* 
 
 si 
 
 % 
 
 
 % 
 
 
 
 
Ts LESLIE. J 
 ■ LU k 
 
 LESLIt-.l 
 •(hi..: - \ 
 
 
 
 PKINCETON, N. J. 
 
 %. 
 
 Collection of Puritan Literature. 
 

 Smectymnuus 
 
 Redivivus. 
 
 Being an Anfwer to a Book , cntitukd 
 
 AS HUMBLE 
 
 REMONSTRANCE. 
 
 In which , 
 
 The Original of / £ r l T u R G Y \ fc difcuffed 
 D \ Episcopacy j " ulu - ullca - 
 
 And ghtdries propounded concerning both. 
 
 The P A r i t Y of Bifnops and Presbyters in Scri- 
 pture demonftrated. 
 
 The occafion of the Imparity in Antiquity 
 difcovered 
 
 The D i s p A r i t y of the Ancient and our Mo- 
 dern Bifhops manifefted. 
 
 The Antiquity of ruling Elders in the Church 
 
 vindicated. 
 The Prelatica ll Church Bounded. 
 Compcfed iy file Learned and Orthodox Dilines. 
 
 JER. 6. 16. 
 
 Tim fiith tht Lo\ dyptjkl i.'i the rvayes, and bcb$id t a-ni as^fuy tbt old nun which 
 
 is tbt WQi end vhUl ib.rcir.. 
 
 Tcrcul. tie prxfer. adv. hjercf. 
 id DwnicHm & warn, qvodprius!; ;!i u?i: id au'em cxt,.::. , % &fdfim 
 
 quod jit poskrius. 
 
 LONDOM, 
 Printed for John Rothwell, at the Fountain in Goldfmhhs- 1 
 Row in Cheap (ide. And now republifhed,i££o. 
 
 / 
 

 * ± 
 
 TO THE READER. 
 
 Good Reader., 
 
 SOlomon told us long fwce , that there is 
 no end of many books , Ecclef. 12.12. 
 Scripturiency (it feemeth)is no no veil hu- 
 mour, but abounded then , ev:n when the 
 means of transmitting knowledge was more diffi- 
 cult } if there were caufefor the complaint then, 
 there is much more now '-> fince the Prefle hath 
 helped the Penne, every one will be fcnbling, and 
 fo better boo\es are negleSied , and lie lihg a few 
 grains of Corn under an heap of Chaff e and duji : 
 nfually books are received as faftiions } the new- 
 eft, not the beft and mo (I profitable, are mofl in* v n } dd ** «*** 
 
 a • r 1 ,1 11 1 1 1 r 1 paium laborari 
 
 ejteem } in Jo much that really learned and j ober mo k& copia 
 men have been afraid to publijh their labours y v * vlonim ' mhoc 
 left they jljould divert the world from reading farioramlnovis" 
 the ufefull worlds of others that wrote ^^reeditionibus an- 
 them. I remember Dr. Altingius a terfe and m^ommdA^A j 
 fpirit , Jiood out the battery of twenty years iw-fedmeliorcscti- 
 portnnity, and would not yield to divulge any^f^Z 
 thing upon this fear. Certainly (Reader) YtfAuthorcs eftu- 
 for thy profit fometimes to lool^ bac^ and confult^ ^?^ 
 with them that fir ft laboured in the mines ofprtfat.Scripto- 
 fyowledge, and not alwaies to take up with what rml *" l9 Z M '* m 
 
 a commeth 
 
To the Reader. 
 
 commeth next to hand. In. this controverfte of 
 Difcipline many have -written , but not all with a 
 like judgement and fire ngth^which I believe hath 
 been no fmall rock of offcncc,and ftone of Hum- 
 bling to the adver fanes 5 who are hardned with 
 nothing fo much as a weak defence of the truth, 
 *Qu3cdamnoxia <tf*Auftin complaineth^ that when he was a Ma- 
 miW fcmpcr in nichee he had had too too often the viStory put 
 difputationibus into his hands by the defences of weak^ and un- 
 £hriffiani?im- m skilfull Chrijlians. This work^ which the Statio- 
 perkis: Auguft. ner hath now revived (that it may not be for got- 
 
 SjS*^ *"> and U ^ e a ^ eweI *f ter once ft cwing7&itf up 
 
 * Mr. Stephen in the Cabinet of private jiudies only) was pen* 
 
 ^tt.c*umy. ned h*f***r*H worthy Divines of great note 
 Dr. fb.roung* and fame in the Churches of Chriji ^ under the 
 m'momln W borrowed and covert name of S M E C T Y M- 
 Dr.mDiam Spur- N U II S y which wasfome matter of f corn and ex- 
 fiojrc^ ception to the adver furies y as the Papifis obje* 
 
 3ed to Calvin his printing his Inftitutions 
 under the name of Alciiinus , and toBucerhis 
 naming himfelfArctim Felinus, though all this 
 without ground and reafon 3 the affixion of the 
 name to any worh^ being a thing indifferent , for 
 there wejhonld not confider fo much the Author, 
 as the matter, and not who faid it^ but what? 
 and the affumption of another name not being 
 infamous but where it is done out ^/deceit, and 
 to another s prejudice , or out of flbame becaufe 
 *f gbih > or feare to own the truths which thy 
 
 JJ/ould 
 
— *ii*jL<L«TL*d<»_JThe!other two in Kifig£dWJi daycs. One in 
 
 To the Reader. 
 
 jhonld ejlablijb: Jfuppofe the reverend Autboun 
 were willing to lie hid under this ONOMA- 
 STICK, partly that their worh^ might not be 
 received with prejudice , the fa&ion againji 
 which they dealt > arrogating to themfelves a Mo- 
 nopoly of Learning, and condemning all others as 
 ignorants and novices not worthy to be beard', and 
 partly that they might not burden their Frontif 
 piece with a voluminous nomenclature , it not 
 being ufuall to affix fo many names at length to 
 one Treatife. 
 
 For the work^it felfit fpeahgth its ownpraife, 
 and is now once more fubje&edto thy cenfure and 
 judgement : This fecond publication of it was 
 occasioned by another book^for vindication of 
 the Miniftery by the Provinciall Afiembly of 
 London, wherein there are frequent appeals to 
 Sme&ymnuus \ though otherwife IJhould have 
 jmlged the reprinting feafonable \ for the Lord 
 hath now returned us to fuch a juncture of time, 
 wherein there is greater freedom of debate with- 
 out noyfe and vulgar prejudice '•> and certainly if 
 the quarrell ofEpifcopacy were once chared, ami 
 brought to an iffue,we Jhould not befo much in the 
 darh^ in other parts ofDifcipline, the conviSiion 
 of an errour by folid grounds being the beji way 
 to fnde out the truth \ reformations carried ow 
 with popular tumult, rather then ratiojiall con- 
 
 vi&ioi), 
 
To the RearW- 
 To the Reader. 
 
 •viftion j feldom end well, though tht judgement of 
 Sjod be to be obferved in powring contempt upon 
 thofe which are partiall in his law , yet the im- 
 provident leapes which a people are wont to 
 make upon fitch occafions, lay the foundation of a 
 lafting milchiefe. I hope that by the review of 
 thefc matters we Jhall come to know more of the 
 Lords counfeU for the ordering of his houfe , or 
 **Aa»W«f at l ea ft f h at h weighing what may be f aid on all 
 m «>«**• fides ^ we fh all learn more to * truth it in love, 
 which is the unfeined deftre of him who is 
 
 Newington, Thine in the Lord., 
 
 June 23. 1653. 
 
 Tho.Manton, 
 
— Lfcu^Uju^LiJThelother twoin King £«fW*Ji daycs. One in 
 
 Mod Honourable Lords, 
 
 And ye the Knights^Citizens^and Burgeffes of 
 the Honourable Houfe of Commons. 
 
 A Lthough we doubt not, but that book which was lately 
 
 7\ directed to your Honours, bearing the name of an Hum- 
 l \jble Bemonflrance , hath had accefle unto your prefence : 
 and is in the firft approaches of it, difcovered by your difcer- 
 ning fpirits,to be neither Humble>nor a Remonftrancc-y but a heap 
 of conhdent and ungrounded aflertions; fo that t© your Honours 
 a Reply may feem fuperfluousrYet left the Authour (hould glory 
 in our lilcnce, as a granting of die caufejwe humbly crave 
 your Honours leave to prefent^not fo much to your felves, as to 
 the world by your hands,a view of this Remonftrance;in which 
 the Authour after too large a Preface, undertakes the fupport of 
 two things, which feem to him to be threatned with danger of a 
 prefent precipice,ffo Liturgie^and the Hierarchy. 
 
 It was a conftitution of thofe admired fons of Juftice the Areo- &««< *&*$$ 
 pagi; that fuch as pleaded before them (hould plead without/? re- * v * v ^S 90 ^ 
 facing and without paffion : had your Honours made fuch a eon- P** % 
 ftitution , this Remonftrance mult have been banifhed from the 
 face of your Aflembly; for the Preface fils almoft a fourth part 
 of the book, and the reft fwels with fo many paffionate Rhetorica- 
 tions^s it is harder for us in the multitude of his words to finde 
 what his argument is that we have to anfwer , then to anfwer ic 
 when it is found. 
 
 We would not trace him in his words, but clofe immediately 
 with his arguments, did we not finde in him a fad exemplificati- 
 on of that divine Axiome , in Multitudine verborum nondeeftpec- Pa Z- 2 3» 
 catum, in the multitude ofwordsjhere wants not fm : for though the 
 Author is bold to call upon your Honours toheare the words of 
 truth and confidence^ tt how little truth there is in his great con- 
 fidence, the enfuing difcourfe (hall difcover. 
 
 His very words are confident enough, and yet as falfe as con- 
 fident \ wherein he Impropriates all hone 'ftj unto thefe his Paper s,ani 
 brands all others with the name of Libellers, and yet himfelfe finnes 
 deeply againft the rule of honefty, and lies naked tothefcourge 
 of his own cenfure. 
 
 Firft , in fetting a brand upon all writings that have lately i 
 
 A 2 i flued Pag. i. 
 
2, 
 
 ifliied from the preffe, as if they had forgotten to fpeak any other 
 language then Libellous : it feems hinafelfe had forgotten thalfome 
 things had ifTued by authority of the King and Parliament. 
 
 Secondly,in taxing (implicitely) all fuch as wil not own this 
 Remonftrance for theirs , as none of the ye ace able and wel-ajfecled 
 Sons of the Church of England. 
 3. Thirdly, in cenfuring the way of petitioning your Honours, 
 
 Tag. 2. the ancient and ordinary free way of feeking redrefle of our 
 evils, for a Tumultuary under-hand way. 
 , Fourthly, in condemning all fuch as are not fautors of this 
 
 Tag- 3. EpifcopalCaufe, as none of his Majefties good Subjects , engrof- 
 fing that praife onely to his own party, faying, The eyes of us the 
 good Subjetfs $f this whole Realmc are fixed uponyour Succejfe y &c. 
 §. Fifthly , in Impropriating to the fame party the praife of 
 
 Tag. 6. Orthodox$ag.6.a$ if to fpeak a word, or think a thought againft 
 Epifcopacy, were no leffe Herefie, then it was in former time to 
 fpeak againft the Popes fupremacy , or the monkes fat belly ; 
 whereas whether the Efifcop all part be the Orthodox , peaceable, 
 wel-ajfelled part, and his Majefties only good Subjetts , we leave to 
 your Honours to Judge, upon tke numerous informations that 
 flow in unto you from the feveral parts of this Kingdome. 
 Tag. 2. Nor can they decline your Judgement , feeing new you are 
 
 (through Gods blefling) hzppily met in a much longed for Parlia- 
 ment : but whither fo much longed for by him and his accom- 
 plices, as by thofe againft whom he whets his Style, the prayers 
 that have obtained this happy meeting, and the praifes that doe 
 attend it, will decide in that great day. 
 
 The Helena, whofe Champion this Remonftrant chiefely is, is 
 that Government which he calls Sacredy viz. that Government by 
 Arch-BifljopSyBijhopSy'DeanesyArchdeaconsy&c. which, faith he, 
 through the fides of fome miflikedperfonsfome have endeavoured to 
 wound. Mifliked Terfons ? and why nor offending perfons?why 
 not guilty perfons? when this honourable houfe hath found juft 
 caufe to charge fome of them with crimes of the higheft nature, 
 Our zeale for your Honours makes us feare, left your aflembly 
 fhouldfurTerin this word 5 as if your proceedings againft fuch 
 perfons mould be grounded upon compliance with fuch as doe 
 miflike them, rather then upon their own demerits or the Jufticc 
 of this Court. 
 
 But whatever thofe Perfon s be, the Government it felf is Sa- 
 Tag.-j. cre( j . whi^ iy t fo j j Ht con f € fii OH of all reformed Divines , derives it 
 
 Untruths. ft If from the times of the bleffed Apo files > Without any interruption* 
 
 without 
 
^r*k_lThe!other two in Kip£ Edward daycs. One in 
 
 without contradittion of any one congregation in the world unto this 
 prefent age. This is but an Epifcopall Bravado', therefore we let ic 
 pafTe, till we come to clofe and contend with him in the point ; 
 where we (hall demonftrate, that in the compafle of three lines he 
 hath packt up as many untruths , as could be fmoothly couched 
 in fo few words , as any man of common underftanding , that 
 lookes upon the face of the Government of almoft all reformed 
 Churches in the Chriftian w r orld may at firft view difcover. 
 
 But before we come to this , there are yet two things in this 
 Preface which we count not unworthy obfervation. The Firft 
 is 3 the comparifon which he makes between the two Govern- 
 ments, the Civil which with us is Monarchy: and the facred R 
 which with himisEpifcopaey. Of the firft he faith, if Antiquity p^g"' 
 may be the Kule (as he pleades it for EpifcopacyJ or if Scripture 
 fas he interprets Scripture) it is VARIABLE, and ARBITRA- 
 RY : but the other DIVINE and VN ALTER ABLE: fo that had 
 men petitioned for the altering of Monarchical! Government, 
 they had fin his Judgement^ been lefle culpable, both by Scrip- 
 ture and Antiquity , then in petitioning the alteration of the 
 Hierarchical: Had he found but any fuch paflage in any of his 
 Lewd Libellers fas his modefty isalwayes pleafed to termethemj 
 certainly if we may borrow his own phrafe, the eares of the 
 three Interefted Kingdomes,yea all the neighbour Churches, and if we 
 may fay, the whole Chriftian world, and nofmallpart beyond it , had 
 run with the loud cryes of no leffe then TreafonjCreafon. 
 
 Truth is, in his ^«t/^«iry we finde thatrfo* his uninterrupted 
 facredGovernment hath fofarre invaded the Civil, and fo yoked 
 Monarchy, even in this Kingdome,as Malmesbury reports : That 
 William Rufusopprejpd by Bifhops , perfwaded the Jewesto con- Malmsbury 
 fute them ; promifing thereupon to turne England to their Re- Iib.4. 
 Iigion,that he might be free of Bifhops. And this is fo natural an 
 effect of unalterable Epifopacy, that Fius the fourth to the Spanifo 
 EmbafTador , importuning him to permit Bifhops to be decla- 
 red by the Counctl of 'Trent to be Jure Vivino, gave this anfwer: Hift. ConciL 
 That his King knew not what he did defirej for if Bifhops mould Trid. 
 be fo declared , they would be all exempted from his Power, 
 and as independent as the Pope himfelf. 
 
 The fecond thing obfervable is the comparifon he makes be- 
 tween the late Alterations attempted in our Neighbour Church 
 by his Epifcopal faction, and that Alteration that is now juftly 
 defired by the humble Fetiti$ners to this Honourable Houfe. The 
 one being attempted by ftrangers 5 endeavoring violently to ob- 
 trude 
 
trudc Innovations upon zfetled Church and State, The other hum* 
 bly petitioned to the He ads and Princes of our State by Multitudes 
 therein almoft ruined by an Innovating Fa&ion ; yet doth not this 
 Remonftrant blufti to fay 5 ii thefe be branded, (Co he calls the 
 juft cenfures of this Honourable Houfe)/ar Incendiaries, howfhaU 
 PJi-9- f ^ e J e % oute f eux tfcape, &c. thus cunningly indeavouring either to 
 
 juftifie the former by the pra&ifc of the latter, or to render the 
 latter more odious then the former. 
 
 The attempts of thefe men whom he would thus render o- 
 dious , lie craves leave to prefent to your Honours in two 
 things, which are the fubjects of this quarrel : The Liturgy and 
 Epifcopacy ; and we humbly crave your Honours leave in both to 
 anjwer, 
 
 SECT. II. 
 
 Liturgie. I?^ 5 x ^ e Liturgy of the Church of England ( faith he) hath been 
 Jl hitherto efteemedj acred, reverently ufed by holy Martyrs, daily 
 jp^.io. frequented by devout Proteftants , as that which wore then once hath 
 
 been confirmed by the Edids of religious Princes , and your own Par- 
 liamentary ABs, &c. And hath it fo ? whence then proceed thefe 
 many Additions and Alterations? that have fo changed the face 
 and fabrick of the Liturgy , that as Dr. HaU fpakc once of the 
 pride of England: if our fore-fathers fhould revive and fee their 
 daughters walking in Cheapfide with their fannes and farthin- 
 gales, &c. they would wonder what kinde of creatures they 
 were ; and fay Nature had forgot her felf and brought forth a 
 monfter : foif thefe holy Martyrs that once fo reverently ufed 
 the Liturgy fhould revive and look for their Letany ftampt by 
 Authority of Parliament , they would be amazed, and wonde- 
 . . , , ring fay y England had forgotten her felf and brought forth, 8cc. 
 rum devolluta Martyrs ? what doe we fpeak of Martyrs, when we know Sir,that 
 eft Ecclefia Dei one of your own (a) Bifhops faid it in the hearing of many not 
 ^r fponfa Chri- fo long fince, but you may well remember it, That the Service of 
 ftiyut hdutko- x b e Church of England was nowfo dreft , that if the Pope fhould com* 
 
 SSenr«r^<fir and fo ity he WGU ^ daim %% ** b " own > hut tbat lX is m %*&& ? 
 ddcekbranda lc is ntt ^ e tnen to tne advantage of your caufe , that you tell 
 SicramenU us, it is tranflated into other languages 5 and as little ferviee have 
 cceleftUidifcipli- they done to the Church of England, who have taught onr Pray- 
 iwm, Lux mu- crs to fpeak Latine again : For if it be their Language chiefly 
 Trifyidft- d** 1 overthrows the Popes claime, takeaway that t and what 
 dan) chriftiani hinders then, but the Pope may fay, thefe are mine? 
 ^u9dAntichrij\i As for other Tranfl at ions and the great applaufe it hath obtained 
 faciunt. from forraiene Divines , which are the fumes this Remonftrant 
 
 Cypr.Ep.^ s vendi- 
 
(5) 
 
 vcnditates \ what late daycs have produced we know not$but the 
 great lights of Former ages have been farre from this applau- 
 ding : we are fure judicious Calvin faith , that in the Liturgy 
 there are fund ry Tolerabiles IneptU y which we think is no very 
 great applaufe. 
 
 To vindicate this Liturgy from fcorne fas he calls itj at home or 
 by your Honours aide to reinforce it upon the Nation, is the work of 
 his Remonftrance , for the effecting whereof he falls into an un- - 
 paraUelPd difcourfe about the Antiquity of Liturgies ; we call it *" 3 * 
 unparaMd, becaufe no man that we have feen ever drew the line 
 of Liturgy fo high as he hath done. 
 
 Concerning which , if by Liturgy this Remonftrant under- 
 ftand an Order obferved in Church aflemblies of Fraying , readings 
 and expounding the Scriptures, Adminiftring Sacraments,&e: Such 
 a Liturgy we know and doe acknowledge both Jews and Chriftians 
 haveufed. But if by Liturgy he underftand prefcribed and din- 
 ted formes of Adminiftration Compofed by fome particular men 
 in the Church 5 and impofed upon all the reft £as this he mull 
 underftand, or elfe all he faith is nothing ) we defirc and expect 
 that thofe formes, which he faith are yet extant , and ready to be 
 produced, might once appeare. 
 
 Liturgy of this former fort we finde in Juflinc Martyr and Juft. Mar. 
 TertuUian. But that there were not {uch flinted Liturgies as this Apoft.2. 
 "Remonftrant drfputes for, appeares by Tertutiian, in his ApoL Cap. Q™' Q h *' ad; 
 30. where he faith the Chriftians of thofe times did in their pub* 
 like aflemblies pray fine monitor e quia depetlore, without any Promp- 
 ter but their own hearts. And that fo it mould be,the fame Father 
 proves in his Treatife de Oratione : Sunt qtttpetantur, &c. 'There 
 are fome things to be ask^d according to the occaftons of every man ; 
 the lawfulland ordinary prayer Qthat is the Lords prayer) being laid 
 as a foundation 5 It is lawfull to build upon that foundation other 
 prayers according to every ones occaftons. And to the fame purpofe 
 St. Auftin in his 121. Ep. liberum eft-, &c.it is free to aske the 
 fame things that are defired in the Lords Prayer, aliis atque aliis 
 verbis, fometimes one way and fometimes another : And before J uft - Mar. 
 this,in that famous place oUufl.Mar.Apo.2. He,who inftruUed the ^ poft * 2 \ „ 
 feeplc, prayed according to his ability. Nor was this liberty in ^JJ^L^'k*- 
 prayer taken away, and fet and impofed formes introduced, Trt^nii. 
 untill the time that the Arian and Pelagian^ Herefies did invade 
 the Church, and then becaufe thofe Heret*cks did convey and 
 fpread their poyfon in their formes of Prayer and Hymnes , the 
 Church thought it convenient to reftraine the liberty oQjiaking 
 
 and 
 
4 
 
 i; and ufing publique forms: And firft it ordained that none fhould 
 
 pray pro ArbitriO) fed femper e<edewpreces, that none (hould ufe 
 liberty to vary in prayer, but ufe alwaies the fame forme, Cone. 
 'Concil.Laod. Laod.Can. ifr. yet this was a forme of his own compofing, as 
 Can.i3. appears by another Canon y wherein it was ordered thus : None 
 
 (hould ufe any forme, unlcfle he had firft conferred Cumfratribus 
 Cone. Carth. inflruciioribus : with the more learned of his brethren. Com* Carth. y 
 3. Can.23. Gan.23. and laftly that none fhould ufe fet prayers , but fuch as 
 were approved of in a Synode 5 which was not determined till 
 Conc.Milev.2. tne yeare 41 6, ConcMilev.i.Can. 12. And had there been any Li- 
 Can. 12. An. tur gi es f Times of the firft and moil venerable antiquity pro- 
 ducible, the great admirers cf them, and enquirers after them 
 would have prefented them to the world ere this. 
 
