn me, yet truly I cannot justify myself before the judgement seat of Almighty God, but must make my earnest supplication for mercy to my judge. I fear lest any soul miscarry, or miscarried through my default, that his blood should be required at my hands; And therefore I tremble when I consider what account I am to give of my Stewardship. And now having knowledge and experience of the most heavy weight of this sacred vocation, and the great propensity of our nature, strengthened by manifold temptations, unto unfaithfulness therein, if I were now to enter into it, the conscience of my weakness and fear of miscarriage would cause me to decline it, but being long since entered, woe unto me if I preach not the Gospel; and I will not be discouraged having the power and mercy of God in whom I trust to be my strength and comfort. I desire all good men, as charitably to censure us, so to pray earnestly to God for us, that the great afflictions which we have suffered may be sanctified to us, that remembering the afflictions and miseries, the Wormwood and the Gall, our souls may be humbled in us, and that the extraordinary deliverance and blessings may entirely engage our hearts to serve the Lord with all diligence and faithfulness in the holy ministry, and to feed the flock of God, taking the oversight thereof not by constraint but willingly, not for filthy Lucre (a pestilence in the Church) but of a ready mind, neither being Lords over God's Heritage (so unbecoming the messengers of the Lamb of God, who washed his Disciples feet,) but being examples to the flock of sobriety, humility, meekness, Christian bounty to the poor, etc. it becomes not good men to censure us for using those Rites and Ceremonies, which we are persuaded not to be prohibited by God's Law, and both they and we do surely know to be commanded to be used by man's Law duly made, which is God's ordinance, to which we must be subject for conscience sake. We pity the tender conscience which cannot without offence either obey or disobey that ordinance. And where any of a good life is seen to have that tenderness without the malignity of pride, and labour to propagate it and divide the Church, the piety and discretion of the Bishop will use him gently, instruct him, pray for him, wait patiently for his amendment, and, unless the example of the party is seen to corrupt the sound, will hardly be drawn to go beyond a threatening, because punishment to a man of that temper, seems rather to be an addition of misery to him, then wholesome Physic meet to cure him.  
If any will attempt to be Authors of Combinations, to extort, by show of multitudes and by tumults, the alteration or abrogation of any part of the established laws Civil or Ecclesiastical, they will thereby evidently manifest themselves to be but mere pretenders to a tender conscience and power of godliness; for they that labour to extort a part, if they prevail, must have the whole in their power. And can they that attempt so great robbery love God, and the power of Godliness? By this cursed fruit we know these to be most vile Hypocrites. Let no good people be deceived by their sheep's clothing; look upon this bitter fruit, and you see that they are within but greedy and ravening Wolves: 
Contra epist. Parmen. l. 2.13. c. 15. apud Theod. balsam. c. 5. Vide Baron annal. an. 389. sect. 74. & conc. African. temp. Bonifac. & caelestin. c. 15. Conc. earth. 5. c. 6. Greg. 3. epist. 5.  God deliver us from them, and deliver them from the wickedness of their hearts and ways: but leaving these I proceed. It is very pertinent to the matter in hand to speak of reordination; but because this subject is two large, I will only say thus much, that St. Aug. and the Council of Carthage, and generally all antiquity are against reordination, as well as against rebaptisation, both truly so called. In cases of doubt whether one were truly baptised or truly ordained, it was never accounted a rebaptisation to baptise the one, or reordination to ordain the other. The ordination of a Presbyter by Presbyters without Commission from a Bishop; was always judged of dubious validity at the least. Some so ordained in foreign Churches were not rejected by the Bishops of the Church of England; I believe, because they thought that to judge of the fact of another Church in matter of no greater moment would not tend to strengthen unity between the Churches, but rather to diminish and weaken it; Or, it may be, they did not admit them, as certainly knowing them to be so ordained, but as charitably believing they had been ordained by a Bishop, for charity covereth the multitude of sins: a doubtful ordination established in all the parts of it, by the public consent and authority of a Church is far more tolerable, than the like ordination celebrated in all the parts of it, without and against the legal consent and authority of the Church. For in this last case, many are doubtful of the validity of Baptism, and the other divine ordinances administered by them that were so ordained. But the Higher power partly hath, and in convenient time will remove all such doubts to the full satisfaction of all good men. I have already exceeded my intended brevity. I will say no more, but desire the candid reader to believe that I have not maintained Episcopacy to be an institution of Christ by the Apostles, and not an institution of Christ in the Apostles (as some hold, induced by many fair probabilities) out of a spirit of contradiction; but because the sentence chosen by me seems to be subject to less difficulties, and more agreeable to the ancient pastoral and Episcopal ordinations which be received and used in the Church of England, and especially because it doth more incline and conduce to moderation. Whatsoever I have herein written, I humbly submit to the judgement and correction of my Superiors.  
Neque enim Episcopi propter nos sumus, sed propter eos quibus verbum & Sacramentum Dominicum ministramus; ac per hoc ut eorum sine scandalo gubernandorum sese necessitas tulerit, ita vel esse vel non esse debemus, quod non propter nos sed propter alios sumus. Aug contra Crescon. Grammatic. l. 2. c. 11.  
FINIS.   

Errata.  
PAg. 4. line penult. after [of the Apostles] add [before our Saviour's death] p. 10. marg. r. Jubain. p. 14. marg. r. in Esai. p. 15. l. 12. r. dicit. l. 22. r. dicit. ib. r. consecratione. l. 36. r. postea. p. 26. l. 10. deal [of] exped. p. 30. l. penult. r. saith. l. 27. r. enable [them] the. p 32. l. 13. r. whom. l. 31. r. Walafridus. p. 39 l. 31. r. Tungrens. so in marg. pro Vigrens. r. Tungrens. p, 41. l. 27. r. within ten. in marg. r. natalem Domini Toletan. the quotation ubi multorum is misplaced. p. 42. l. 9, 10. r. Paschal Wax. candle. p. 46. over against l. 24. r. in marg. Greg. Nyssen. contra Hunom. Orat. 16. p. 47. ult. r. Catechumen. p. 51. in marg. deal [Paulinus in vita Ambros.] l. 10. marg. r. c. 5. p. 53. in marg. deal [per] Socrat. p. 54. in marg. pro praecip. r. princip. p. 56. l. 8. r. Chorepiscope. p. 59 for Minister, all, r. Ministerial. p. 62. l. 20. r. 70 discip. in marg. r. Dracontium. Aug. in Psal. 44. l. ult. deal (and.) p. 63. l. 6. r. Brethren [.]— of [the] l. 13. deal [whose Successors] l. 14. r. succeed. p. 69. marg. r. paenit: after r. [profecti] in pagum.  
It may be, that, by reason of the Authors absence and some obscurity in the Copy, a few other faults may have escaped undiscerned, as misplacing some Authors cited in the Margin, or in the Figures, or in Pointing, and the like, which being small, the goodness of the Reader will easily pardon.