 We know that Bijhop Andrewes in hiszealefor Liturgies pur- 
 fued the enquiry after the Jewijh Liturgy fo far, that he thought 
 he had found it ; and one there was which he lent to Cambridge 
 to be tranflated : but there it was foon difcovered to have been 
 made long after the Jewes ceafed to be the Church of God ; and 
 fo himfelf fuppreft it, that it never faw the light under a tran- 
 flation. 
 fa^.-io. We wonder therefore what this Remonftrant meant to affirm 
 
 fo confidently,that part of the forme of prayer which was compofed 
 by sur hleffed Saviour ^ was borrowed from the formes of prayer former* 
 ly ufe d by Gods people. An opinion we never met before 5 indeed, 
 we have read that the Rabbines lince the dayes of our Saviour 
 have borrowed fome expreffions from that Prayer , and from o- 
 ther Evangelical pajfages: But we never read till now, that the 
 Lord Chrift the wifdome of the Father borrowed from the IP if dome 
 cftheRabincs expreffions to ufe in Prayer. 
 P*i* 11. And as much we wonder by what Revelation or 'tradition 
 
 (Scripture being filent in the thing) he knew , that Peter and 
 John , when they went up to the Temple to pray , their Prayer 
 was not of&fudden and extemporary conception , but of a Regular 
 prefcription. Sure we are,fome as well read in J ewifh antiquity y 
 as this Remonftrant fhewes himfelf to be , have told us that the 
 houre of Prayer was the time when the Prieft burnt Incenfe 5 and 
 the people were at their private prayers without , as appeares 
 Luke 1.9. where we read, that while Zachary the Prieft went in to 
 offer Incenfe , all the people flood with out praying in the time 
 of the Oblation. Which Prayers were fo far from being Prefcrtpt 
 Formes or Liturgies that they were not vocal but mental Prayer^ 
 as Mafter Meade tells us in his exposition upon the eighth of th* 
 Revelations. Am" 
 
 - v 
 
(7) 
 And whatever Tcter and John did, this we know , that when 
 the Publican and the Pharifee went up to the Temple to pray ("as p az i§ 
 the Apoftle did at the houre of prayer) their prayer wm not of 
 Hegular prefer iption, but of a prejent Conception, 
 
 But it this Remonftrant be in the right, concerning the Jcwim 
 Liturgies, then the Evangelical Church might better have impro- 
 ved her peace and huppineffe , then in compofmg Models of Invocation Pag, 1 1. 
 and Thanksgiving, when there is one extant and ready to be produ- 
 ct d, that was conftantly ujed by Gods people ever fince Mofes dayes, 
 and put over to the times of tbe Go/pel, and confirmed by Apoftolical 
 pratlife : or elfe great is our lout, who are fo unhappily depri- 
 ved of the beft improvement^ the Church made of her peace and hap- 
 fineffe'm the nrft 300. years: for rejecting thofe Liturgies that 
 are confefftd by the Learned to bee Spurious : we challenge this v 
 Remonftrant to produce any one Liturgie that was the iflue of ^' ^, 
 thofe times. And bkflld Conftantine was herein as unhappy as vlt ' Con '^» 
 wee, who needed not have compofed forms of prayer for his ^^P' 1 ^ 
 Guard to uie upon the Lords day, but might and would have 
 taken them out of former Li turgies,if there had been any; And 
 canye with patience thinl^th at any ingenuous Chriftian Jhould be fo 
 transported , as upon fuch weak and un proved premifes to build ? a & n » 
 fuch a Confident conclufi n, as this Remonftrant doth ? and in that 
 Conclufon forget the ftate of the controverfie, Hiding from the 
 queftton of a prefer i bed and impofid Liturgy to an arbitrary book 
 ofprayer. 
 
 In his Rhetorical Encomium of conceived prayer we ftiall more 
 willingly bear a part with him, then they whofe caufe he pleads; 
 for had that been in their hearts, which is in this book : to hate, 
 to be guilty ofpowring water upon the Spirit , and gladly to adde oyle 
 ratter ;fo many learned, able, Confcientious Preachers had not Fa & % l2, 
 been molefted and fufpended, for letting the conf} ant flames 
 of their fixed conceptions mount ufrfrom the altar of their zealous 
 heart unto the throne of grace : nor hcid there been fo many 
 advantages watched from fome flops and (cemmg fohcifmes in 
 fome mens prayers, toblafpheme the fpirit of Prayer, which though 
 now confeft to be fo far from being offenfive, that they are as plea- P.rg. 12. 
 fmgMufickin the eares of the Almighty : yet time hath been, when 
 they have founded as meer Batt.togies 5 nay no better then nicer 
 Blajphemies in the eares of fome Bifhops. 
 
 And if this conceived prayer be not to be oppofed in another, ?*£•!& 
 by any man that hath found the true operation of this grace in 
 himfelf: with diatfpirit then are thofe pofleft, that have not 
 
 £ onely 
 
C«). 
 
 onely thus raged with their tongues againft this way of prayer, 
 but byfealingupthcmouthes of Minifters for praying thus in 
 publike, and impofing penances upon private Chriftians for 
 praying thus in their families ; and compelling them to abjure 
 this pra&ife,have endeavoured with raging violence to banifh 
 this divine ordinance from our Churches and dwellings, and 
 V Corbet P roteft in °P cn Court , it was fitter for Amflerdam then for our 
 
 MNeveL CnLlrchcs - 
 
 B t howfoever this applaufe of conceived prayer may feem to 
 be Cordial , yet he makes it but a vantage ground to lift up pub- 
 like formes offitcrcd Church Liturgy (as he calls it) the higher,that 
 they may have the greater honour, that by the power of your autho- 
 rity they be reinforced, which work there would have been no 
 need to call your Honours to, had not Epifcopal zeal broke forth 
 into fuch flames of indignation againft conceived prayers , that 
 
 JPdg.13, we have morejuftcaufe to implore thepropitious aide ohhc fame 
 Authority to re-eft ablijh the Liberty of this , then they to re-in force 
 theneceffity of that. 
 
 Yet there are two fpecious Arguments which this Remon- 
 ftrant brings to perfwade this defircd re-inforcement * the Ori- 
 ginal and Confirmation of our Liturgy. 
 
 For the fii ft 3 he tels your Honours , it vjzsfeletled out of ancient 
 
 ?tfg. 13. Models not Rowan but Chriftian, contrived by the holy Martyrs 
 an dConfeffors of the bleffed reformation of Religion ; where we be- 
 feech your Honours to confider how we may truft thefe men,who 
 fometimes fpeaking and writing of the Roman Church > pro- 
 claime it a true Church ofChrift, and yet here Roman and Chrifti- 
 an ftand in oppofition : fometimes they tell men 3 their Liturgy 
 is wholly taken out of the Romane Miffal, onely with fome little 
 alteration : and here they would perfwade your Honours there 
 is nothing Romane in it. But it is wholly fele&ed out of pure 
 Ancient Models, as the ^uintefitUte of them all. Whereas alas the 
 original of it, is published to the world, in 7 that Proclamation 
 q{ Edward the Ex t. 
 
 And though here they plcafe to ftile the Compofer s of it, holy 
 Martyrs and contrivers of the bhfied Reformation : yet there are of 
 the Tribe for whjm he pleads, not a few that have called them Trai- 
 tors rather then Martyrs , and Deformers rather then Reformers of 
 our Religion. 
 £J His other Argument for the Liturgy is taken from that jupply 
 
 of ftrengtb it hath received from the recommendation offoure moft Re- 
 ligions Frinces and jour own parliamentary eftablifhments : and more 
 
 efpeciaUy 
 
tfpeciaVy from the T reclamation of King James cf 'famous fnemoryz 
 the validity of which pica, your Honours are bell able to judge, 
 and therefore we leave it at your Bar ; yet thefe two things we 
 know : firft,that this forme was never ejiabli/hed to be fo punctu- 
 ally obfervedy fo rigor ouflyprefied) to the cafting out of all that fcru pie 
 it> w any thing in it (as many ot his Majdties Subjects now doe) 
 to the QalmoJiJ juftl i ng out of the preaching of the Word and Con- 
 ceived Prayer altogether. 
 
 And fecondly,as fure we are, that your Honours think neither 
 your own Lawes , nor the Proclamation of that moft famous and 
 ever udnnred Prince ^ to be as unalterable as the Lawes of the 
 Medes ard Pe)fians. 
 
 And now having briefly fhewed, that Liturgies are not of that 
 antiquity that this Kemonftrant pretends, but that come ved prayer 
 was in nfe in the Church of God before Liturgies y and is justified 
 fro<n thiir own mouther and not to btfonnd fault with by any but a 
 gracelfieman : and having likewife (hewed that our Liturgy wot 
 taken out of Models, not oncly Chriftian but Romane , and had 
 fince the firft compiling of it fuffered alteration to the w rfe ; and 
 though eftabhjhed by Lan\ and confirmed by Proclamation, was 
 never intend d to the juftling out, either of preaching or concei- 
 ved prayer 5 thefe things declared , we humbly crave your Ho- 
 nours leave to propound thefe two Queries. 
 
 QUERE. I- 
 
 Whether it be not fit to conlidcr of the alteration of the pre- 
 fent Liturgy. 
 
 Firft, oecaufe it fymbolizeth fo much with the Popifh MaflTe, \ 
 as that the Pope himklf was willing to have it ufed, if he might 
 but confirme it. 
 
 It was made and compofed into this frame, on purpofe to Z 
 
 [bring the Papifts to our Churches, which we finde to be with fo 
 little fucafTe, as that it hath rather brought many of us to them., 
 then any of them to us, and hath loft many of ours from us. 
 
 Becaufe many things therein contained are (tumbling blocks 2 
 
 before the feet of many : fuch as thefe, the clogging ic with 
 Ceremonies, and the often and impertinent reiterating of the 
 Lords Prayer,the ill tranflation of the Pfalmes, and other Scrip- 
 tures, the many phrafes in the very prayers, which are liable to 
 juftexa prion. And whereas the Minifter by the Scripture is 
 the peoples mouth to God, this book prefcribes Refponfories to 
 be laid by the people, forac of which are unfutable to what the 
 JVlinifter pronounceth, fome of them feem to favour of Tautolo- 
 
 B2 gy> 
 
gy, fomeare madetobefoeffential to the prayer , as that all 
 
 which the Minifter faith , is no prayer without them 5 as in the 
 
 Let any. 
 
 - Bccaufe it is fo much Idolized, as that it is accounted the only 
 
 worfhip of God in England, and is now made the upholder of a 
 
 non-preaching Miniftry, and is cryed up to that height , as that 
 
 rh b0t Iff " ft f° me are not aftumecl t0 &y 5 tnat tnc wit of me " and Angels 
 
 Sen. cannot mend k : and that ic is a rufficient difcharge of the Mi- 
 
 * nifters duty to read this Book. 
 
 There are fuch multitudes of people , that diftafte this book, 
 that unleffe it be altered, there is no hope of any mutual agree- 
 ment between Gods Minifters and their people. 
 •* There is fuch a vaft difference between it, and the Liturgies of 
 
 all other reformed Churches* as that it keeepes them at a di- 
 ftance from us, and us from full Communion with them. 
 
 QtlEREII. 
 
 Wh ether the firft reformers of Religion did ever intend the ufe 
 of a Liturgy further, then to be an help, in the want, or to the 
 weakneffeof a Minifter. 
 
 * All other reformed Churches, though they ufe Liturgies, yet 
 doe no binde their Minifters to the ufe of them. 
 
 2 A Rubrick in King Edwards book left it unto the difcretron 
 
 of the Minifter, what and how much to read, when there was a 
 Sermon. 
 £ The Homilies which are appointed to be read, are left free ei- 
 
 ther to be read or not, by preaching Minifters; and why^iot then 
 theLiturgyMpecially confidering that the ability to offer up the 
 peoples wants to God in prayer is part of the Minifterial office, 
 as well as preaching. And if it can be thought no lefTe then fa- 
 criledge to rob the people of the Minifters gift in preaching, 
 and to ty e them to Homilies, it can be no leffe, to deprive them 
 of their gift in prayer. 
 
 The ground of the firft binding of it upon all to ufe , was not 
 
 ^ to tye godly men from exercifing their gift in prayer 5 but the 
 
 old Popifh Priefts , that by a feeming returne to our Religion 
 did through indulgence retaine their places , from returning to 
 theoldMafle. 
 
 ^ That which makes many refufe to be prefent at our Church 
 
 fervice, is not onely the Liturgy it felf, but the impofingofic 
 
 upon Minifters. And we finde no way to recover our people to a 
 
 Hinted prayer, but by leaving it free to ufe or not to ufe. 
 
 Oh If it be objected p that this will breed divisions and disturban- 
 
 ces 
 

 
 ces in Churches, unleffc there be a uniformity, and that there aie 
 many unable. 
 
 It hath not bred any difturbance in other reformed Churches. Anf. 
 
 Why fhould the free liberty of ufing or not ufing a Liturgy, 2 
 
 breed more confulion then the free liberty of reading or not rea- 
 ding Homilies? efpccially when Minifters (hall teach people, not 
 to condemne one another in things indifferent. 
 
 If there be a care taken in thole that have the power to make ± 
 
 Minifters, to choofe men gifted as well for prayer as preaching, 
 therecannot be conceived how any inconvenience fhould fol- 
 low. Or if afterwards it fhould appeare, that any Minifter fhould 
 prove infufficient to difcharge the duty of prayer in a conceived 
 way, it may beimpofed on him as a punifhment,to life £et forms 
 and no other. But why any Minifter that hath the gift of pray er, 
 in an abundant meafure, as well as of preaching, fhould be hin- 
 dered from exercifing his gift well, becaufe another ufeth it ill, 
 is a new Divinity never heard of in Gods Church, till Bifhop 
 Wrens dayes , who forbad all ufe of conceived prayer in the 
 Church. 
 
 SECT. III. 
 
 WE come now with your Honours favour , to the fecond 
 point difputed in this Remonftrance , Epifcopacy it felfe, 
 againft which, whatfoever hath been either fpok en or written 
 by any, either learned Divines, or well-reformed Churches (as hisp^. jr> # 
 confeience knows, there are of both that have Writ againft it) is 
 Taxed by him as no other then the unjuft Clamors either of weak 
 orfadwM perfons. Sure the man thinkes he hath obtained aMo- 
 nopoly of learning, and all Knowledge is lockt up in his bofome \-^ a J7 
 and not onely Knowledge but p iety and peaceablenefle too; for 
 all that are not of his opinion, muft fuffer either as weak or 
 factious, if he may be their Judge. We know not what this Ar- 
 rogancy might attempt to faften upon your Honours, fhould the 
 bowels of your companion be enlarged, to weigh in the Bal lance 
 ofyourwifedomes, the multitude of Humble petitions , pre fen ted 
 to you from feveral parts of this Kingdome, that hath long 
 groaned under the Iron and Infupportable yoake ofthhEpifco- 
 pal Government^ which yet we doubt not, but y out Honours will 
 pleafe to take into your prudent and pious confideration : Efpe- 
 cially knowing it is their continual pra&ife to loade with the 
 odious names of Faftion all that juftly complaine of their unjuji 
 opfrejpQH* 
 
 In 
 
a 
 
 fa*. 17. ltihis addrefie to his defence of Epifcopacy, he makes an woh 
 
 happy conftftion that he is confounded in himfelfe. Your Honours 
 may in this believe him $ for he that reades this remonftrance, 
 
 as C0U1G not rail uuu\ luc rcu ui any , vuLjccj-Lvrijsunucci, man : 
 
 1 which though we doubt not bat your Honours have deicryeijyct 
 
 O^'of thefe becaufc they are hid from an errant and unobferving eye , un- 
 Sonnesofthe der the Embroyderies of a (ilken Language, we Humbly crave 
 Church of your Honours leave to put them one by one upon the file, that 
 England t ^ e WO rld may tee what credit is to be given to the bold allertH 
 whofe meffen- ons of thiscon fidentRemonftrant. 
 
 roontont is, Firft, in his fecond page, he dubs his book * the faithful mef- 
 was he who fenger of ati(&y he peaceable a nd right affected fozs of the Church of 
 fworebythe £ n nland : which words (beiides thatunchriftian T^heta , which 
 Eternal God, ag ^ e a j reac jy obferved, they fet upon all that are not of his par- 
 the death of tv carry in the bowels of them a notorious falfity and comra- 
 thofe that did dittion to the phrafe of the book % for how could this book be 
 appeareto the mtfllnger of all hit own party in England , when it is not to 
 move againft be imagined, that all could know of the coming forth of this 
 * f E § ?fcoracy-, book before it was publilhed r and how can that book crave ad- 
 andUthertftmittancein all their names, th.it fpeakes in the lingular number, 
 of thefe Milli- and as in the perfon of one man aim eft tht whole book thorow. 
 ons mentio- g ut * lt may be fame will fay, this is but a fmall flp^ well be it 
 ned pag^ 2. ^ . ^ j n t \ ie f cve nsh page he layes it on in four lines, aflerring 
 (kndfare'fo" thefe four things : Firft, thitEpifcop all Government , ( that very 
 punctually fame Epifcbpal Government, which fome hefahhfeeke to wov.ndy 
 calculated p. t h a t is Government by Diocefan Bifhops ) derives it i elf from the 
 41. be of -his Ap {U es timesjwhich though we (hall <rvv )*J more fully confute 
 
 iptnt , they ^ Q0 ^ ^ y Ct lve cannot here but rank it among his notorious : 
 
 ot^very 3 peace- for how could there be fuch Government of a DiocefTe by a Bi- 
 able & right- (hop derived from the Apoftles times, when in the Apoftles times 
 afte&ed men. t | icre were no Bilhops diftinct from Presbyters, as we (hall fhew? 
 2 and if the re had been Bifhops, yet they were no Diocefans; for 
 
 ¥ a & 7' it was a hundred yearcs after Chrift, or as molt agree 260. before 
 
 Evar'ifxm. Pariflies were diftinguifhed, and there mu ft be a diftin&ion of 
 100. Pariflies before there could be an union of them into Dioaflcs. 
 
 "Dionyfm. . Secondly, it is by thejoynt confejfion of all reformed Divines gran' 
 260. ted, that this] "acred Government is derived from the Apoftles : What 
 
 Some fay all reformed Divines ? was Calvin , Beza, Junius , &c. of that 
 267. as fuL minde 1 Are the reformed Churches of France^ Scotland, Nether- 
 Vng. landsy of that Judgement r we fhall fliew anon that there is no 
 
 Pag- i?^4' more 
 
fi3) 
 
 more truth in this Aflertion then if he had faid with Anaxagor^ 
 fnow is black, or with Copernicus , the Earth moves, and the 
 Heavens ftandftil. 
 
 Thirdly, he faith this Government hath continued without any % 
 
 interruption : What doth he meane, at Rome 1 for we reade in fome 
 places of the world this Government was never known for many 
 yeares together : as in Scotland , we read that in Ancient times 
 the Scots were inftrutted in the Chriftian faith by Prieftsand J hnMai r 
 Monkes, and were without Bifhops 290. yeares : yea to come to fo.Hift. de 
 England, we would delire to know of this Remonftrant whether g e ft t g co ^ 
 God had a Church in England in QJtfaries dayes or no ? and if Cap. 2. 
 fo, who were then the Bifhops of this Church , for fome there 
 muft be, if it be true that this man faith , this Government hath 
 continued without any interruption unto this day , and Bifhops 
 then we know not where to finde but in the line of Popifh fuc- 
 ceflion. ' 
 
 Fourthly, he faith it hath thus continued without the contra- 
 diction of any one Congregation in the Chriftian world. It fcemes he 
 hath forgotten, what their own darling Heylin hath written of 
 the people ofBifcay in Spaine , that they admit of no Bifhops to 
 come among them 5 for when Ferdinand the Catholike came in 
 progrefle accompanied among others with the Bifliop otFatnpe- tieylins 
 lone^ the people rofe up in Armes, drove back the Bifhop , and ga- G£0g./>.55* 
 theringupall the duft which they thought he hadtrodeon, 
 flung it into the Sea. 
 
 Which ftory had it been recorded onely by him , would have Gener.Hift. 
 been of lighter Credit. But we reade the fame in the SpaninV/Sp tf "*^ 22 
 Chronicle, who faith more then the Doftor : for he tcls us that 
 the People threw that duft that the Bifhop or his Mule had trode 
 on, into the Sea with Curfes and Imprecations : which certainly 
 faith he was not done without fome Myftery , thofe people not 
 being voide of Religion, but fuperftltioufly devout as the reft of 
 the Spaniards are:fo that there is one Congregation in the Chri- 
 ftian world in which this Government hath met with contra- 
 diction. 
 
 And arenot theFrench, ScottiJb y and Belgick Churches worthy 
 to be counted Chriftian Congregations ? and who knowes not 
 that amongftthefc this Government hath met not onely with 
 verbal but reall contradiction ? 
 
 Yet he cannot leave his-«--- : But within two pages is at it a- - 
 
 gaine ; and tcls m of an unqueftionable clearenefle wherein it hath p 
 been from the ApoftUs derived to us : how unqueftionable ? when *' "* 
 
 the 
 
C»4J 
 
 the many volumes Written about it, witnefli to the World, and 
 to his confeience^ it hath been as much queftioned as any point 
 Calmoft)in our Religion. 
 
 7 And that afiertion of his that tels us that the people of God 
 had a forme of pray er as ancient as Mofes , which was conftantly 
 praclifed to the Afoflles dayes y and by the Apoftles , &c. though we 
 have (hewed how bold and falfe this aiTertioh is, yet we mention 
 it here as deferving to be put into the Catalogue. 
 
 8 And that he may not fecm Contrt mentem ire y but to be of the 
 fag. 18. fameminde ftill,f. 18. hefaith,Epifcopal Government hath conti- 
 nued in this Jjland ever fince the fir ft plantation of the Gofpel without 
 contradiction. Had he taken a lefte fpace of time , and faid but 
 fince the refufcitaiion of the Gofpel : we can prove it to him and 
 fhal] 5 that fince the reformation , Epifcopacy hath been more 
 contradicted , then ever the Papacy was before the extirpation 
 
 z of it. - 
 
 p Yet Mill the man runs on , thinking to get credit to his un- 
 
 truths by their multiplications ; for pag.n. he faith ; Certtinly, 
 except allHiftories , all Authors faile m y nothing can he more certaine 
 then this truth ; Os Durum I Nothing more certaine / what is it 
 not more certain that there is a God ? is it not more certain that 
 Chrift is God and man ? is it not more certain that Chrift is the 
 only Saviour of the world?Nothing more certain/ muft this then 
 be an Article of our Creed, the corner ftone of our Religion>muft 
 this be of neceility to Salvation ? Nothing more certain / O 
 that men fhould not onely forget themfelves , butGodalfo: 
 and in their zeale for their own Honour utter words bordering 
 upon Blifphemy. 
 
 Indignation will not fuffer us to profecute thefe fallities of 
 his any further ; we will leave this difpleafing fervice, onely 
 Tag. 18. retorting the words of this Remonftrant upon himfelf. Surely 
 could he loo\with our eyes for any eyes that were not partial ) he 
 would fee caufe to he throughly afhamed of thefe his grofle injurious 
 mfcarriageS) and fhould be forced to confeffejhat never good caufe(if 
 caufe be good) had more reafon to complains of afinful profecution . 
 
 SECT. IV. 
 
 WE will now come with your Honours patience, to weigh 
 whether there be any more flrcngth in his arguments, 
 then there is truth in his aflertions. 
 
 His Plea for Epifcopacy confifts of two parts. In the firft he 
 
 brings 
 
brings arguments for the fupporting of it. In thefecond he un- 
 dertakes to anfwer the objections that may be made againft it. 
 
 Hisfirft argument for it, is couched in thefe words ; Were this 
 Ordinance meerly Humane or Ecclefiaftical , if there c,uld no more 
 be [aid for i^ but that it is exceeding Ancient > of more then 15, huh- 
 dred years, &c. The ftrength of which argument lies in this, 
 that they have been in peaceable pofleflion of this government 
 fifteen hundered years and upwards 5 and in this Ifland ever fince 
 the Gofpel, without contradiction. 
 
 In which words he fpeaks two things which deferve juit cen- 
 fure. Firft, that the Hierarchical Government hath continued 
 for fifteen hundred years ; therefore fhould not now be altered; 
 which may well be called., as Hieromm another Cafe, Argumen- 
 turn Galeatum, an Argument calculated for the Meridian of Epifco*- 
 pacy, and may indifferently ferve for all Religions in the World : For 
 thus the Jews might have pleaded againft Chrift the Antiquity 
 of more then fo many hundred years ; and thus the Heathens 
 did plead againft the Chriftian Religion, which Juftin Martyr 
 in his Apology anfwers. And by this Argument the Pope lies as 
 faft rivetted in his chayre at R.ome, as ours in theirs: whofe 
 Plea for Antiquity runs parallel with theirs. It is a good obfer- 
 vationofCjpi/ra, thatChriftfaid, Egofumvia, Veritas & vita-? 
 not Egofum confuetudo ; and * that Confuetudofme ver irate eft ve- 
 tuft as err or if, Chrift is Truth, and not Cuftomej andGuftome 
 withou Truth, is a mouldy error : and as Sir Francis Bacon * Fruftra con- 
 faith, Antiquity without Truth 9 is a Cypher without a Figure. fuetudinem no- 
 
 Yet had this b Remonftrant been as well verfed in Antiquity bis °PP omnt > 
 as he would bear the world in hand he hath, he might have^/°f M ^* 
 found Learned Ancients affirming, there was a Time when the rimeZtlnrf 
 Church was n ot governed by Bifhops, but by Presbyters. And fn in fpiritudli- 
 when by Bifhops, he might further hj^e feen more affinity be- bus ftquendum, 
 tween our Bifhops and the Pope of Rome, then between ^9.^ in melius 
 Primitive Bifhops and them. And that as King James of famous ^c tt^Z*' 
 memory, faidof the Religion of England, that it differed no ZutuTcw 
 more from Rome, then Rome did from what it was at firft 5 may Ep. 73. 
 astrulybefaid of Bifhops, that we differ no more from them Htiswelob- 
 
 then they do from what Bifhops were, when firft they were rai- ^ erved b y Ger ~ 
 
 y hard, that a 
 
 ApoflolicZ, that is, the JJifhop that is the fame with a Presbyter, is of fifteen huXcd^L 
 fending; but a B.fhop Vbraft ?ont',fi«a, that is, a diftin ft order fupedour to a p'el? 
 byter, inverted with fole power of Ordination and Iurifditfion , is bat a Novell In 
 
 C 
 
 Ud 
 
fed unto this eminency : which difference we fhallfhew in our 
 enfuing Difcourfe, to be fo great, that as he faid of Rome, he 
 did Romam in Roma quxrere, he fought Rome in Rome ; fo wee 
 Epifcopatum inEpifcopatu, may go feck for a Bifnop am:ng all our 
 Bijhops. 
 
 And whereas in his application of this Argument to the Ei- 
 fhops of this Nation, he iaith, It hath continued in thti Iftand e- 
 verfmce the firft plantation of the Gojpel , without contradiction-, 
 Tv. 19. which is his Second in this Argument ; How falfe this is,we have 
 
 declared already ; and we all know, and himfclfe cannot but 
 know, that there is no one thing fince the reformation, that 
 hath met with fo much Contra dill ion. as Epifcopacy hath done; 
 witnefs the fcveral Books written in the Reigns of our feverai 
 Princes, and the many Petitions exhibited to our feverai Partia* 
 mentS) and the many fpeeches made therein againg Epifcopal Go- 
 vernment : many of which are yet extant. 
 Pag. 19. - As for that fupply of AcceiTory ftrength, which he begs to this 
 
 * W vfi| C ^^ Argument,from the light of nature, and the rules of juft policy, which 
 ofEpil^acy f faith he) teacheth us noteafilj to give way to the change of thofe 
 by the Lwcs things which long ufe and many * Laws have firmly efiablijhed, as 
 is, and upon Necejfary and Beneficial ; it is evident, that thofe things which 
 what ground- CQ f ormcr Ages have fecmed Necefiary and Beneficial, may to fuc- 
 ^[rEj^cecding Generations, prove not Necefiary but Noxious, not Bene- 
 Cook informes ficial,hut Burthenfome 5 And then the fame light of nature, and 
 us, who re- t he fame juft policy, that did at the firft command the eftabliuV 
 ports, That in mcnt f them, may and will perfwade their Aholifhment \ if not, 
 an Act of Par- ^.^ our p ar li ame nts muft never Repeale any of their former 
 doT HtCcrOh Afts (which yet they have juftly and wifely done) or elfe in fo 
 in the 2$.year doing mull run Counter to the light of nature, and the Rules of 
 o[Edw. i-'rt^juft policy ; which to think were an impiety to be punifhed by 
 
 church of England was founded in theftate of Prelacy within the Realm of England,by th* 
 King and his Pregenirors , &c. for them to inform the people in the Law of God, and to 
 keep hofpicality, and give alntes,and do other works of charity. And the faid Kings in times 
 oaft were wont to have their advice and counfel for the fafe- guard of the Realme,when they 
 had need offuch Prelates and Clerks fo advanced. Cookde jure Regis Ecclefiajljco. But whe- 
 ther Bifliops have obferved the Orders of their firft foundation, &c. 
 
 SECT. V. 
 
 Tag. i>. 20. ?TpHe Second Argument for the defence of Epifcopal Govern- 
 
 X mcnt, is from the Pedigree of this holy Callings which he dt- 
 
 xives from noleS then &n Apoftoltcal, and in that right divine infii- 
 
 J tution 
 
V */ J 
 
 ta\\on\ and affayes to prove it from the pra&ice of the Apcjftfes 
 and as he faith, the clear pr aft ice of the ir Succejfors , continued i y 
 Chrifts Church to this very day : And to this Argument he fo nuch 
 confides,that he concludes it with thisTrimnpbantEpipbotiemaJVhjt Pag-. 21 
 fcruple can remain in any ingenuous beart ? And detenu in s, if any con- 
 tinue jet unfatisfied, it is in defpigbt of reafon^ and all evidence of Mi* 
 Jlory y and bvcaujebe wilfully Jhun his eyes with apurpoje not to fee the 
 light. Bona verba. 
 
 By your favour Sir, we will tell you notwithflanding thefup- 
 pofed ftrength cf your argumentation, there is one fcruple yet re- 
 maining; and if you would know upon what ground,} t is this^be- 
 caufewe find in Scripture f which by your own confeflion is i- P>*i 
 ginal Authority ) thatBifhops and Presbyters were Originally the 
 fame, though afterwards they came to be diftinguifhed : and in 
 procefs of time, Epifcopacy did fwallowupall the honor and pow- 
 er of the Presbytery , as Pharaoh's lean Kine did the fat. 
 
 Their Identity is difcernable ; firft, from the fame names given 
 unto both : fecondly, from the fame office defigned unto both in 
 Scripture. As for the names, are not the fame names given unto 
 both in Sacred Writ > Let the fifth, fixth, and feventh verfes of the 
 firft Chapter to Tzta* teftifie ; in the fifth verfe, the Apoftle (hews 
 that he left Hitus in Creet to ordain Elders in every City t, in the 
 iixth verfe, he gives a delineation of the perfons that are capable 
 of finch Ordination ; and in the feventh, the Reafon, why the per- 
 fon to be ordained, muft be fo qualified : for a Bifhop ^ &c. Now if 
 the Eifhop and Elder be not here the fame,but names of diftinct of- 
 fice and order, the Apoftlcs reafon rendred in the feventh verfe of 
 his direction in the fifth and j fixth verfes, is ("with reverence be it 
 fpokenjinconfequential, and his demand unjuft. If a Chancellor 
 in cne of the tlniverfities fhould give order to his Vice- Chancellor 
 to admit none to the degree of Batchelour in Arts,but fuch as were 
 able to preach, or keep a Divinity Mk : For Batcbelours in Divinity 
 tnuft be jo : what reafon or equity were in this > So if Paul leaving 
 Ziritf as his Loam tenens, as it were in Creet for a feafon, fhould 
 give order to him not to admit any to be an Elder but one thus 
 and thus qualified, becaufe a Bifhop mud be fo : had a Bifhop 
 been an Order or Calling diftinft from,or fuperior to a Presbyter, 
 and not the fame, this had been no more rational or equal then 
 the former : therefore under the name of Bifhop in the feventh 
 verfe the Apoftle intends the Elder mentioned in the fifth verfe. 1 
 Confonant to this is the Language of the fame Apoftle, A&s. 20. v. 
 17. i8.whcre fuch as inij.verfe he calls n-ffrfuKpf, Elder s^m the 18. 
 he calls for kqtm, is ordinary Englifh, Bifhaps 9 though our Tranf- 
 
 G 2 latior* 
 
ktion there/we know not for what reafon) reads ltOverfeirsmcx 
 fo rendring the word in any other Text. 
 And though thisRcmonftrant undertakes to fhew a clear and re- 
 ceived diftin&ion of Bifhops, Presbyters, & Deacons,*** three diftmff 
 fub ordinate Casings in Gods Church, with an evident jpecification of 
 the duty & charge belonging to each of them, or elje let this claimed Hie- 
 rarchy be for ever hooted out of the Church : Yet let us tell him, that 
 we never find in Scripture thefe three Orders, Bijhops, Presbyters^ 
 andVeaconSy mentioned together : but onely Bijhops and Dea- 
 consy as VhiL I. and i . Ti m. Nor do we find in Scripture any Ordi* 
 nation to the office of a Bifhop, differing from thcOrdinatitn of aa 
 Elder: Nor do we find in Scripture, the fpecification of any Du- 
 ty charged upon a Bifhop, that Elders are fecluded from : Nor a- 
 ny qualification required in a Bifhop, that is not requisite in every 
 presbyter j fome of which, if not all,wouId be foundiwere they not 
 the fame. 
 
 But if this Kemonftrant think to help himfelfe by taking Sanftu- 
 
 ■ary in Antiquity ("though we would gladly reft in Scripture, the 
 
 San&uary oftheLordJ yet we will follow him thither, aud there 
 
 fhew him that Hierome from the Scriptures proves more then oner 3 
 
 Presbyters and Bifhops to be the fame. And Chryfoftome in Philip, i. 
 
 Hierony. Ep.ad ft om il. 2. with his admirer 'theophilaB in P&i/zp.i. affirms that while 
 
 Evsg. fy ad t k e Apoftles lived, the names of Bifhops and Vresbyters were not di- 
 
 0cea ' -ftinguiflicd .: and not onely while the Apoftles lived, but in after 
 
 ages. Doth not Irentus ufe the name of Bifhops and Presbyters 
 
 Iren rfrfwr. ^ ic , y y iT& ^ j n a p ro mifcuous fenfe> Are not AnicetM^ius,Hyginus 6 
 
 42 ' 44 Telefphorus, SixM, whom the Papifts call Bifhops, and the Popes 
 
 prcdeceffors, termed by Eufebius Presbyters/ Nor was itftrange 
 
 Hip.Lib.s. in the Primitive times to hear Bifhops called Presbyters, when 
 
 Cap* 2$.' Presbyters writing to their Bifhop have called him Frater. So 
 
 Cyprian (Epift.26.1n the beginning,) is ftilcd by his Presbyters, 
 
 Deacons and Conftflbrs 5 nor was that holy Martyr offended with 
 
 that title, nor they condemned of infolency thatufed it. 
 
 Eut what fhou Id we burthen your patience with more teftimo- 
 
 nies, when the evidence of this truth hath fhined with fo ftrong 
 
 a beam that even our Adverfanes have ftooped to it, and confei- 
 
 BeHarm. de fed that their Names were the fame in the Apoftles time > But yet 
 
 cleric. Lib. f a y they, the Offices were diftinft. 
 
 1 . cay. 1 $. j^ow here we would gladly know, what thefe men make the di- 
 
 ftinft Office of a Bifhop. % . ; \i . ; 
 
 Is it to edifie the Church by Word and Sacrament > is it to or- 
 dain others to that work > is it to rule, to -govern, by admonition 
 and other cenfures? if any oftMTe, if all thefe make up the pro- 
 - - - - pre 
 
09) 
 
 feu worke of a Bifhop ; We can prove from Scripture that all thefe 1 *tt f h ter '* 
 belong unto the Presbytery , which is no more then was granted &' E f^ copts 
 by a Gouncel. jf^Uw 
 
 Dei commijfa eft: Pr&funtenim EccleftA Chrifti: in Confecratione Dominici corporis fy fanguinis % confor- 
 tes funt cum Epifcopis: & fimiliter in Dottrina Populorum & in officio pr&dkandi: acfolum propter <*k- 
 tcritatetn^fummo Sacerdoti Cleric&rum Ordinatio refervata eft: Cencil. Aquifgran. primum, Can. 8. 
 
 Euangelium tnbuit his quiprtfunt Ecclt{i& Mandatum docendi Evangelic remittendipeccata^admi- 
 niflrandi Sacrarnenta: pr^terea jurifdi^fionem } videlicet Mandatum Excommunicandieos quorum nota. 
 funt criminal Refipifcentesrurjuui abfolvendi : Ac Omnium Cohfeficne, etiam adverfariorum liquet, 
 btnepotejfatem ]irre Divi'no communem effe Omnibus qui -pr&funt Eccleft*, five Paftoresvocentur \ftve 
 Preshyteri, Sive Epijccpi. Scriptum Philip.Melanch. in conventu Smaluld. Anno. 1540. apr&cipuis 
 illirum Ecc'eftarum Volhribus comwuni Confenfu comprobitn depoteftate & ]ur?fdi#ione Epifcoporutn o 
 
 For the firft , Edifying of the Church by word and Sacraments* 1 
 
 though we feare they will fome of them at leait fcarce own this as 
 their proper worke (for fome have been cited into the High Commiffx- 
 fion for iaying,it belongs to themj yet Sir we are fure , Scripture 
 makes it apart, a chiefe of the Epif copal office ; for fo in the 1 Pet. imtrwicZu* 
 5. 2. they are faid to doe the work of a Bifhop, when they do feed voi paint*. 
 the flock of God. And this is fuch a work as we hope their Lord* 
 jhips will give the poor Presbyters leave to fhare with them in : or 
 if not , we will tell them that the Apoftle Peter in that forecited 
 place, and the Apoftle Paul^ Acls&o. binds this work upon our 
 hands, and Woe unto its if we preach not the Gofpel. 
 
 But this branch of Epifcopal and Presbyterial office we paffe 
 with brevity , becaufe in this there lies not fo much controveriie 
 as in the next, which they doe more wholly Impropriate to them- 
 {elves : the power of Ordination. 
 
 Which power, that it was in former times in the hands of Pm- 
 £yfm,appeares 1 Tint. 4. 14. Neglect net the gift which was given thee 
 by Prophefie and by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery. The 
 gilt here fpoken of is the Minifterial gift, the exercife whereof, the 
 Apoftle exhorts Timothy not to neglect, which faith he, he had re- 
 ceived, not by the laying on of the hands of one fingle man, whe- 
 ther Apoftle^ov Bifiop^or Presbyter , but t£ irsexrliunfi* the Presbytery, 
 that is, the whde company of Presbyters, for in that fenfe onely we 
 finde'o^^/Wf/cp taken in Scipture,as in Luke 22.vcrt.66.Ael.12. 
 verf-5.which the Chriftian Church called the Ecdefiaftical Senate 
 aslerom in If ay 3. A~;.r habemus in Ecclefia Senatumnofirum , Ccetum 
 Presbyter or um^ Sc an Apofiolical Senate ;<nW*pio? ' A7rorbhu>v Ignatius E~ Jerom.Ifa.X* 
 pif. adMagnef. and fome times7rpi<r@vTh<>iofConcil.Aiicyr.Can.i$. 
 
 And though the Apoftle in his'fecondEpiftle to Tim.1.6. makes Igna. Epif. 
 mention of the laying on of his hands : yet to maintaine the Har- adMagnes. 
 mony of Scripture, it mult not be denied but there was impofiti- Conc.Ancyr. 
 onofhandsby the Presbytery as wel as by himfelf, and fo it was Gw.18. 
 a joynt a& 3 So that in this there is no more difference then in the 
 former. Aud 
 
And \i there be no difference between Presbyters in feeding or 
 ordaining, let us fee if there be any in the third part of their office 
 of Ruling, which though our Bijhops aflame wholly to themfelves, 
 yet we (hall difcover, that it hath been committed to and excrci- 
 fed by Presbytetiall hands. 
 
 For whoarethey of whom the Scripture fpeakes, Heb. 13.17. 
 Obey them that have the Rule over you? for they watch for your faules, as 
 they that mufi give an account, &x. 
 
 Here all fuch as watcK over the fouls of Gods people , are inti- 
 tuled to rule over them. So that unleiTe Bijhops will fay , that they 
 cnely watch over the fouls of Gods people, and are only to give an 
 account Tor them , they cannot challenge to thcmfelves t\\tfole rule 
 over them. And if the Bijhops can give us good fecurity, that they 
 will acquit.us from giving up our account to God for the fouls of his 
 people, we will quit our plea, and refigne to them the fole rule o- 
 ver them. 
 
 So againe in the 1 ihejfa. 5,12. Know them which labour amonift 
 you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonifh you. 
 
 m which words are contained thefetruthes ; Firlt that in one 
 Church (Tor the iheftalonions were but one Church, 1, Gz.) there 
 was not TTjois-tf ttevof but °' Tgo^Af^Jn 5 not one chief e Bijhop or Prefi- 
 denty but the Prefidency was in many. 
 
 Secondly, that this Prefidency was of fuch as laboured in the 
 word and Doctrine. 
 3 Thirdly, that theCenfures of the Church were managed not 
 
 by one, but by them all in Communi. "them that admonifh you. 
 4;, Fourthly, that there was among them a Parity : for the Apoitle 
 
 bids kgow them in an indifferency ,. not difcriminating one from a- 
 nother.yeafuch was the rule that Elders had,that S. Peter thought 
 it needful to make an exhortation to them to ufe their power with 
 Moderation ,- not Lording it over Gods Heritage, 1 Pet. 5.3. 
 
 By this time we have fufficiently proved from Scripture, that 
 Bijhops and Presbyters are the fame in name, in Office, in Edifying 
 the Church, in power of Ordination and Jurifdiction : we fum up 
 all that hath been fpokenin one argument : 
 
 They which have the fame Name , the fame Ordination to their 
 Office, the fame qualification for their Office, the fame worke to feed 
 theflod^ok God,to or dame paftors and Elders, to Rule and Governed 
 they are one and the fame Office : but fuch are Bijhops and Presby- 
 ters; Ergo. 
 
 SECT. VI. 
 
 Btlt the dint of all this Scripture , the Remonftrant would elude, 
 by obtruding upon his reader a commentary (as he calls \%) of 
 
 the 
 
^11 J 
 
 ihe ApoftUs ownprattife (which he would force to contradict their 
 own rules Jto which he juperadds the nnqueftionable gloffe of the cUare 
 praH/fe of their immediate fucceffvrs in this admin iflr at ion. For the 
 Apcftles pra&ice,we have already difcovcred it, from the Apoftles 
 own writings ; and for his Gloffe hefuperadds, if it corrupts not 
 the Tcxt,we ihall admit it 5 but if it doe,wemuft anfwer with l^er- Tertul. 
 tullian--, Id verum quodcunq; primumiid adulterum quod pojteri us, what- 
 ibever is hrft is true ; but that which is latter is adulterous. 
 
 In the examination of this GJofTe , to avoyd needkfleContro- 
 verfie,Firft,we take for granted by both fides, that the firftand beft 
 Antiquity, ufed the names of Bi (hops andPm^tmpromifcuoufly, 
 Secondly, that in proccfle of time , feme one was honoured with 
 the name of Bi/^op, and the reft were called presbyters or Cleri. 
 Thirdly, that this was not Nomen inane,but there was fome kinde 
 of Imparity between him and the reft of the Presbyters. 
 
 Yet in this we differ ; that they fay, this Impropriation of name, 
 and Imparity of place, is of Divine Right and.Apoftoiical Inftitution:we 
 affirmc both to be occasional, and of humane Invention ; and un- 
 dertake to (hew out of Antiquity, both the occafion upon which, and 
 the Perfons by whom this Imparity was brought into the Church. 
 
 On our parts ftands Jerome and Ambrofe, and others, whom we 
 doubt not but our Remonftrant will grant a place among his 
 GlofTators : Saint Jerome tells us in 1 'Tit. 
 
 Idem eft ergo Presbyt.rqui A Presbyter and a Bilhop is the 
 Epifcopus:& antequam Diabo- fame : and before there were through 
 k inftmUu,ftudia in Keligione the Devils inftincl, divifions in Reli- 
 ef rent, & dicer etur inpopulis, gion, and the people began to fay , I 
 efo7«w Pauli, ego Apollo, fgo am of Paul, and 1 of Apollo , and I ot: 
 Cephas, Co-nmuni Presbyterorn Cephas , the Churches were governed 
 Confdio ecckfije gubernab an- by the Common-councell ot the 
 tur. Poftquam verb unufquifqve Presbyters. But after that each man 
 eos quos baptizaverat fuos pu- began to account tho few horn he had 
 tat at efle,non Ck'rifl. ''; in toto baptized his own,and not Ghrifts s ic 
 Orbe decretum eft , ut UHM de was decreed thorow the whole weir Id, 
 Presbyter is ele&us fuperpom- that one of the Presbyters mould be 
 retur ceteris , ad quern om- fet over the reft ; to whom the care 
 nk Ecclefi* Cur a pertinent, & of all the Church mould belong,that 
 fahifmatum femina tolkrentur. the feeds of fchifme might be taken 
 Putat a'liquis non Scnptura- away. Thinks any, that this is my 
 rum, fed nofirameRe jententi- opinion , and aot the opinion of the 
 am, Epifcopum&Presbyterum Scripture, that a Bilhop and an Elder 
 unum efie>&aliud ttaUtjultud is the fame > let him read the words 
 
 or 
 
efienomen officii ,. rekgat'Apo- of the Apoftle to the Fhilippians, fay- 
 fkli rf^Philippenfcs verba,di- ing, Paul and Timothy^ the fervants of 
 ««t/x, Paulus e^ Timothxus Jefus Chrift, to them that are at Phi- 
 fervi JefuChrijh quifunt Phi- lippx , with the Biihops and Deacons 
 lippis, cum Epifcopi* & Via* philippi is one city of Macedonia, and 
 c ojwfj^c.Philippi una eji urbs certainly in one city there could not 
 Macedoniae,dr certein una Ci- be many BijbopsQzs they are now called' 
 vitete non poterantplures ejfe &c.)and after the allegations of many^ 
 (jtt nuncupantur*)Epifcepi>&c. other Scriptures^! e concludes thusjas 
 fwut ergo Presbyteri fciant fe the Elders therefore may know, that' 
 exEccleft£ confuetudine ei qui they are to be fubjeft to him that is 
 ftbipr£pofitusfuerit ejfe fubje- fct over them by the cuftome of the 
 80s 5 Ita Epifcopi noverint fe Church; fo let the Bifiiops know,that 
 vnagis tonfuetudine^ quam dif- itls more from cuftome, then from 
 pofitionis "Dominic £- veritaU any true difpenfation from the Lord* 
 Presbyter if ejfe majores ^ d^itfthat they are above the Presbyters* 
 Communi debertEcdefiam re* & that they ought to rule the Church 
 cere. m common. 
 
 In which words of lew W*, thefe five things prefent themfclves to 
 the Readers view ; 
 
 Firft, that Eifbops and Presbyters are originally the fame 5 Ident 
 ergo eft Presbyter qui Epifcopus. 
 
 Secondly, that that Imparity that was in his time between Bi- 
 ihops and Elders, was grounded upon Ecclefiaftical cuftome, and 
 not upon devine Inftitution ; Epifcopi noverint^ &c. 
 
 Thirdly, that this was not his private judgement, but the judge* 
 inent of Scripture ; Put at aliquk^ &c. 
 
 Fourthly, that before this Priority was upon this occafion ftar- 
 ted, the Church was governed Communi Presbyterorum Confilio , by 
 the Gounfel of the Presbyters in common, and that even after this* 
 imparity, it ought to be fo governed ; Sciant Epifcopi fe Ecclefiam 
 debere in communi regere. 
 
 Fifthly, that the occafion of this Imparity and Superiority of 
 Bifhops above Elders, was the divifions which through t he Devils- 
 inftinft fell among the Churches 5 Poflquam verb Diaboli inftinftu. 
 
 Saravia would take advantage of this place, to deduce this Im* 
 
 Earity as high as from the Apoftles times , becaufe even then they 
 egan to fay,/ am ofPaul^and I of ApoUos: but fure S. Ierome was not 
 fo weake as this man would make him, to fpeak Inconfiftencies ; 
 and when he propounds it to himfelf, to prove that Bifhops and Pres- 
 byters are in Scripture the fame , to let fall words that fhould con- 
 fute his own proposition ; whereas therefore S. Ierome faith 9 that 
 
 ~"~""" after ■ 
 
CO 
 
 after men began to fay, I am of Paul, and I ofApollos , & c. it was de* 
 creed that one of the Presbyters fhould be fet over the reft, &c. This is 
 fpoken indeed in die Apofiles phraje,but not of the Apofiles times,clfe 
 to what purpofe, is thatcoacervation of texts that followes ? 
 
 But fuppofe it ihould be granted to be of Apoftolical antiquity 
 (which yetwre grant not, having proved the contrary) yet it ap- 
 peares, it was not of Apoftolical intention, but of "Diabolic al occafiom 
 And though the Devil by kindling Divifions in the Church , did 
 minifter Occ afion to the invention of the primacy or prelacy or one 
 for the fuppreffing of Schifmc ; yet there is juftcaufe to think,thae 
 the Spirit of God in his Apofiles was never the author of this 
 invention. 
 
 . Firft>becaufe we read in the Apoftles day es there were Divifions* 
 Rom. 16. ,7. and Schifmes,i Cor. 3. 3. and 11. 18. yet the Apoftle was 
 not direfted by the holy Ghoft to ordaineBimops for the taking 
 away of thofe Divifions. Neither in the rules he prefcribes for the 
 healing of thofe breaches , doth he mention Bijkopsior that end ; 
 Nor in the Directions given to Timothy and Titus for the Ordination 
 ofBiJhops or Elders, doth he mention this as one end of their Ordi- 
 nation, or one peculiar duty of their office. And though the Apoftle 
 faith, Oportet hwefes inter vos ejje, ut quiprobatifunt manifeftifiant 
 inter vos ; yet the Apoftle no where faith, OportetEpifcopos ejje 5 ut 
 toSantur hdrefes, qu£ manifeflde fiunt. 
 
 Secondly ft becaufe as Do&or Whital^r faith, the remedy devifed 
 hath proved worfe then the difeafe , which doth never happen to 
 that remedy whereof the holy Ghoft is the author. 
 
 Thirdly ,becaufe the holy Ghoft,who could forefee what Would 
 enfue thereupon, would never ordaine that for a remedy , which 
 would notonely be ineffectual to the cutting off of evil , but be- 
 come a ftirrup for Antichrift to get into his faddle. For if there be 
 a neceflity of fetting up one Bijhop over many Presbyters for preven- 
 ting fchifme?, there is as great a nudity of fetting up one Arcb- 
 bijhop over many Bifiops, and one Patriarch over many Archbifbops^ 
 and one Pope over all,un\tffe men will imagine, that there is a dan- 
 ger of fchifme onely among Presbyters, and not among Bijhops and 
 Archbi(hops,v;hich is contrary to reafonJruth,Hiftory, and our own 
 Experience. 
 
 And left our adverfaries mould appealefrom Hierome as an in- 
 competent Judge in this cafe, becaufe a Presbyter, ' and fo a party, 
 we will therefore fubjoyne the jndgments of other ancient Fathers 
 who were themfelves Bifhops. 
 
 The Commentaries that go under the name of Stint Ambrofe up- 
 on Ephef 4. mention another occafion of this Discrimination or 
 
 Q priority: 
 
*At ubi omnia pncrity^and that was : * the increafe and dilatation of the Church 
 l f Cd ^RE^l- u P on occa ^ Ion whereof they did ordaine Reftors or Governours, 
 %* Convent i-' anc * otner officers in the Church ; yet this he grants , that this did 
 cuk conQiwi differ from the former orders of the Church , and from apoftoli- 
 junr. & c&pc- C al Writ. 
 
 runt Kdhrcsi ^ HC j t ^\ s Reft'orfhip or Priority was devolved at firft from one 
 & c . d[< £ a ?f.' Elder to anorher by Succcffion, when he who was in the place was 
 hVt^dwH. removed, the next in order among the Elders Succeeded. But this 
 Capit aim or- was after wards changed 3 and that unworthy men might not be 
 dine <& Provi- preferred, it was made a matter of Election , and not a matter of* 
 denm guber- Succeflion. Thus much wefinde concerning the occaiion of this 
 "del E nonper imparity,enough to (hew, it is not of Divine Authority . 
 omnia conveniunt Scrfpta Jpoftoli ordinationi qutnunc in EcclefiAefr.^ quia hac inter ip(a primwdia 
 fcripta [unt. Nam fa timotbeum a fe Presbytorium Creatum Epifcopum vocatjfyc. Sed quia corpermt 
 fequenies Prejbyteri indigni invenirj ad primatsmenendofyimmutata eft raije^c 
 
 For the fecond thing, the perfons who brought in this Impari- 
 ty : the fame Authors tells us, the Presbyters themfelves brought 
 5r in ; witnefTe H'ierome ad Evag, Alexandria presbyteri unum exfe 
 Hieromad elellum in Excdfiorigvadu collacatum t Epifcopum nominal ant', quomodo 
 Evazo frexercituf Imperatorem faceretjaut Viacom de fe Archidiaconum.T\\c 
 
 Presbyters of Alexandria did call him their Bifbop, whom they had 
 chofen from among themfelvesjk placed in a higher deg r ee^as if an 
 army mould make an Emperour, or the Deacons an Archdeacon. 
 A hi C J ' Ambrofe upon the fourth of the Ephefians tells us , it was done 
 '" by a CounceJI, and although he neither name the time nor place of 
 }rw+ ^ c omce j 9 y et afcribing it to a C ounce 11 he grants it not to be A- 
 
 poftolical : this gave occafion to others to fixe it upon Cuftome as 
 Hieronym, in Tit, and Auguft. Epifl. 19. fecundkm honor urn voc alula 
 que Ecclefi£ ufus -obtinnit Epifcopatus Preslyterio major eft, And had" 
 that 7TfW(Tf/ct or Prelacy had the Seal andxonfirmation ofVivine or 
 Gre£Q.Naz. Apoftolical Authority firezory Naztanzene would never in fuch a Pa- 
 Qrat.2%* thetick manner have wimed tH^\.bblition of it , as he doth in his 
 
 28. Oration. 
 Ftf£. 21 12. And now where is that acknowledgement, and conveyance of Impa- 
 rity and Iurifdiclion which faith thisRemonftrant was derived from 
 the Apoftles hands, and deduced in an uninterupted line, unto this day : 
 where U it ? we finde no fuch Imparity delivered from Apoftolical 
 hands,nov acknowledge dm Apoftolical writings; yet had there been 
 fuch an acknowledgement and conveyance of imparity : how this mould ' 
 have been deduced to us in an uninterrupted Line, we know not, 
 unlefle our Bijhops will draw the Line of their Pedigree through the 
 hynes of Antkhrift ,and jopie iftue s and mingle blood with Rowe. -which 
 
 it 
 
it kemes they win ratner aoe tneffioie tmrpiea rui > ruj*rrnw 
 
 v^vo\ii<t their tyrannical prerogative , as Nazianzen calls it . ubi. print. 
 
 Suffer us therefore humbly to appeale to your Honours, whe- 
 ther this Rernonftrant hath not given fentence againft himfelf,who 
 is fo confident of the Evidence of his caufe, that he doth notfeare 
 to fay, if there can be better Evidence under Heaven for any matter 
 rffaa then there is for his Epifcopacy :Let EPISCOPACY BEp^ 2 2 
 FOR EVER ABANDONED O LIT OF THE *' - 
 CHURCH OF GOD. 
 
 SECT. VII. 
 
 yEtitfeemshimfelfeinthe height of his confidence was not 
 without Jeloufies, of fo ne thing might be fpoken againft his 
 cauie,therefore he feems to hearc, what is fpoken againft it. 
 
 That the Apojiles Bijhops and ours are two : there was no other then a 
 Farochial fajtor, a Preaching Presbyter without inequality , without a- ? a &* 2 $' 
 vy Rule over bis brethren. Ours claim an eminent Superiority , and a, 
 power of Ordination andlurifditlwn unhpowne to the Primitive times. 
 
 That this which he fuppofcth he heares us fay is Scripture 
 Truth we have (hewed already, &e. that there was a parity between 
 Vresbyters and Bifljops : and that eminent Superiority and power of Or" 
 dination and Iurifdi&ion which our Bijhops claime , was unknown to 
 Scripture; and are now prepared by Gods afjiftance to prove, it was 
 unknown to primitive times. 
 
 But how doth this Remonftrant mecte with this Reply : ALAS, 
 ALAS, HOW GOOD PEOPLE may be abufed by mismformati- p^.23, 
 onl It feemes the man Judged this Reply fo poor as in his thoughts 
 it was more worthy of hispitty, then ofhispaines to anfwer, or ra« 
 ther knew there was more in this Reply, then he knew how to an- 
 fwer, and therefore waves it with his Rhetoric!^. 
 
 And this we rather think, becaufe he knowes but little in Anti- 
 quity , that knowes not, that there is fovaft a difference between 
 our Bifhops, and thofe that were not onely in the Apoftles dayes 
 (whom we have proved to be undiftinguifhed from Presbyters} 
 Bat thofe Bilhops that were in the Church 400. yeares after, whera 
 there began to be fome difcrimination, that Epifcopacy may well 
 be likened to the Ship Argo , that was fo often repaired, as there 
 was nothing left of the Firft Materials 5 yet ftill it challenged the 
 fir ft Name, 
 
 Which difference we fpread before your Honours in three parti- 
 culars : firft in point of Election to their office ; fecondly, in point 
 of Execution of their orfice;thirdly,in point of State-Imployment. 
 
 Firft (having difcovered already upon what occafion- this priori- 
 ty began to have exiftence in the Church , and from whom ic firft 
 
 D 2 re* 
 
J tCCIV CU ILo Utliltj H\Jt »l *JU* v-»i/M< i/uv, »4. vn.** y^vrtjvr** unit y^njiurnc Ul 
 
 the Churches, according to Ambrofe, Ierome, Augufiine, &c.) We 
 * P/ 6j >r come now *° Declare what was the manner of Election unto this 
 Miximh labet Priority in thefe times, and to (hew firft, how therein thefe Bifhops 
 poteftaiem id did differ from ours : for all their Elections were ordered by the 
 Mgendi.D'tg- privity, confent, and approbation of the people, where the Bijhops 
 msSacerdotes* was to f ervC; Were there no other Authors to make this good,C>-- 
 cufandi^quld £™^alone would doe it, among other places let his 68. Epiftle 
 & ipfum Vide- witneffe , where he faith *plebs Maxime habet pot e fiat em , &c. The 
 $nw de Divim people fpecially have power either of ch tiling worthy Priefts , or 
 
 pr4entefubom-* ore a ^ tn< * r e ^ es an " a PP rovcd a * fit and worthy by 
 mum aculi* dtr publike vote and Teftimony. This he proves by the Teftimony of 
 iigatur, & dig- Sacred writ both Old and New. Where we obferve firft, that the 
 ma atque ido- fpecial power of Judging of the worthineffe or unworthinefle of a 
 7-V ila- lM " maivfor the Prelacy was m the bread: of the Peogle. Secondly, the 
 mocompofoUT. fpecial power ot choohng or rejecting eohis place according as 
 By Priefts the they Judged him worthy or unworthy refided in the People. Flcb-s 
 Authourhere maxime Habetpoteflatem^&c. Thirdly, that this power did de- 
 tmderftands fcend upon the People 2> Divina Authoritate. 
 whole *ser\e* ^ or Was tn * s tne Judgement of one Sole man, but of an African 
 of the Epiflle Synod confulted by the Spanifh Churches in point of Election, a* 
 Ihews. the infeription of the Epiftle fhewes. 
 
 a KA7no7»v> tfThe Obtrufionofa Bifhopupon the Church of Alexandria, 
 c*,K\r\sncis7Kxs without the Prefence, defire and vote of the Clergy or People is 
 *&vbyag, jy •& condemned by Athanafws not onely as a breach of Canon, but as 
 wnt Tnlvhx a Tranfgrtffion of Apoftolical prefcript, and that it did compel or 
 P"Va 5 ' neceflltate the heathen toblafpheme. 
 
 riT&tott- Nor did onely chrt fl ian Blflj °P > . but C&*M*» Twee* acknow- 
 vojl -n , £ ledge the Right and power of Election of Biftops to be in the Peo- 
 tsr^X^vcuy pie 3 fo that admired Confl antine the great Promover and Pa tronof 
 rxLyviravT the peace of the Chiftian Church writing to the Church of Nico'ne- 
 tttTxftivav jj a againft Eufebius^ud Jheognius , tells them the ready way to lay 
 ^£y— """ afleep the Tumults that did then difturbe the Church about the 
 ft*™ o rau >w Election of a Bifhop was^fiwodo Epifcopumfidelem & integrum naB-i 
 Zvmki\ct&7jk*< fuermty.quod quidem in prtfentia in veftrlifitumeft poteflate , quodque 
 9&y'ovet£'mi&.- etiam dudhn penes veftrum Judicium fuerat , nifi Eufebius de quo- 
 \^ a l TO '**' dixbpravo eorum,qui cum juverunt Confiiio kacpr£ceps ruiflet & reUum 
 ■ ~* p a *^ i 5T Eligendi Ordinem impudenter contnrbaftet.Gelas in Acf, ConciL Nicen. 
 ^«? ^ part.%. if they would get a faithful and upright Bifhop which faitbr 
 
 <*thanaf.Epift. he, is in your power presently to doe ; and was ldhg agoe, if Eiifebius 
 tdQithodoxos* with the aide of his faction^ hadnotrulhed inuponyou^ and 
 
 im- 
 
impudently disturbed the ngbt ureter cj utaton. 
 
 That which this facred Emperour calls the right order ofEleBtm^ 
 what is it but the Eleftion by the people ? in whofe power,he faith 
 ic then was and long had been to choofe a Bijhop ; and by whofe 
 power the next Bijhop was chofen.So the fame Author tells us,thac 
 after Eufebius and Iheognw were caft out of their feveral feats for l & m «# far** 
 Artanifnte, by the Counccl of Nice, others were appointed in their 
 roomes by the Clergy and people of each Diocefle. ■ -. 
 
 To this Election in Nicomedia,. we could ( if it were needful in 
 fo clearc a Truth)adde many the like Presidents of popular Ele&i- Cyprian,Corne> 
 ens ; which for brevities fake, we paffe over. Not queftioning,but ^ Ah ^ na fi Ki ' 
 that which hath been fpoken, is fufficient to informe the intelli- 
 gent Reader, that our Bifhops and the Bifhops of former times* are 
 TWO inpomt ofEletiiou. , 
 
 sect, vnr; 
 
 A Second thing wherein we have undertaken to Jhew, that our 
 Bifhops and the Bifhops of former times are T W O, is in the 
 Execution of their Office : and here there are three things, where-* 
 in he that will not wilfully (hut his eyes againft all light , may fee a - 
 Latitude of difference between ours and former Bifhops. Firit, in 
 that Sole lurifdiViion which our Bifhops affume to themfelves. Se- 
 condly, in the Velagation they make of the power of exercising this 
 Jurifdi&ion unco others. Thirdly^ in the way of the exercife of that 
 power. 
 
 For the firft of thefe, Their file lurifdiUion 5 That our Bifhops af- 
 fume this to themfelves, it is known and felt, and that this Sole Ju- 
 rifdiftion was a ftranger, a Monfter to former times, wefhall now 
 prove, and make cleare$ that the power ofOrdinationy Admonition, 
 Excommunication, Abfolution, was not in the hands of any fole man. 
 
 Firft, for Ordination, Cyprian in his exile writing to his Charge.j Cypr.Epift.i 
 certifies them, that Aureliut was ordained by him and his Colleagues, 
 who were prefent with him ; ( who were thefe Colleagues , but his 
 Presbyters ; as he himfelf expounds h , writing to Lucius in his 
 own name, and the name of his Clergy and people, Ego & College £pjff . 5 g ; 
 & fratemitas omnisjfrc. I and my Colleagues and my whole peo- 
 ple fend thefe Letters to you, &c. So that it is cleare in Cyprians 
 rime, Presbyters had a hand in Ordination* and Bijhop did not Or- 
 daine alone. Firrnilianus faith of them that rule in the Church, 
 guod haptizandi, MANVM IMPONENVI ET OKV I^ArudCypr, 
 NANV I,poflidenlpoteflatem. And who thofe he , he exprefleth a Efefc7$« 
 little before, SENIORES & Prtpofiti : by whom the Presbyters 
 as- well as the Bifbopswe underftood. 
 
 And- 
 
nna as tneiep*a4ea prove, that Bjlhopsinthe Primitive time 
 could not tttdain aioriS withou* the Presbyters 5 Co there are that 
 give us light to- undtfrftand,. that the Presbyters nii^ht ordain 
 without the Bifhop. The Author of the Comment upon the £. 
 pbefians, that goes under the name of of Ambrofe, faith, ApudEoyp- 
 tumPresbyteri confignant.fi pr&fensnon fit Epifcopus, In Egypt tic 
 CmiureVm. ^'p** 1 ***** jgW^ prefent ;io Jfairh Au^ujhne in 
 no nonftnt di- the £™ words 5 and the * Corepifcupu's, who was but a' Presby- 
 ter// padus ter, had power to'impofe handstand to ordaine within his pre- 
 Epifcoprxfy Pa- cinas.,with the Bifhops Licence. Now Licences confer not a power 
 
 Sm M- S gjgg hath k not ' but ™ d y a f4Cult y * ™^e that pow- 
 
 nationem in fua -r, . . * . r . ... 
 
 JLeclcfia fafam j he *"iquity of our tin^s hath been fuch, that a Minifler may 
 JVKE D I- not Preach to his own flock, without a Licence: doth this Li- 
 VltiQ ka- cence make a man a Minifter, and.give him power to preacher on- 
 ittncfmE ^ a facul ty and liberty to cxercife that power? Should a Bifhop 
 pijlopi or dim' give a L . ai ^ e a Licence to preach, or to ordain, doth that Licence 
 rii fiant holies mj &e him a Minifter, or a (Bifhop ? Sure all will fay, no: why? 
 Ecckfiaaut no- becaufe in the Laike there is hot Aft m primus y the root and prin- 
 lunt ordinatio- ciple of that power, which Licence onely opens a way to the exer- 
 7cdlZ7eZlt di ^°^ and theref o re that muft be concluded to be in thofe Cho- 
 jusfuum. Me r xt V^co^ or Presbyters, by vertue of their place and calling, and 
 tanch. u'bi fu- not D 7 vertue of a Licence. So that the power of Ordination was 
 pra,p£g.Conci!. fo farre from refiding in the Bifhop alone, as that the Presbyters 
 Antios.Can.iQ. and Corepifcopi had power to ordain as well as he. 
 &Ancjr. Can. jjjjjj^ was ^ on .i y a matt€r of Ecckfiajlica! cuftome, but of 
 
 Ecclefiafiical conftitution, which bids the Bifhop ; 
 Condi 4. Car- Fir(t 3 in all his Ordinations to confult with his Clergy 5 Vt E- 
 thag. ' pifcopus fine Concilio Clericorum fuorum Clerkos non ordhiet: That the 
 
 Can. 22. Eijfjopjhall not ordain a 'Clergy man without the counfel of the Clergy ; 
 
 this ivas Cyprians practice, Epift. 33. 
 ... 2# Secondly, in his Ordinations to take the concurrent afliftance 
 
 Carr * *' of his Presbyters ; Cum erdinatur Presbyter, Epijcopo eum benedicen* 
 te, & manunt fuper caput ejus tenente> etiam omnes Presbyteri.qui prx- 
 Jentesfunty manusfuas ytxta manum Ep if copi fuper caput illius teneant . 
 When a Presbyter is ordained, the Bifhop bleiung him, and hold- 
 ing his hand upon his head, all the Presbyters that are prefent, 
 fhall likewife lay their hands upon his head, with the hands of the 
 Bilhop. In which Canon, we have the unanimous vote of two 
 Hieronym. in hundred and fourteen Bifhops, declaring that the power of Ordi- 
 Epift. ad Evag. nation is in the hands of Presbyters as well as Bifhops. 
 cbryfoft. Horn. And whereas it may be objected, that Hierome and Chryfoftome, 
 1 1 .in 1 . ad affirming Bifhops to differ from Presbyters in the power of Ordi- 
 Tjm * nation; 
 
Cav- 
 itation, feenno imply, that that power is foly theirs: Here Wee 
 defire it may be obferved. 
 
 Firft, that thefe Fathers put all the difference that lies betweene 
 Bifhops and Presbyters, to be in point of Ordination." Quidfacit 
 Eptfiopus, quod mn facit Presbyter except* Ordinatione. And there- 
 fore Chrjfoftome himfelfe confefTeth, that ia hi9 days there was li- 
 tle or no difference between a Bifhop and a Presbyter. Inter Epif- chfyfnjt. upon 
 copum & pre sbyteVum irttereft ferme nihil, &c. , t the* 1. Tim. 
 
 Second ly/That this difference is not fo to he underfioody as if 
 thefe Fathers did hold it to be by divine right (as Betlarmin and 
 our Epifcopal men would make us beleevej buu fey a humane con- 
 stitution. And therefore they do not ipeak Vejurebwt _de facto,Quid Librp defep- 
 facit, &c. not quid debet faccre. And miiHiewiM confefTeth . So Leo tenr Ordinibut* 
 ■prim, ep. 88. upon complaints of unlawful Ordinations, writing 
 to the Germane and French Bifhops, reckons up what things are 
 refcrved to the Bifhops, among which htfttdowXtPvesbyterorum & 
 Diaconorum con 'fecratio^ and then zddes, Qu£vmnid\folis deberi fim- Cohcil. Aquif- 
 misVontificibus Author it ate Canonam pr £c ipiur, :>]So that, for this*™- I; Can - 8o 
 power of Ordination, they are morebeholdeft to the Canon of a °™J™f™ 
 the Church, then to the Canon of Gods Word. | ckrkorum or- 
 
 Thirdly, we ahfwer that this very humane difference Was not in dinatio & con- 
 the Primitive Antiquity . It wasnoirfoin Cyprians time, as we e-jurathrefer- 
 vennowfhewed. And when it did prevaile, it was but a .particu- \ aue f r mm 
 lar Cuftome (and fometimes ufurpation^) of fome Churches. For 
 it was otherwife appointed in the Couricel of Carthage, and in 
 Egypt, and other places, as is declared in the former part of this 
 Seftion 5 and even in Chryfoflomes time, it was fo little approved 
 of, that it was one great accufation againft Chryfoftomc himfelfe, 
 That he made Ordinations without the Presbytery , and without the con- 
 sent of his Clergy,] this is quoted by Bifhop Bow/iam, lib. 1. cap. & 
 fag. 176. 
 
 SECT. IX. • BUfon. Spalat. 
 
 NOr had the Bifhops of former times more right to the power ^ unc ' a San U* 
 of fole J urjf diction, then of file Ordination ; And here we have cfc'g*U 6 
 Confitentem reum, our very Adverfaries confefs the Votes of And- fa 28. 
 quity are with us. id. 
 
 Cyprian profefleth, that he would do nothing without the Clergy, Condi. 4. Car- 
 may, he could do nothing without them 3 nay, he durft not tafy upon him y*j}'S a pu-ff 
 alone to determine that which of right did belong to all -, and had ^ IO c 'jp."o! 
 he or any other done fo,thefourthCouncel of Carthage condemns Soy. I. 2.1.23. 
 the Sentence of the Bifhop, as Irritamfi Clericorum fententia confir- Pojfidcn. devi- 
 ntetur. ta.Aug. e. 4. 
 
 Would ye know the particulars, wherein the Bifhops had no f^fp^'ll]' 
 ppwertf Judicature without their Presbyters. Firft 
 
(3Q) 
 
 1 Firft,in judging and JcenfuriiigPffsbytcr^tfiemrc^vesyn^.thw 
 
 rZ't'JV,'* n' Doftrine ; For this the Canon Law in Gtatian is full and cleare ; 
 
 i'fr mam (£r 1L P] C9 f )Ui n * n potejt ludicare Presbyterum vet uiaconwn fine Synodo & 
 
 partes Dtjf.^. Senioribus : Thus Bafill counfelled and praftifed, epifl.y^.So Ambr. 
 
 cap. 5,5. . lib, 1 o.epip&o.Cyril in tpift. ad hhannem Antaochen. Thus Gregory ad 
 
 lohatt. patfor tottan.ltb.i v.epift.49. 
 
 . ■* Secondly , in judging of the converfatkm or crimes of any of 
 
 Stromat.lib.n I t ^ lc me . mDei s of the Church : Penes Presbyter os eft Vifciplina qiutfa- 
 
 at homines meliores ; That Difcipline that workes emendation in 
 
 hien, is in the power of the Elders. ' And therefore when any was 
 
 quettioned in point of converfation, he was brought, faith Tertul- 
 
 Tertul ftol #*#yinta the Cong^g^t^oh.i^htT€ wtreExhortations^CajjigationT^nd 
 
 a^erf:Oent. '" T*ivine cenfures : And who had thechiefe ftroke in thefe Cenfures, 
 
 he tells us after':' prefidentprobati quiquefeniores •■; AH the approved 
 
 Elders fit as Prefi dents. 
 
 AncUhofc cenfures that paffed by the whole Presbytery were 
 more approved by the Church in ancient times , then fuch as were 
 pafTed by one man". £ for iv.e flnde that when fyagrius and Ambrofe 
 pa fled Sentence in die fame cafe, the Qhurcb was unfatisfied in the 
 Sentence ofSyagrim , becaufe he paft It fine alicufm fratris confilio, 
 without the counfel or confent of any of his Brethren. But were pa- 
 cified with the fentence of Saint Ambrofe: becaufe, faith he , Hoc 
 . . r r ..-■' IvdkiumNoftrum cunt fratribu* & con facer dotibus participatumpro- 
 
 tfsfrium ceffent. ' 
 
 y g m Nor was there any kinde of cenfures that the Bifhops did adml- 
 
 Aug. deverb. n '^ e r alone: Admonitions were given by the Elder s^Augufiine tells 
 Apt)}. Ser.19. us the Elders did admonifh fuch as were offenders:to the fame pur- 
 
 pofefpeakes-.'Or%f«. c antra Celfum.Lib.%. 
 *Conj}at. lurif- * So excommunication,though that being the dreadfulleft thun- 
 diltianem iilam d er c f the Churchy and as T'ertutiianczlh it , fummum pr judicium 
 excomrmmkan- jr Hturi fyfcj; fa g, reat fore-runner of the Judgement of God,was 
 (kZn c7hnt : "ever vibrated but by the hand of thofe that laboured in the Word 
 mm pertwere and Doftrine ; yet was no one man in the Church invefted with 
 ado nnes Pafto- this power more then another. 
 
 resjunc ad fe • Th ere f ore faith b Hierom? Presbyterofi peccavero licet me tradere 
 wET fatantm inter itumc amis. Iflfinne, a Presbyter Qnot a Bifhopon- 
 fradquejlum ly) may deliver me to Satan, to the deftruftion, &c. where the 
 contulermt E- Reader may pleafe to take notice that Saint Hierom fpeakes not of 
 pjcopi, Meknc onc particular Presbyter, but of the Order of Presbyters. 
 hH U? ' v 4 The fame S - Huron faith againe, Sunt quos Ecclefia reprehend^ 
 adHdildor ?"« mterdum abijeit, in quos non nunquam Epifcoporum & CUricorum 
 JEp.ad Doner, cenfura defevit. There be fome whom the Church reproves, and 
 Tome which (he cafts out ; againft whom the cenfures of Bifhops and 
 Zmbyurs fharply proceed b where we fee > the Cenfures whereby 
 
(29) 
 
 wicked men were caft out of the Church ,were not in the fo!e hands of 
 the Bi(hops,but likewife in the hands of Prefbyters. 
 
 Syrkius Bifhop of Rome fignifies to the Church of Mitiaine , that Io- 
 vinianiU) AuxentM) &c. were caft out of the Church for ever , and he Ambrcf. 
 lets down how they did it , Omnium Noftrum tarn Presbyterorum quam lib.io. 
 Diacomrum^ quam totius etiam cleri fcifcitatafuit fententia. There was a Ej»;/f.8ai 
 concurrence of all Presbyter?, Deacons, and the whole Clergy in that 
 icntence of Excommunication. 
 
 The truth herein may be further evidenced by this 5 becaufe the 
 whole Clergy as well as the Bifhops impofed hands upon fuch , as re- 
 penting were abfolvcd : Nee ad communicationem ( faith Cyprian) venire Cm £ ti a 
 (juispojjity nifi prim ab Epifcopo & Clero Manns iJlifuerit impofita: No man 12. ' 
 that hath ban excommunicated might relume to Church-Communion , be- And this 
 fore hands had been laid upon him by the Bifhop and Clergy. was c ^ c 
 
 Alfo writing to his Clergy concerning lap fed Chriftians , he tells them, fatf\Ci* 
 Exomologefi fail a & manu eti a vobk inpeenitentiam impojita^&c. that zf-prian in 
 ter confeflion and the laying on their hands , they might be commended mmoribus 
 unto God : fo when certain e returning from their herefie were to be dzliZt'u. 
 received into the Church at Rome in the time otCornelw , they came Cypr.Epijf. 
 before the Presbytery^ and therefore confefled their finnes, and fo were $6. vide 
 admitted, etiam Cypt 
 
 Eut though thefentence of Excommunication was managed onely £ ^*^ 
 by the hand of thofe that laboured in the Word and Doctrine, yet we 
 will not conceale from you, that neither Excommunication not abfo- 
 huion did pafTe without the knowledge and approbation of the body of 
 the Church, to which the Delinquent did belong. 
 
 So we have learned out of 7ertwl//^,that their cenfbres were ordered Tertul.A- 
 in their publike arTemblies ; and good reafon, becaufe the people were pol.adver. 
 to forbeare communion with fuch. 2 lhef.%.6, 14^1 5. and publike cen- Cent - 
 fures of the Church were infli&ed not onely for the Emendation of c ^* 59 ° 
 delinquents, but for the admonition of others, and therefore ought to 
 be admiftrcd in publike that others might feare, 1 Tim. 5. 20. Origen °JJ gen ' 
 (peaking of the Duty and Power of the Church in cutting off a fcan- y'jl 
 dalous Pei fon though a Presby ter,making the cafe his own , he faith 
 thus : In uno confenju Ecclefia univerfa confpirans excidat me dextramfuam 
 &prejiciat a fe, He would have the confent of the whole Church in that Aa* 
 
 And when the lapfed Chriftians were received againe into the 
 Church, the Peoples confent was required therein ; elfewhy mould 
 Cyprian lay, Vix plebi petfuadeo into extorqueo ut tales patiantur admitti : c # r - 
 I can fcarce perfwade the people to fuffer fuch to be admitted : and in E W' $U 
 another Epiftlc written to his people in his Banifhment , he promrfeth 
 to examine all things,they being prefent and judging. Examinabmtur C,pr 'P^ 
 fingula pr£fentibus & judicantibus vobis. 1 ! \ a £ 
 
 But of this power of the People we (hall have a further occalion to 
 
A 
 
 fpeak afterttfards , When we come to difcourfc of Governing Elders*- 
 
 Onely may it pleafe your Honours from hence to take notice , how 
 unjuitly our Bifhops have invaded this right and power of Presbyters 
 and people in Church cenfures^ and devefting both of it, have girt it 
 wholly upon themfelves 3 and how herein they and the Bifhops of for- 
 mer times are T W (X 
 
 SECT. X. 
 Nd as our Ei(hops,and the Bifhops of former times are T W O in 
 . point of Sole; J ur if diction, fo alfo in the Delegation of this power 
 „ ofjunfdicudn unto others : to their Chancellours, Commiflaries,Of- 
 J^7/Jm^ cers > &c - Was ever fuch a thing as this heard of in the beft primitive 
 vicarium Times I that men that never received impofition of hands 3 fhould not only 
 ejje Efifco- be received into affiftance, but be wholly intrufted with the power of Spirt" 
 t'h & ft- tual Jurifdidion : Even then when it is to be exercifed over fuch perfons 
 culansin as jy ave \ 3a ^ b an ds laid upon them. ' 
 
 wtican.-in ^ e ma y °W erve ln Cyprian, whilft perfecution feparated him from 
 uno enirn his Church 3 when queftions did arife among his people , he doth not 
 fedemque fend them to his Chancellour or CommifTary ; No 3 he was fo far from 
 cjerenon fubftituting any man (much lefftzlay man) to determene or give 
 decetppar J uc |g enicnt | n f uc h cafes 3 that he would not afliime that power wholly 
 quodetiam 10 fcinafelf, but fufpends his Judgement , till the hand of God fhould 
 in lege Df-reftorc him to his Church againe, that with the advice and Counfel of 
 vina pro- the Presbytery he might give fentence : as may appeare to any that 
 kibetur di- (hall perufe his Epiftlcs. 
 
 7tNonau- ^ ure ^ God nac * ever * ec * n * s Ghiirch to fuch a way of deputation^ 
 
 bis in bove wou ^ have been in fuch a cafe of Neceffity as this was : or had any 
 
 <fy afmo footfteps of fuch a courfe as this been vifible by this holy Martyr in the 
 
 fimul,Con' goings of former ages 3 he needed not have deferred the determination 
 
 cil.UjfpuL Q f the quelHon about the receiving of fome penitent lapfed ones into 
 
 the bofome of the Church again, till his returne and the returne of his 
 
 Clergy, as he doth. 
 
 Cypr.Epift We will inflance in his 28 Epiftle 3 wherein giving direction for the 
 
 3$> excommunicating of fuch as would rafhiy communicate with lapfed 
 
 Chriftians, he gives this charge not to his Chancellor or CommiJJary, or 
 
 any other man upon whom he had devolved his power, and fet him as 
 
 his Deputy or Viccar generall in his abfence 3 but ad clerum, to the whole 
 
 Presbytery. 
 
 Dbmhim ^his Truth is fo cleare, that Bifhop Downam the great Advocate of 
 
 in the de- Epifcopacy confefleth 3 that in Ambrofe his time, and a good while after 
 
 fence of f which was about 400 years) till the Presbyters were in a manner 
 
 his Ser- wholly negle&ed, the Bifhops had no Ordinaries, Vicars, Chancellors^? 
 
 jnon,/j£.i Qommiffaries, that were not Clergy-men : but this is but a blind, where- 
 
 with the Bifhop would Dorre his P\.eader 3 for we challenge any man 
 
 to produce the names of any Clergy-man that was Vicar to Ambrofe, or 
 
J J s 
 
 Ai 
 
 SECT. XL 
 
 Third branch wherein the difference between our Bifhops , and 
 ^the Bifhops of former times, in point of Exerciiing their Jurif- 
 diction, is vifible, is the way or manner of exerciiing that power. 
 
 For brevities fake we will onely inftance in their proceedings in 
 caufes criminal ; where let them tell us, whether any good Antiquity 
 can yeild them one Prefident for THEIR OATH EX OFF1- 
 CIO, which hath been to their COURTS, as Purgatory fire to the 
 fopes Kitchin : they have forgotten that old Maxime in the Civil Lajy, 
 Nemo tenetur proderefeipfum , which as it is grounded upon natural e- 
 quity, fo it is confirmed by a Law ena&ed by Vioclefian and Maximili- 
 an, Nimis grave eft quod petitis, &c. It is too grievous that the adverfe part 
 Jhould be required to the exhibition offucb things asfhould create trouble to. n ... . 
 themfelves. Under ft and therefore that you ought to bring proof es of your in" # r " 2 o ' 
 tentions, and not to extort them from your adversaries againft themfelves, ifl 
 
 Shall the Lamp of Nature in the night of Ethnicifme enable Hea- 
 then Princes,(jea PerfecutorsJ to fee and ena& thus much , and fhali 
 not the glorious Sunne of the Gofpel convince thefe of their iniquities 
 in tranfgrefljng this Law,that call themfelves the Fathers of the Church? 
 
 If neither the light oj ^Nature, nor Gofpel light can,yetthecuftome'of 
 the Church, to which they fo oft appeal, may both convince them of 
 this iniquity, and difcov r to all the world the contrariety of their 
 proceedings, to the proceedings of former times, in this particular. 
 
 For of Old) both the Plantiffe and Defendant were brought face to 
 face, before the parties, in whofe power it was to judge : which way AfJwr/ 
 of proceeding , Athanafms affirmes to be according to Scripture , the ApolL 
 Law of God. And becaufe thofe that condemned Macarius,dld not thus 
 proceed, he condemnes their Sentence as malicious and unjuft. 
 
 Of old> no Sentence pa fled againft any man, but upon the Teftimony 
 of other witnefles befides the Accufers : after complaint exhibited, 
 the firir thing they applyed themfelves to , was to confider the perfon A . , ~ 1 
 and quality of the Accufer,Concil.t>rim.Conftant.Can.6 Then they heard 2rm 
 the witnefies,\vho were two at lezttfi an. Ap oft. Can. 7 5. And thefe witnefles 
 rnuft be fuch, as might not be imagined to be partial!, nor to beare en- 
 mity nor malice againft the party 2LCC\ikd.Ambrof.Epi ft, 64. fo Gratian y 
 Cauf 3.7/^.5 .cap.Gfr.odfufpeai . 
 
 Of old, None might be party, witneffe, and Judge, which Gratian 
 proves at large. Cauf.^.qu.^. cap.NuUus unquam prtfumat accufator fa- 
 mule fie , & Judex & teftis, G ^ 
 
 We grant indeed the Canon Law permits in fome cafes Tryal with- eeet. /ifcg. 
 out witneffe s ; Si crimen it a publicum eft, ut merito debeat appellari note- V'- 2 -™?- 
 rmm $ If the enmt be fo publike, that it may defervedly be called K™'* 
 Kotonm. Which Law further determines what is notorious, faying, GregliU 
 VJfenfam turn nos wteUigimut mamfeftam, qu& velper confeffionem velpro- Tit.4. c^.- 
 
 £ 2 bationem 2 ^ 
 
(Chryfoft 
 Hom.40. 
 in 2. Tim 
 
 Record- 
 ing this 
 among 
 shofe 
 things 
 ithathe 
 did Dolo 
 modo dn' 
 cere^ 
 
 Sozp.i'9 
 fficep. 18 
 
 51 
 
 hathftem legitime not a fuerit^ ant evident'^ Rei> qutnuRa. poflit tergiver~ 
 fatione celari •, We count that offence manifeft, which either by confef- 
 iion, or by lawful proofe comes to be known, or by evidence of fa&j 
 fo as it can be hid by no tergiverfations. 
 
 So that all was done in former times with mature deliberation, up- 
 on examination and evidence prod need, and proved by fuch witnef- 
 fes, as againft whom the Defendant could lay in no juft exception.And 
 notas now an Accufation whifperedagainft a man, he knowes not by 
 whom,to which he muft take his oath to anfwer,before he knows whac 
 his Accufation isi Which Oath, if he takes, without further witneffe, 
 he is cenfured upon the witnefle of his own Oith. If he takes it not, 
 he is fent prefentlyto prifon,there to lye without Bayle or Mainprize, 
 till the infupportable miferies of his long durance, compel him to take 
 on Oath again ft Naturej Scripture, Confcience, and the juft Defence 
 of his own innocency. 
 
 That our Bifhops therefore and former Bifhops are 7W,in the point 
 of executing their Judicatory power, we need fpend no more time to 
 prove. But come to the third thing, in which the difference betweene. 
 ours and former Bifhops is to be evidenced. 
 
 SECT. XII. 
 
 ANd that is State Imployment, or attendance upon Civil and Se^ 
 cular affaires, &c. which both Chrift and Saint Paul prohibits, 
 which prohibition reached* every Bifhop ( to fpeake in Cbrjfoftorues- 
 words) as well as iimotby, to whom it is directed ; Nullus ergo Epifco- 
 fatuprgditushtc audire detrectet^fed agere eci omnia detrectet, Let no 
 man that is a Bifhop, refufe to hear what the Apoftle faith, but to doe 
 what the Apoftle forbids. 
 
 We deny not but that Bifhops were in the Primitive times often in- 
 cumbredwithfecularbufinefs: but thefe were put upon them, fome- 
 times by Emperors, who fought the mine of the Church, as Julian, of 
 whom Nicepb. lib. 10. cap. 13. doth report, that in Clerum coaptatos 
 Senatorum munere- & mimjieriopexverfe fungi }ufit. Sometimes the gra- 
 cious difpofition of Princes toward Chrift i an Religion, madethenv 
 thus to honour Bifhops, thinking thereby to advance Religion : as 
 Gonftantine the Great enafted, that fuch as were to be tryed before 
 Civil Magiftrates,might haveleave to appeale ad Indicium Epifcoporum r 
 atqueecrumfententiamtatamtfietanquamab ipfo Imperatore prolatum ,. 
 ^nd this the Hiftorian reckoneth as one argument of his reverend re- 
 fpeft to Religion. Sometimes the excellency of their lingular parts caft 
 . civil dignities upon them. Tiberiut granted a Queftors dignity unto * 
 Bifljopjor bis eloquence: Cbrjfofiome for his notable ftoutnefs and free- 
 dome of fpeech,was fent as the fitteft man to Gaina;>whh the Emperors 
 command. Sometimes the people obferving the Fiihops to be much 
 honoured by the Emperour, would follick them to prefent their grei- 
 ' vances 
 
03) 
 
 tances to the Emperour. And fometimes tine afpiring humour of the 
 
 ITifhops raifed them to fuch places, as appears by Cjr/7/, who was the 
 
 firft Bifhop in Alexandria, who had civil dignities conferred upon him, 
 
 as Socrates relates it, from whom civil authority did defccnd upon fuc- Soira.j % j. 
 
 ceeding Bifhops. «| Zh,uv* u ZfantoTti A\i%a.yfyitiL{ /©k^ ^ hyrmuif 
 
 Tafias Y&TzLfwdi&vuv t T^y/uA7tdv %K(t^i t apx™ : ofwhom Nicephorus 
 
 therefore recorded, Epifcopatumma'pr cumfajtu, prophanorum Mtgiflra- 
 
 tmtm more^ quam prjedeceffores ejus Epifcopiy ingreffus f/r, unde adeo initi- 
 
 um jumptum eft in Ecclcfia Alexandria ut Epifcopi et/am, prof ana negotia , ., 
 
 curarent : He entred upon his Epifcopacy with more pomp then his il 
 
 predeceflbrs, with a pomp conformable to the Heathen Magiftrates. 
 
 Both thefeHiftorians relate the fad confequence that followedjupon Soc ^-7- c. 
 this, that Oreftes the Roman Govtrnour feeing his power much weaken- *?' 
 ed by the Biuiops interpofing in fecular affairs, hated the Bifhop ; and 
 this Cas the Hiixorian calls it) his usurped power. 
 
 This prefident of the Alexandrian Bifhop, the Bifhop of Rome did Mceph.l. 
 foon follow ; Et Romanus Epifcopatus non aliter quam Alexandrinus^quafi 
 EXTRA SACERVOtll FINES egreff'M ad j'ecularem princi- 
 patum erat)am dclapfus ; The Bifhop of Rome as well as the Bifhop of 
 Alexandria breaking the limits of the Prieftly function, did degene- 
 rate into a fecular Principality: which purchaftd no lefTe envie to him 
 then that to the other. 
 
 And though thefe two Bifhops went at fii ft abreaft in this point,yet 
 in a mort time the Roman had out ftripped the Alexandrian in that 
 power, till the Church degenerating more and more, that Roman 
 Prieft advanced his power not onely above all the Bifhops, but all the 
 Monarchs in the Chriftian Oi be. 
 
 Yetnotwithfhnding, he that fhall look into the Ancients, (hall x 
 finde ; firft,that the beft of them held,that they were not to be molefted 
 with the handling of worldly affaires, Cyprian Epft. 66. I. Singuli di~- 
 vine Saccrdotio honor at i non nifx altar i & facrificiis defeivire & precibus- 
 atq; oratiombus Vacate debent^ Molt ftiis fad aribus nonfunt obligandi^ qui 
 divinis rebus & jpiritualibus occupant jr. 
 
 Secondly, that they complained of them as of heavy burthens, ^g'Pofjjdou. 
 calls it Angaria>yez Avflin himfelfe in his 8i.EpifUecomplaines.that i n vm ^ 
 worldly buiincfs hindered his praying and lb prefltd him, that vix \ ut!U a 
 refifirarepotuit : and Gregory the great, non fine dclore in fecular ibm ver- 
 fabatur, prafat. in Dial. 
 
 Thirdly, Cyprian conftrued it as one great caufe of perfecutions rai- 
 fed againft the Churchy de lapfs, Sed. 4. 
 
 Fourthly, it was much cryed down as unlawful by the holyFa- 
 thers,many Canons forbidding it,and that under pain of being remo- 
 ved from their places. Can. Apoft. Can.6. Can. 81. hee that did 
 prefume to adminifter V»kW*tu}(i$xW£*iH*li*nrfiQ i *WP 9 a Roman 
 
 com- 
 
B 
 
 command or Adminiftration of Military affaires or civil placef as Zo- 
 nam therejhe (hould be M^okdfian.Apo.Can.%^ hiring of ground, 
 tnedling with worldly affaires is to be laid afide by them. Otherwife 
 they are threatned to be liable to Ecclciiaitical ctnCure.sfionc.Cal.C an. 
 %,Conc.Carth*Can.i6. 
 
 We will adde this for a conclulion in this pokit , it is obferved by 
 AthanafM)SulpitM, Severing and other Ecclefiaftical Hiftorians, that 
 theAriaxs were very expedite in worldly affaircsj, which experience 
 they gained by their conftant following and attendance upon the Em- 
 perours Court 5 and what troubles they occafioned to the Church 
 thereby, is notoriotrfly known to any that have feen die Hiftories of 
 their times. And in this our Bifhops have approved themfelves more 
 like to the Arian Bilhops then the purer Bijhops of purer times : but how 
 ever cleare it is, that our Bijhops and the Bijhops of former times are Two 2 
 two in eletiion to their office; Two in the difcharge of their officetfwo in their 
 Ordination, Jurifdittion, Procejfes, Cenfure <> Adminifiranom, and the dif- 
 ference between our Bijhops and thofe of former times , is greater then be* 
 tween the treat Bijhop ofKome and them. 
 
 s SECT. Xttl. 
 
 1 ut it feemes our Pvcmonftrant foared above thefe times even as high 
 ^Jis the Apoftles dayes, for fo he faith, If our Bijhops challenge any o- 
 iberfpiritud power 1 then was by Apoftoiike Authority delegated to, and re- 
 quired of Timothy and Titus > and the Angels of the feven Afian Churches^ 
 IctthembcVlSCLAIMEVzsVSVRFERS. And the truth is, fothey 
 deferve to be, if they doe but challenge the fame power that the Apoftle 
 did delegate to Timothy and Titus $ for Timothy and Titus were Evange- 
 lifts, and fo moved in a Sphere above Bifhops or Presbyters.^ For Time- 
 thy^t is cleare from the letter of the Text,2 Tim.^. %\?w ttowov Ivzfyz- 
 ■a tec the M ^Z) oe t fo ^ f an Evangel'ft : liTimothy had been but a Presbyter or 
 
 p\Tk\o&fl3 G h? aul had here P ut him u P on im P lo y ment 3 Vltra s ? h *™ m 
 
 -confulc Mivitatis. 
 
 Eujeb.Hijl And to any man , that will but underftand and coniider what the 
 
 Mb. 3: cap. Office of an * Evangdift was; ard wherein it differed from the Office of 
 
 ^.accor- aJ > rw £ >t , r or£/to 5 itwillbemanifeftthat^w^; and Titus were E- 
 
 fomf t0 af pm^hh and no Bijhops :,for the title of Evangebft is taken but two 
 
 £™tfieri waves 5 either for filch as wrote the Gofpel, and fo we doe not affirme //- 
 
 cap. 37. mothy and Titus, to be EvangeMs : or elfe for fuch as taught the Go/pel ; 
 
 and view an d thofe were of two forts, either fuch as had ordinary places and ordi- 
 
 the de * nary (Lifts, or fuch vjhete places and gifts were extraordinary \ and fuch 
 
 tfffi Evangelijls were Timothy and Titus, and not Bijhops , as wil appeare if 
 
 mk s of we confider, whativasthe difference betw een thtEvangelfftswdBi- 
 
 m Vw-fbops. Bijhops or Presbyters wve tyed to the particular care and tuition 
 
 gcW.Vnd of that flock over which God had made them OverfeersABs 20.28.But 
 
 then )' u ^EvangeliJis were not tyed to refide in one particular place 9 but did at- 
 
I 61 J 
 
 tend upon the Apoftles by whofe appointment they are fent from place:' 
 to place, astheneceffity of the Churches did require. As appeared 
 firftin Timothy whom Saint Paul befought to abide at Ephefus , 
 i. Tint, i. 3. which had beene needlefTe importuniy , if Ti- 
 mothy had the Epifcopall Q that is the Paftorall ) charge of 
 Ephefus committed to him by the Apoftles, for then he might have 
 laid as dreadful a Charge upon him to abide at Ephefus, as he doth to 
 Preach the Gofpel. But fo tar was Paul from fetling Timothy in Cathe- 
 dra in Ephefus, that he father continually fends him up and down up- 
 on all Church-fervices, for wefinde Alls. 17. 14. that when Paul fled Anno 5 
 from the tumults of Berea to Aihens, he left SiLis and Timothy behinde Aer*. 
 him, who afterwards comming to Pa.ul to Athens, Paul fends Timothy Chrifti 
 from Athens to Thtfialonica, to confirm the Theft alonians in the faith, as receptee, 
 appears i-Thef. 3. 1. 2. from whence returning to Paul to Athens again, 47. 
 the Apoftle Paul before he left Athens and went to Corinthfent him and . Q 
 Silas into Macedonia, who returned to him again to Corinth, Ad. 18. no 4 
 5. afterwards they travelled to Ephefus, from whence we read Paul . 
 lent Timothy arid Eraftus into Macedonia, Aft. 19.22. wither P^/ went ^ 5 * 
 after them, and from whence they and divers other Breathren jour- 
 nied into Afia, Alls 20. 4. All which Breathren Paulczlh, as it is pro- Anno 53 
 bable, Aws-ohoi tK^xa-nSy, the meffengers of the Churches, 2. Cw.8.23. 
 And being thus accompanied with Timothy, and the reft of the Bre-Awto 53 
 thercn he comes to Miletum, and calls the Elders of the Church of E~ 
 phejus thither to him, of which Church had Timothy been Eifhop, the 
 Apoftle in ftead of giving the Elders a charge to feed the flock of 
 Chrift, would have given that charge to Timothy, and not to them. 
 
 And fecondly,the Apoftle would not fo have forgotten hirnfelf, as 
 to call the Elders Enta-noTTSi, before their Bifhops face. 
 
 Thirdly, It is to be conceived, the Apoftles would have given them 
 fome directions, how to carry themfelves towards their Bifhop 5 bun 
 not a word of this though Timothy were then in Pauls prefence, and in 
 the prefence of the Elders, The cieare evidence of which Text demon- 
 j\ rates ^ that Paul did not leave Timothy at this time as Bifhop of Ephefus. p Af£AS 
 But it is rather evident that he took him along with him in his journey Capellui. 
 to Hierufalem,zr\& fo to Rometfor we find that thofe Epi files Paul 'wrote Heb. 13, 
 while he a prifoner^bear either in their infeription or fome other paf- 2 \- 
 fage of them, the name ofTimothy as Pauls companion, viz. The Epiftle ^ 5q " jy 
 to thcPhiltppians, CrJoJfians,Hebrewes,Phtlemon^whlch Epiftles he Wrote thatTjmo- 
 in bonds as the contexture, which thofe two learned profeflbrsj the thy was 
 one at Heydelburg, the other at Saulmur, make of Saint Pauls Epiftles, wit!l p <*«* 
 doth declare. at Rome, _ 
 
 So that it appears that Timothy was no Bifhop, but a Minifter, an^* pn " 
 Evangelift, a fellow labourer of the Apoftles, 1 7 hef. 3. 1. an Apoftle, a w i c h him 
 Meffenger of the Church, 2 Cor. 8. 3. a MinifterofGod^ 1 Thef 3, 2. thefe there, 
 
 titles 
 
 1 
 
titles the Holy Ghoft gives him, but never the title of a Bifhop. 
 
 The like we finde in Scripture concerning Titus y whom Paul as it is 
 
 conceived by learned men, did firftafliime into the felJowfhip of his 
 
 \nno M Labors in the place of John* and made him his companion in his jour- 
 
 b 4nno 45 ny through Axttoch a to Hierufalem.b fo we find Gal. 2.1. from thence 
 
 returning to //wt/otfcagaine^from thence he paffed through Syria and 
 
 Cilicia, confirming the Churches; and from Cilicia , he paffed to Greet, 
 
 where having Preached die Gofpel, and plainted Churches, he left jj- 
 
 "jAnno 4* m * there for a while, to jet in order things that remaine, 
 
 Yet it was hut for a while he left him there,for in his EpifUe which he 
 wrote to him not many yeares after, he in joynes him to come to him 
 
 * Anno $1 to Nicopolk * where he did intend to winter , but changing that pur- 
 
 pole fends for him to Ephcfus, where it feemes hi s Hycmal ftation was, 
 
 and from thence fends him before him to Corinth, to enquire the ftate 
 
 **Anno 51 of the Corinthians *.Hi$ returne from thence Paul expects at Troas *,ai d 
 
 * Anno 52 De caufe comming thither he found not his expeBatun there, he was fo 
 
 grieved in his fpirit, 2 Cor. 2.12. that he paffed prefently from thence 
 into Macedonia, where Titus met him^and in the midft of his afflictions 
 joyed his fpirits with the glad tydings of the powerful and gracious 
 effects, his firft Epiftle had among the Corinthians, a Cor. 7 , 5,6,7. Paid 
 having there collected the Liberalities of the Saints, fends Jitus aejaine 
 *JVnno $3 to the * Corinthians, to prepare f hem for the fame fervice of Miniftring 
 to thtneceffities of the Sahus,2 Ccr.8,6. And makes him with fome 
 others the Conveyers of that fecond Epiftle to the Corinthians. 
 
 All thefe journey es to'and fro did Jitus make at the defignment of 
 the ApojUe, even after he was left in Creet. Nor doe we finde, that after 
 
 * Anno 64 kjg g^g remo val from Creet * s he did ever returne thither.We read in- 
 
 deed, 2 ijm.JL.io.he was with_Ptf»/at Rome, and from thence returned 
 not to Creet, but into Valmatia. All which doth more then probably 
 fhew, it never was the Intendment of the Apoflle to fix Titus in Creet as a 
 Bifhop, butonely to leave him there for zfeafon for the good of that 
 Church, and to call him from thence, and fend him abroad to other 
 Churches for their good, as their neccflities might require. Now who 
 that will acknowledge a Vijhntlion between the Offices ofBifiops and 
 Evange lifts, and knows wherein that Diftintlion lyes, will not upon thefe 
 premiffes conclude that Timothy and Titus were Evangel ft s and NO T 
 
 Bijhops. 
 
 I but fome of the Fathers have called Timothy and Titus Bifhops. We 
 grant it true; and it is as true,that/or//e of the Father s have called them 
 Archhifhops and Patriar^s ; yet it doth not follow , they were fo. We 
 adde, fecondly, that when the Fathers did call them fo, it was not in a 
 proper but in an improper fenfe ; which we expreffe in the words of our 
 Kaynolds Learned Orthodox Raynolds ; 
 
 cenm fat Y u may learne by the Fathers thcmfelves, faith he, that when they 
 &a;6; tearmed 
 
K39) 
 
 -termed any Apoftle a Bifhop of this or that City (as namely S, 
 Feter of Antioch or KomO they meant it in a general iort and fignifi- 
 cation,becaufe they did attend that Church for a timc,and (upply that 
 roome in preaching the Gofpel, which Eifhops did after ; but as the 
 name of Bifhop is commonly taken for the Overjeer of a particular 
 Church, and Paftor of a feveral flock } f o Peter was not Bifhop of any 
 one place 5 thcrtfore not of Rome. And this is true by Analogy of ail 
 -extraordinary Bifhop?, and the fame may be (aid of Timothy and Titus, 
 
 that he faith of Peter. 
 
 Butwere it true that Tiwtfr*)' and Titus were Bifhops : will this Rc- 
 monihant undertake, that all his party (hall ftand to his Conditions < 
 If our Bifhops challenge any other fewer then was by Apojhlick^Authority de- 
 legated to,and required of Timothy and Titus, W the Angels ofthefeaven 
 Afian Churches, let them he dif claimed as ujurpers. Will our Bifhops in- 
 deed ftand to this ? then aVtum eft. Did ever Apoftchc\_Authmty delegate 
 power to timothy or Titus, to ordain alone } to governe alone I and do 
 not our Bifhops challenge that power > Did ever Apoftoliqne Authority 
 delegate power to Timothy and Titus, to rebuke an £lder> no 5 but %b 
 entreat him as a Father : and do not our Bifhops challenge themfelves 
 and permit to their Chancellors, CommijJaries,and Officials power not on- 
 ly to Rebufo an Elder, but to rayle upon an Elder 1 to reproach him with 
 the meft opprobrious termes offoole, knave, jach^fauce, &c. which our 
 paper blufhes to prefent to your Honors view . ? Did ever Apoftolich^ Au- 
 thority delegate to Timothy and Titus power to receive an accufation a- 
 gainft an Elder, but before tw r o or three witnefTes 1 and do not our Bi- 
 fhops challenge power to proceed Ex Officio, and make Elders their 
 own Accufers ? Did ever Apoftolick^Authority delegate power to Timo- 
 thy or Thus, to reject any after twice admonition, but an HeretickJ and 
 do not our Bifhops challenge power to reject and eject the moft fonnd 
 and Orthodox of our Minifters, for refilling the ufe of a Ceremony ? as if 
 Non-ccnfonnitywereHerefie. So that either our Bijhops muft difclaimc 
 this Kemonftrance, or elfe themfelves muft be disclaimed as usurpers. 
 
 But lilimotby and Titus were no Bifhops, or had not this power, it 
 may be the Angels of the feven Afian Churches had 5 and cur Remon- 
 itrant is fo fubtile as to twift thefe two together,that if one faiie.the ei- 
 ther may hold. 
 
 To which we anfwer 5 hYft, that Angel in thofe Epiftlcs is put Col- 
 ledively, not Individually 3 as appears by the Epiftle to Thyatira cap, 2. 
 verf. 25.whcre we read „>:, $•**•>* gror* Aoi7rof*,&c.But I fay untoyou 
 (ln.the plural number, not unto thee in the Angular)***/ unto the reft 
 7HTbyatira&c.Hnxh a plain diftinaion between the members of that 
 Church. By you, is fignifud thofe to whom he fpake under the name of 
 theAngeL By the rrfahe rcfidue of the people. The tropic governed, 
 and the Governours in the plural number, What c an- be m 01 e evident 
 
to prove 5 that by Attgtl is infant not one Angular perfon,but the whole 
 company of Presbyters that were in Thyatira. 
 
 This alfo further appears, becaufe it is ufual with the holy Ghoft, 
 not only in other Books of the Scripture, but alfo in this very Book of 
 the Revelation, to cxprefs a company under one Angular perfon. Thus 
 the Civil State of Rome, as oppofite to Chrift, is called A beafi with 
 ten horns : and the Ecclefiaftical State Antichriftian is called the whore 
 cfBabjlon^a.ndythefalfe Prophet ' 7 and the Devil and all his family is 
 called An old red Vr agon. Thus alfo the feven Angels that blew the fe- 
 ven trumpets. Revel. 8. 2. and the feven Angels that poured out the 
 feven Vials, are not literally to be taken, but Synecdochically, as all 
 know. And why not then the {even Angels in thofe EpiftlesMr. Mede 
 in his Commentaries upon the Revelation, pag. 265, hath thefe words; 
 J>enique(ut jam fetnel iterumqyncnuimM~)quoniam ~Deus adhibet angelospro- 
 videnti&fu* in reru humanarnmotibus & converfionibm ciendis,gubernan- 
 difqi adminiftrisudcirco, qua multorum manibus peraguntnr, Angelo tamen 
 tanquarn rei gerendtyr&ndi &Ducif ro communi loquendi mo do trihuuntur 9 
 Adde, thirdly, that the very name Angel is furacient to prove,that it 
 as not meant of one perfon alone, becaufe the word Angel doth not im- 
 port any peculiar jurifdi&ion or preheminence, but is a common » 
 name to all Minifters, and is fo ufed in Scripture. For all Minifters are 
 Gods MefTengers and Embafladours,fent for the good of the Ele&.And 
 therefore the name being common to all Minifters, why fhould wee 
 think that there mould be anything fpoken to one Minifter, that doth 
 not belong to all ? The like argument we draw from the word Stars 
 ufcd Revel, 1. zo. The feven Stars are the Kngels of the feven Churches, 
 How it is evident, that all faithful Minifters are called Stars in Scrip- 
 ture, whofe duty is to Chine as lights unto the Churches, in ail purity 
 ofdo^rineandholinefsofconverfation. And in this fenfe, the word 
 is ufed,when it is faid,that the third fart ofthefiars were darkpe dR.es tl* 
 E,I2. and that the Dragons taile drew the third part oftheftars of "Heaven* 
 and caft them to the E^, Revel. 1-2. 4. Which is meant not only of 
 Bifhops, but of other Minifters, unkffe the Bifhops will appropriate, 
 all corruption and Apoftacy unto themfelves. 
 
 Adde, fourthly,out of the Text it felfe,it is very obfervable,that our 
 Saviour in opening the myilery of the Viiion, Revel. 1. 20. iaith •, Tte 
 feven Candleftickl which thou faweft^re the feven Churches, but he doth 
 not fay 3 The feven Stars are the feven Angels of the fame Churches, 
 But the Kngels of the feven Churches ; wherein not without fome myftery 
 the number of the Angels is omitted, lead we mould underftand by 
 Angel, one Minifter alone, and not a company. And yet the Septenary 
 number of Churches is twice fetdown. 
 
 Laftly, though but one Angel be mentioned in the fore-front, yet it 
 
 is evident, that the Epiftles themfelves are dedicated to all the Angels 
 
 9 and 
 
and Minifters in every Church, and to the Churehcs themfelves: And 
 if to the whole Church, much more to the Presbyters of that Church. 
 This is proved Revel. 1. 1 1. What thcufeeft, write in a Booh and fend it 
 to tbefeven Churches which arc in Afia. And alfo by the Epiphonema of 
 every Epiftle ; He that hath an eare to hear, leuhim hear what the Spirit 
 faith ttnto the Churches. Upon which word's^ Ambrofius Ausbertus in his 
 Second book upon the Rivelation, faith thus ; Vnh eademq; lecutione & 
 Angelos & Eccleftas unum effe defignat. Nam cum in principio locutionum 
 qu£ adfeptemfiunt Angelos dicat, & Angelo illius Ecclefiefcribe ; in fine 
 lament earundem non dicit, Qjvz habet aurem audiat quodfpiritus dicat An* 
 gelo,fed quid Ecclefia dicat. By one and the fame phrafe of fpeech he 
 ilxweth, the Angels and the Churches to be one and the kme. For 
 whereas in the beginning of his fpeech, which he makes to the fewm 
 Churches, he faith, And write to the Angel of the Churches -, ye t in the 
 clofe of die fame^ he doth not fay, He that hath an Eare, let him heare 
 what the Spirit (dith to the Angel, but what he faith to the Church. And 
 this is further proved by the whole argument of thofe Epiftles, where- 
 in the admonitions, threatnings, commendations, and r eproofes, are 
 directed to all the Minifters of all the Churches. Revel. 2.10. The T>e~ 
 vil Jhattcaftfomeofyw intoprifon, &c. Revel. 2. 16. I will fight againft 
 them with the f word of my mouth, Revel. 2. 24. 1 will put upon you no other 
 burthen, &c. I fay unto yon and the reft of Thy aura, as many as have not 
 t6isVocirine,and which have not known the depths of Satan,&c. And when 
 it is faid in the lingular Number (as it is often} I know thy works and 
 labour, &c. verf. 2. and vcrf. 4. Repent and do thyfirft worlds ; and verf. 
 13. Thou haft not denyed my Faith, &c. and cap. 3. 26. Becaufe thou art 
 neither hot mr cold, &c. All thefe and the like places, are not to be un- 
 derftood as meant of one individual perfon, but of the whole compa- 
 ny of Minifters, and alfo of the whole Church , becaufe that the pu- 
 nishment thrcatned, is to the whole Church; Revel. 2. 5. Repent and 
 do thyfirft works, or elfelwill come unto thee quickly and remove thy Can* 
 dleftickj)ut oj 'his place 3 Rev. 2. 16. Repent, or elfel will come unto thee 
 quickly^ and will fight againft thee with thefword of my mouth -, Revel. 2. 
 24. I will not put uponyou any other burthen. Now we have no warrant 
 in the Word to think that Chrift would remove his Gofpelfroma 
 Church for the fin of one Bifhop, when all the other Minifters, and the 
 Churches themfelves are free from thofe fins. And if God would take 
 this courfe, in what woeful & miferable condition mould the Church 
 of England be, which groaneth under fo many corrupt Prelates? By 
 all this it appears, that the word Angel, is not to be taken, 'i£.*1tu*i, 
 but <ruAA»7r7«K*f >not properly^but figuratively .And this is the judgment 
 of Mafter Perkjn: upon the fecond Chapter of the Revelation : and of 
 Matter Brightman : and of Doctor F«%who in anfwer to the Rhemift; 
 in AfQc. i, 20, hath thefe words: S. John by the Angels of the Churches 
 
 r 1 wipar^rVi 
 
\ T^ 
 
 meaneth not all that fhould wear on their heads Myters, and hold 
 crofier (laves in their hands, like dead Idols, but them that are the 
 faithful meffengers of Gods word, and utter and declare the fame. A- 
 gain, they are called the Angels of the Ghurches,becaufe they be Gods. 
 
 meffengers. 
 
 Mafter Fox likewife in his Meditation upon the Revelation fpag .7.9. 
 W. ) is of this opinion* and hath gathered to our .hands the opinions 
 of all Interpreters he could meet,and faith that they all confent in this 
 that under the.perfon of an Angel,the Paftors 8c Minifters of the Chur- 
 ches were underftood.S. Auftin in his 1 32.Epin le, faith thus, Sic enim in 
 Apocalypfi legitur Angelus>&c.§>uodfi de Angelo fuperioYum coelorum :> & nm> 
 de Prapofitis Eccleflarum veflet intelligu non conjequenter dicer et> Habeo 
 adverfum te,&c. And fo in his fecond Homily upon the Revelation (if 
 that book be his) &>uod autem dicit Angelo Thyatir* Habeo adverfum te 
 pauca, dicit Praepofitis Eccleflarum, &c, This alfo Gregory the Great, 
 lib. 34. Moral, in lob. cap. 4. Stpcfacram \cripXuram prdeiicatores Ecclefi£ 
 pro eo quod patris gloriam annunciant, angelorum nomine folere defignare:& 
 hinc efte,quodIoha>inesinApocalypfi feptem Ecclefiis fcribens, angelis 
 Eccleflarum loquitur, ideft, Pr^dicatoribus pop.ulorum. Mafter Box 
 citeth Frimafiuty Haymo y Beda, Richard^ Thomas, and others, to whom 
 
 we refer you. 
 
 If it be here demanded fas it is much by the Hierarchical fide) that- 
 if by Angel be meant the whole company of Presbyters, why Chrift- 
 didnot fay, to the Angels in the plural number , but to the Angel ittc 
 
 the Angular t 
 
 We anfwer, that though this qiuftion may favor of a litle too mnefc 
 euriofity, yet we will make bold to fubjoyn three conjectural reafons< 
 of this phrafe of fpeech. 
 
 Fitft, it is fo ufedin this place, becaufeit is the common language 
 of other Scriptures in types and vifions to fct down a certain number 
 for an uncertain>& the Angular number for the plural. Thus the Ranv 
 pan.%. 3.isinterpredverf.2o. to be the Kings of Media, and PerAa. 
 And the enemies of Gods Church are fet out by four horns. And the 
 deliverers by four Carpenters, Zach. 1. 18.20.And the wife and foolifh 
 Virgins are faidtobe five wife and five foolilh. And many fuch like. 
 And therefore as we anfwer the Papjfts, when they demand why Chrift 
 if he meant figuratively when he faith, this is my body, did not fpeak in 
 plain language, this is the fign of my body? We fay, that this phrafe of 
 fpeech is proper to all Sacraments : So we alfo aniwer here,this phrafe. 
 of fpeech, Angel for Angels^ is common to all types and viiions. 
 
 Secondly Angel is put, though more be meant, that fo it may hold 
 proportion withthe viflon which John faw,Chap. 1. 12. zo.Hefawfe- 
 ven golden Candlefticks, and (even Stars. And therefore to hold propor- 
 tiom the Eniftles are dire&ed to feven Angels^ and to fevea Churches. 
 5 l And 
 
(43) 
 
 And this is called a myftery, Revel. 1. 10. the Myftery af the feven Stars. 
 &c. Now a myftery is a fecret which comprehends more then is ex- 
 preffed 5 and therefore though but one ^ngel be expreffed, yet the my- 
 ftery implyes all the Angels of that Church. 
 
 Thirdly, to fignifie their unity in the Minifterial funcT:ion,and joynt 
 comnriilion to attend upon the feeding and governing of one Churchy 
 with one common care, as it were with one hand a»nd heart. And this 
 ii more fitly declared by the name of one Angel, then of many. We of- 
 ten finde the name of ('one) Prophet or Prieft to be put for the general 
 body of the Miniftery, or whole multitude of Prophets or Prieft s, in 
 the Church of Ijrael or ludab , when the Spirit of God intendeth to 
 reprove, threaten , or admonifh them. Thus it is If re. 6. 13. 18. ipJfa. 
 3. 2. Hof. 9. 8*. Eze\. 7. 26. Hof. 4, 6. Mai. 2. 7. Neither mould it feem 
 ftiange,that a multitude or company of Minifters fhould be underftood 
 under the name of one Angel, feeing a multitude of Heavenly Angels 
 (Employed in one fervice for the good of Gods SaintsJ is fometimes 
 in the Scripture (hut up under one Angel in the lingular number, as 
 may be gathered from Gen. 14.7. 2 Kings 19. 35. pfal 34. 7. compa- 
 red with Pfal. 91. 11. Gen. 32. 1. 2. Kin/ t s 6. 16, 17. And alio a multi- 
 tude of Devils or evil Angels, joiritly labouring in any one work, is 
 fet forth under the name of one evil or unclean fpirit, 1 Kings 22 . 2 1, 
 22.Markj.2$ y 24. Marine}. 2. 9. Luke $. 33. 34. Luk^ 8. 27. 30. 1 Bet. 
 5. 8. Heb. 2. 14. Efhef. 6. 1 1. 12. 
 
 Butnowlctusiuppofe (which yet notwithstanding we will not 
 grant)that the wordAngel is taken individually for one particular per- 
 ion, as Do&or Reynolds teems to interpret it, together with Matter Be- 
 z,a yet nevertheliffe, there will nothing follow out of this acception, 
 that will any ways make for the upholding of a Dioccfan Bi(hop,with 
 fole power of Ordination and Jurifdiftion, as a dittinct Superior to 
 Presbyters. And this appear?, 
 
 Firftjbecaufe it never was yet proved nor ever willfas we conceive ) 
 that thele Angels were Dioceian Bifhops, considering that Parifhes 
 were not divided into DioceflTes in $. Johns d\ys. And the feven Stars 
 a>re faid to be fixed in their feven Candlefticks or Churches, not one 
 Star over divers Candlefticks. Neither can thofe Churches be thought 
 to be Diocelan, when not onely Twdaland the old tranflation, calls 
 them feven Congregations, but we read alio Afts 20. that at Ef befits 
 which was one of thofe Candlefticks, there was but one flock. 
 
 And fecondly, we further finde that in Ephefus one of thofe feven 
 Churches, there were many Presbyters, which are all called Bifhops r 
 A&s 20. 28. and we finde no colour of any fuperintendency or fuperi- 
 orityofone Bi (hop over another. To them in general the Church is 
 committed to be fed by them without any refpeft had to timothy, who 
 ftood at his Elbow^and had been with him in Macedonia^ and was now 
 
 waiting: 
 
Waiting upon him to Jerufalem. This is alfo confirmed by 'Epiphanim 
 who writing of the Hereiies of the Af//rt?'/»u,faith 3 that in ancient times 
 this was peculiar to Alexandria^ that it had but one Bifhop, whereas 
 other Cities had two. And he being Bifhop ot Cypres, might well be 
 acquainted with the condition of the Churches oiAfta, which were fo 
 nigh unto him. 
 
 Thirdly, there is nothing faid in the feven Epiftles that implyeth 
 any Superiority or majority of rule or power that thefe Angels had 
 over the other Angels rhat were joyned with them in their Churches. 
 It is written indeed, in commendation of the Angel of the Church of 
 Ephejus, that he could not hcare them that were tvit$ and that he had tryed 
 them which fay they were hpoflks and are net, and had found them lyers. 
 And it h fpoken in difpraife of the Angel oiVergamm, that hefuffered 
 them which held the VoUrine ofBalaam,&c. But thefe things are comtnon" 
 duties requirable at the hands of all Minifters, who have the charge of 
 fouls. 
 
 But fuppofe that there were fome fuperici ity and prehemenency in- 
 iinuated by this individual Angel, yet who knoweth not that there are 
 diverfe kinds of fuperiority ? to wit, of Order, of Dignity, of Gifts 
 and Parts, or in degree of Miniftery, or in charge of power and juris- 
 diction. And how will it be proved that this Angel if he had a fupe- 
 riority, had any more then a fuperiority of Order, or of Gifts and 
 Parts ? Where it is faid, that this Angel was a fuperior degree or or- 
 der of Miniftery above Presbyters? InwhichEpiftleisitfaid that this 
 Angel had fole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction .? And therefore 
 as our learned Proteftants prove againft the Papifts, that where Chrift 
 directed his fpeech to Feter in particular and faid, I will give unto thee 
 the Keys of the kwgdomof Heave «;&c. That this particularization of Pe- 
 ter did not import any lingular preheminence or majority of power to 
 Veter more then to the other Apoftles ; But that though the promife 
 + *, was made to Feter, yet it was made to him in the name of all the reft, 
 
 utique fa anc * g* lven t0 a ^ as we H as one * And tnat therefore it was fpoken to 
 cmri A- oneperfon, and not to all, thatfo Chrift might fore-fignifie theuni- 
 poftoliquodty of his Church, as* Cyprian, Auflin, Hierome, Oftatus, and others 
 juerat Pe- fay^ So when Chrift dire&s an Epiftle to one Angel, it doth notim- 
 *l^uJ?J l ply a fuperior power over his fellow-Angels, but at moft only a pre- 
 pmditi fa fidency for order fake. And that which is written to him, is written 
 honoris fa to the reft as well as to him. And therefore written to one, not to ex- 
 p9teftatis, elude the reft, but to denote the unity that ought to be between the 
 fedexordi- Minifters of the fame Church in their common care and. diligence to 
 me prop- tneir flock .And this is all that Doctor Reynslds faith, as you may read 
 cifcitur,Ht in his conference with Hart, cap. 4. divif. 3. adfinem. For it is evident 
 Ecclefia u- that Do&or Reynolds was an utter enemy to thel/tf Vivinum of the E- 
 ntmon- pifcopal preheminency over Presbyters, by his Letter to Sir Francis 
 fitetur. KwVs 
 
V 40 J 
 
 Knolls. And learned Mafter Beza alfo faith fomething to the fame 
 purpofe in his Annotations upon Revel. 2. i.Augelo. i. Trpoirort quern ni- 
 wirum oporuit imprimis debit rebus admoneri, ac per eum ctteros colleges 
 totamque adeo Ecclefiam. Sed hincftatui Epifcopalis ille gradus poftea bu- 
 manitus in Ecclefiam Dei invefluscerte nee poteft nee debet , imo ne perpe- 
 tuum quidem iftud *-?oera>7o$ ntunus efte neceffario oportuifie^ficnt exorta inde 
 Tyrannis Oligarchica {cu)us apex eft Antichriftiana beftia) certiffima. 
 cum totius non Ecclefi* modo, fed etiam orbis pernicie> nunc tandem de- 
 clirat. 
 
 If therefore our Kemonfirant can produce no better evidence for 
 his Hierarchy then Timothy and Titus, and the Angels of the Afian Chur- 
 ches , Let not this Remonftrant and his party, cry out of wrong, // 
 this claimed Hierarchy be for ever booted out of the church , feeing it is his 
 owne Option. And yet we cannot conceale one refage more out of 
 Scripture, to which the Hierarchy betake themfelves for fhelter. And' 
 that is the twoPoftfcripts in the end of Pauls fecond Epiftle to Timothy, 
 «uidofthatto7/r»i; where in the one, Timothy isfaid to be the firft 
 Bifhop of Ephejus , and in the other, Titus is faid to be the firft 
 Bifbop of the Church of the Cretians : to both which places wee an- 
 fweiv 
 
 That thefe two Poftfcrips Cand fo all the reft) are no part of Ca- 
 nonical Scripture, And therefore our former and ancienter Englifti 
 translations, though they have thefe Poftfcripts, yet they are put 
 in a fmall character different from that of the Text. Although 
 our Epifcopal men of late in newer imprcfiions have inlarged their 
 Phyla&eries, in pHttine thofe Poftfcripts in the fame full cha- 
 racter with that of the Text, that the fimple might beleeve they 
 are Canonical Scripture. The Papifts themfelves ( ^aromm , 
 Serr arias, and the Rhemifts ) confefle that there is much falfity 
 in them. The firft Epiftle to Timothy , is thus fubferi bed : the firft 
 to Timothy was written from Laodicea, whoch is the chiefeft City of 
 Phrygia Pacatiana. Here w T ee demand, whether Paul when hee 
 writ the firft Epiftle to Timothy , was alTurcd he fhould live to 
 write a fecond , which was wricten long after ? And if not ; 
 How comes it to bee fubferibed, the firft to Timothy, w'hich hath re- 
 lation to a fecond ? Befides, the Epiftle is faid to bee writ from 
 Laodicea^ whereas Beza in his Annotations proves apparently, that 
 it was written from Macedonia 5 to which Opinion Baronius and 
 Serrarius jfobferibe; It is added, Which is the chiefeft City of Phry- 
 gia Pacaiiana. But this Epithet is nowhere read in the Writers of 
 t^ofe ages, faith Beza, Sed apud recent lores ihs, qui Komani inrperii 
 jam inclinantis provincias defcripferunU So that by this place it is e« 
 vident, that the fubfeription was added a long while after the 
 
 writing 
 
writing oftheEpiftles by fome men, for the mofc part vcl in2o8u 9 
 faith Beza> velcerte non \atis attentis, Either by a Learned, or negligent 
 
 man. 
 
 The fecond Epiftle is thus fubfcribed -, Ibe fecond Epiftle unto 
 Timothy, ordained thefirfl Bifhop of the Church of the Epheiians, was 
 -written from Rome, when Paul was brought before Nero the fecond time. 
 Now thefe words Ordained tkefirftBifhop, is wanting, faith Beza, m 
 quibufdamvetujtis codicibus, in veteri vulgata editione, &apudSyrum 
 interpre:cm. If Saint F^ had written this PofKcript, he would not 
 havefaid, 2» Timothy the firft Bifhop, &c. whereas it was not yet 
 certain whether ever there mould bee a fecond. Neither would it bee 
 laid when Paul was brought, &c. But when I was the fecond time 
 brought before Nero, The Syriack Interpreter reads it, Here ends the 
 fecond Epiftle to Timothy written from Rome. 
 
 The Epiftle tolitus is thus fubfcribed ; Written to Titus, Ordained 
 frftBifijop of 'the Church of 'the Cretians, from Nicopolis of Macedonia. 
 Here it is faid that this Epiftle was written from Nicopolis, whereas it 
 iscleare that Paul was not at Nicopolis when he wrote it. Tit, 3. 12 , 
 Be diligent to come to me at Nicopolis, for I have determined there to win- 
 ter. Hee doth not fay, Here to winter, but There-, Where note, for 
 the prefent he was not there. And befides it is faid, that Titus was 
 Ordained the fir ft Bifhop, &c. And who was the fecond? or was there 
 ever a fecond ? And alfo He is faid to be Bifhop, not onely of a Diocefs, 
 but of all Greet. Was there ever fuch a fecond Bifhop ? Adde, laftly, 
 that it is faid, Bifhop of the Church of the Cretians ; Whereas it would 
 bee faid of the Churches of the Cretians. For the Chriftian Churches 
 of any Nation are called Churches by Luke and Paul, not Church. 
 Therefore Codex Claremontanus fubferibes -, Here ends the Epiftle to 
 Titus, and no more. So the Syriack ; Finitur Epiftola ad Titum qu£ 
 fcripta fuit e N/copoli. The old Vulgar Edition hath nothing of the E- 
 plfcopacy of Titus. By all this it appears, that if the Bifhops had no 
 more authority to urge us to fubferibe to their Ceremonies, then they 
 have authority for their Epifcopal Dignity by thefe Subfcriptions, 
 there would be no more fubfeription to Ceremonies in the Churches 
 
 ofEngland. 
 
 But fome willfay, that there is one objection out of Scripture yet 
 unanfwered, and that is from the inequality that was bttweene the 
 twelve Apofties, and the feventy Difciples. 
 To which we anfwer j 
 
 Firft, that it cannot be proved that the twelve Apoftles had any fu- 
 periority over the feventy, either of Ordination, or Jurifdittion, or 
 that there was any fubordination of the feventy unto the twelve : but 
 fuppof e it was, yet we anfwer 
 
 Secondly 
 
(47) 
 
 Secondly , that a fuperiority and inferiority betweene Officers 
 of different kindes, will not prove that there (hould be a fuperio- 
 rity and inferiority between Officers of the fame kinde. No man 
 will deny but that in Chritts time, there were Apoftles , Evange- 
 lifts, Prophets, Paftors, and Teachers,and that the Apoftles were 
 fuperior to Evangelifts and Pallors But it cannot be proved, that 
 one Apofilc had any fuperiority over another Apoftle, or one E- 
 vangelift over another. And why then fhould one Presbyter be o* 
 ver another? Hence it followeth , that though we (hould grant a 
 fuperiority between the twelve and the feventy, yet this will not 
 prove the queftion in hand. Becaufe the queftion is concerning 
 Officers of the fame kind,andthe inftance is of Officers of different 
 kinds, amongft whom no man will deny but there may be a fupe- 
 riority and inferiority , as there is amongft us between Presbyters 
 and Deacons. 
 
 And now let your Honours judge ( confidering the premiffes) 
 how far this Epifcopal government is from any Divine right, or 
 jipoftolical ihfiitHtion : And how true that fpeech of Hierome is, 
 that a Bifhop as it is a fuperiour Order to a Presbyter , is an Hu- 
 mane pre/umption , nor a Divine Ordinance' 
 
 But though S enpture fails them, yet the indulgence and Muni- 
 ficence of KcligiQu^ Privets may fupport them, and to this the Re- 
 nsonfi rant &.*%*% his iiexc reiourfe,yetfo as he acknowledged here, 
 Ingagements to ri net s one ly for their acceffvry dignities , tides , and 
 Maintenance; net at all for their ft \tkns a*dfttnelions, ( wherein yet 
 the author plainly acknowledged a difference between our Bifbeps 
 and the Bi(bops of old by fuch acceilions. ) 
 
 For our parts, we are fo farre from envying the gracious Muni- 
 ficence of ' piow Princes , in collating honourable maintenance upon the 
 Minifters of chrift , that We beleeve , that even by Gods oven Grd\- 
 ' nance ^ double Honour isdueuntothem. 
 
 And chat by how much the Miniftery of the Gofpell is more ho- 
 nourable then that of the Law 9 by fo much the more ought all that 
 embrace the Go/pdl , to be carefull to provide, that the Minijhts 
 cftheGafpell might not onely live , but maintain Hofpitalitte, ac- 
 cording to the Rule of the (jofptfi' And that worthy gentleman 
 fpake *s an Oracle, that kid t t kit fc*nd*Uui Maintenance ts a gnat 
 cauffcf afcandelous Mini fiery. 
 
 Yet we are not ignorant, that when the Miniftery came to 
 have <UrQs 3 djmos. Itcationes , vehicular c\ms , latifvndht, as t hry- 
 
 C /J- 
 
fvft. Hm.86 InMatth. That tKen 2fc/igw peptrit divitias > &filU 
 dcvoravit /l/*fra»,Religion brought forth riches,and the Daugh- 
 ter devoured the Mother ; and then there was a voice of Angels 
 heard from Heaven;Ho<&> iHnenumin EccUfiam Cbrifiicecidit .This 
 day is poifon (Vied into the Church of Chrift. 
 
 And then it was that Ierem com plained, Cbrifii Bcclefia poflquam 
 adChriflianos principes venit , potentia quidem & divitiu major , fed 
 virtutibus minor fatta t(l* Then alfo was that Conjunction found 
 true ; That when they bad wooden Chalices, they hadgolden Priefis; 
 but when their Chalices were golden , their Priefts were wooden* 
 
 And though we do not think , there is any fuch incompojfibili' 
 
 y, but that large Revenue s may be happily managed with an humble 
 
 fccliblneffe, yet is very rare to finde* Hiftory tells us , that the fu- 
 
 perfluous revenues of the "Bishops not onely made them neglect 
 
 their CMiniflerj, but further ufhered in their ftatcly and pompous 
 
 attendance; which did fo elevate their fpirits, that they inmlted o- 
 
 ver their brethren , both Clergy and People, and gave occafron to 
 
 others to hate and abhorre the Chriftian Faith , Which Eufebius 
 
 fets forth fully in the pride of Paulm Samofatenus, who notwith- 
 
 ftanding the mcanneffe and obfeurity of his birth,afterwards grew 
 
 to that height of infolency and pride in all his carriage, efpecially in 
 
 that numerous trainc that attended him in the ftreets , and in his 
 
 Stifebjib.-j*' ftateiy throne raifed after the manner of Kings and Princes, that 
 
 CjiQ.29* Fides nofira mvidi<e, & odie, propter faflam & fuperbiam cordis Mint, 
 
 f alia f uerit obnoxia^hc Chriftian Faith was expofed to envy and 
 
 hatred through his pride. 
 
 And as their ambition ( fed with the largeneffe of their reve- 
 nues) difcovered itfelf in great attendance , ftately dwellings, 
 and all Lordly pomp, fo Hierom complaines of their pride in their 
 lately feates, qui velut in aliqua fublimi fpecula confiituti, vixdig- 
 nantur videre mortales & alloqui confervos [ues\ who fitting aloft as 
 it were in a watch-tower, will fcarce deignc to looke upon poorc 
 mortalls, or fpeake to their fellovv-fervants. 
 
 Here we might be large in multipying fevcral tcftimonies a- 
 gainft the pride of Ecclefiafticall perfons , that the largenefTe of 
 their revenues rayfed them to: but we will conclude with that 
 grave complaint of ' Snlpitim Severn* •. 
 
 I lie qui Ante pedibus aut afello ire confueveratjpumante equofuperbui 
 invchttur -, parva priitt ac vili cclluU contentm habitare, erigit celfa 
 Layuearia, conflruit mult a cwclavia, feu I pit pcftes^pingit armaria^ 
 
 vtftem. 
 
veftemrcffuit grcfflorem , indumentum molle drfiderat, &c. Which 
 becaufe the pradice of our times hath already curried into Englifli, 
 wcfpare the labour to tranflate. 
 
 Onely mffer us (being now to give a Vale to our Remonftrants 
 arguments) to recoiled fome few things. 
 
 Firft,whcrcas this Remonftrant faith^/ we do not/bev out ef the true Pa^iz. 
 & genuine writings ofthofe holy men> that lived in the Affiles aayes a 
 clear & received dtfinttknof Bifhops ^Presbyters ^and Deacons >as three 
 dift'tntl fubordinate callings jvith an evident fpeeificatien of the duty be- 
 longing to each of them: Let this claimed Hierarchy be for ever routed 
 out of the churcb:We befeech you,let it be remembred how we have 
 proved out of the genuine and undeniable writings of the Apoftles 
 themfelues , that thcfe are not three diftind callings : Bifiopszre 
 Presbyters, being with them all one , Name and Office , and that the 
 diftndion ofBifhops and Presbyters was not of Divine Inftituti- 
 on, but Humane: and that thefc Bifliops, in their flrft Inftitution 
 did not differ fo much from Presbyters , as our prcfent Bilhops 
 differ from them. 
 
 Sec**dly?N\\tttis this Remonftant faith,7/W Bifhops challenge p 
 any ether fewer then was by tsfpoftolike authority delegated to^ and re- &' % ' 
 quired of Timothy and Titus, and the Angels of the A fan Cb*rches:Li t 
 them be difclaimedas ufurpers. Wee defire it may be remem- 
 bred , how we have proved firft ; that Timothy and Titus and the 
 Angels who are Diocefan Bifhops ; and fecondly , that our Ei- 
 fhops challenge ( if not in their Polemickes , yet in their Prac- 
 ticks ) a power that Timothy and Titus , and thofe Angels never 
 did. 
 
 Thirdly, Whereas this Reraonftrant faith, Jf there can be better <rp A „ 2 . 
 # vide nee under Heaven for any matter of fall , let Epifccptcy be for ever 
 abandoned out of Gods Church: We befeech you remember how 
 wcake we have difcovered his Evidence to be; and then the Infe- 
 rence upon all thefe we humbly leave to your Honours Wifdomand 
 Iuftice. 
 
 SECT. XIV. 
 
 _ 
 
 UAving thus considered the validity of thofe arguments, 
 whereby this Remonflrant would furTult Epifctpacy , we de- 
 fend now to inquire,what fatisfactionhe gives to thofe objedi- 
 ons, which himfelf frames as the main, if not the fole arguments, 
 that Epifcopxcy is affanlcable by, and they are two* . 
 
 F 2 Firft 
 
FiLlr, that pleading the Divine right of Epijcopacy u W the preju- 
 dice of Sovereignty. Secondly , that it cafis a dangerous imputation 
 upon all thoft Reformed Churches that want this Government. 
 
 To the firft, the prejudice of Sovereignty ; he anfwere there is a 
 com patiblencfs in this cafe of Gods Atl 9 and the Kings : it is God 
 that makes the Bi(hop,the King that gives the Bifhoprick. 
 But we have proved already,that God never made a Bifhop,as he 
 {lands in his Superiority over al other Presbyters t he never had Gods 
 Fiat.- and if they diiciaim the influence of fovereignty unto their 
 creation to a Priority , and affert that the King doth not make 
 them Bijhops , they muft have no being at all Sure we are, the 
 t« © Laws of the Land proclaim , that not only Bifheprickj , hut Bi- 
 jhops and all thejurifditlion they have, is from the King : whereas 
 *?hcRcmon- tne Rwonftrant acknowledged no more , but the bare* place 
 ftranthere ac- andexccrcife tobe from Regall donation, which cannot be affirm- 
 knowlcdges ed without appareut prejudice of that Sovcrcigntie which the 
 thefame of the Lawes of the Land have inverted our Princes with. 
 K ng, that ^ n( j £ or fc s un wortby comparifon of King* in order to Bifbops^ 
 
 vI^JJZTxa and Patrons in order to their Clerks, when he (hall prove thatthe 
 of the Pope, Patron gives mimfterial power to nis Clerke' as the King according 
 who affirmed to our Laws gives Epifcopall power to the Bijhop, it may be of fome 
 the degree of a conducement to hiscaufe;but till then , we leave the unfitnefle of 
 Biihop was de this coraparifon , and the unthankfulnefle of thofc men to the in- 
 P* redl V™£P^ dulgence of their Sovereignc, to their deferved recompence. 
 lar Eiihop de *^ s Earned anfwer to fuch men as borrowing Sainc leroms phrafe, 
 jure pontificlo. fpeake Saint Pauls truth, is in fumme this : 
 
 Bift.conTrid. That he knowts not how to prefcribe to mem thoughts } butftr all his 
 
 Fag. 28, 25?. Rhetericke y they will think^what they lifi ; but if they will grant him the 
 
 quefiion^ they fhaE foon be at an end of the quarrell: which one anfwer 
 
 ilfatisfaftory , would filence all controverfies to as good purpofe 
 
 as he did Beliarmine^ who faid 9 Bellarmine faith it is thus, and I 
 
 fay it is not, and where is Bellarmine now? 
 
 c fag. 29. To the fecond ob jection , that Epifcopacie thus ajferted cafis an 
 
 imputation upon all the reformed Churches \ that want that Government, 
 
 he faith, that the thjeBion is intended to raife envie againfi them, who 
 
 ( if chey.may be beleeved) love and honour thofe fifter-fhurches, and 
 
 bleffe God for them- 
 
 But do they out pluck all this envie upon themfelves , who in 
 their Conferences, Writings Pulpits,ZJniverfeties y Difputes t High Com- 
 mijfion, Declamations, have difclairmd them as no Churches^ that have 
 
 dif- 
 
difclaimed the ^Prelates and have honoured the mod glorious Lights 
 oi thofe Reformed Churches, Calvin, ISe^t, and others with no bet- 
 ter titles then of Rafcals, Ttlafphemers ? &c. 
 
 But the pith of his anlwer after a few good words is thi^that no 
 fuch confequentcan be drawn from their opinion; for their Im di- 
 vinum plead i only for a luftifiablenejfe of thisholy calling: not for 
 an abfolutc necefllty of it, Warranting it where it island, requiring it 
 where it may be had; but not fixing upon the Church that wants it, the 
 deftel of any thing of the £jfence of a Church . but only of the glory and 
 jerfetlion of it - y neither is it their fin, but their mifery. 
 
 And is ic fo, doth not this Im divinum argue a Necejfitie,b\it on- 
 ly a.IujfifiableneJfeohhis calling? nor is the want of it a want ofa- 
 ny thing of Effence, but onely of pcrfe&ion? we had thought, that 
 page the 20th, where this Remonftrant ftrives to fetch the pedegree 
 of E fife •of acie it om no leffethan Jfofiolicall; and in that right Di- 
 x/tne ivjtttutton he had reckoned it among thofe things, which the 
 Apoftles ordained for the fucceeding adminiftration of the 
 Church in effentia/l matters: but here it feemes he is willing to re- 
 trad whac there fell from him: there it was to his advantage to 
 fay , this Government was a thing effentiall to the Church 3 and 
 here it is no leffe advantage to fay, it is not effentiall. 
 
 But if it be not Effentiall , then what is the reafon that when a 
 Frieft who hath received Orders at Rome , turnes to us, they urge 
 not him to receive ordination among us again: but when fome of 
 our brethren , who flying in Queene Maries dayes, had received 
 Impofition of hands in the Reformed Churches beyond the Sea ste- 
 mmed again in the dayes of Queene Elizabeth, they were urged 
 to receive Impoiitionof hands againe from our Bifhops, and fome 
 did receive it. If thofe Churches that want Bishops, want nothing 
 effentiall to a Church; then what EJfentiaH want was therein the 
 Ordination of thofe Minifters that received Impofnion of hands- 
 in thofe Churches, that might deferve a Re- ordination, more than, 
 if they had firft received their Ordination at Rome ? 
 
 And what is the reafon that Bifhop Mount ague To confidently Oyginum Ec- 
 affirmes , that Ordination by Epifcopall hands is fo neceffary, as cl*fi?flit*r*m, 
 that the Church is no true Church without it , and the Miniftery 
 no true Miniftery, and ordinarily no falvation to be obtained With- ¥ 6 . & 
 out ic> And if this Remonftrant fhould leave Bifhop Mount ague ro 
 anfwerfor'himfelf, yet notwithstanding he (lands bound to give 
 us fatisfactton to tfaefe two qucftions -, which arife from his own 
 Look. Eirft., 
 
firft, whether that Office, which by divine rtght hath the felt 
 power of Ordaining, and Ruling air Other Officers in the Church, (as 
 he faith Epifcopacie hath) belong not to the feeing, but onely to 
 the gloryand perfection of a Church? Secondly, there being (in 
 this mans thoughts) the fame Imdivinnm for Bifhops, that there 
 is for P Afters and Elders, whether if thofc Reformed Churches want- 
 ed P after s and Elders too, they ftioald want nothing of the E fence 
 of a i > hurch, but of the perfection and glory of it ? 
 
 But this Remonftrant fcemes to know fo much of the minde of 
 thofe Churches , that ifthej might have their option, they would moft 
 gladly embrace Epifcopall Government , as little differing from their 
 crvn Moderator/hip, fave onely in the perpetuitie of it, and the new Inven- 
 tion (as he odioufly calls \t) of lay- Elders. But no queftion thofe 
 1 earned Worthies that were intruded by the Churches te compile their 
 Confefftons , did comprife their Judgements better than the Compofer cf 
 this Remoujf ranee. And to his prefumtion , we oppofe their Con- 
 foflfion. We will begin with the French Church , who in their 
 Confeflion fpeakc thus : 
 
 ] Crehimus verm Eg defiant 
 gubernari deb ere ea politia, 
 quam Dominus nofier fefus 
 Chrifius fancivit^ it a videli- 
 cet jitfm in ea PaJlores,Pref- 
 iyteri, five Senior es^ Dia- 
 tom, ut do5lrln& pur it ax reti- 
 neatur> &c. Art. 29. Credi- 
 mtts otnncs Fafiores ubiennque 
 go Hoc at i funt y eadem & aquali 
 potentate inter fe e(fe praditos 
 fub uno ilio capite fummoque 
 & folo univerfili Epifcopo 
 •fefuChrifto. An.Jo.Galltcd 
 Confej'ftonis.Credimus veram 
 banc EccUfiam Mere regime 
 gubernari , fpirttualiilla po- 
 litic ^ quam nos Dew ipfe in 
 
 
 We believe that the true 
 Church ought to be govern- 
 ed by that policy which 
 Chrift Jefus our Lord efta- 
 blifhcd , viz. that there be 
 Paftors, Presbyters, or El- 
 ders, and Deacons. Anda- 
 gain , We believe that all 
 true Paftors whereever they 
 be , arc endued with eqi al 
 and the fame poweri, under 
 one chief Head and Bifhop 
 Chrift Jefus. Confonantto 
 this the Dutch Churches : 
 We believe (fay they) the 
 true Church ought to be ru- 
 led with that fpiritual policy 
 which God hath taught us 
 
 in 
 
i*?; 
 
 in his Word, to Wit \ th^ 
 there be in it Pallors t° 
 preach the Word purely* 
 Elders and Deacons to con- 
 ftitute.the Ecclefiaftical Se- 
 nate, that by thefe means 
 Religion may be prefer ved, 
 and manners corrected. And 
 fo again,We believe when- 
 ever the Minifters of God 
 arc placed, they All have the 
 fame equal Power and Au- 
 thority as being All equally 
 the Minifters of Chrift. 
 
 irtrbo fuo edocuit 5 it a ut fwt 
 hi ed Pajlores ac Minijlri.qui 
 pure & concionentur, & Sa- 
 cramenta admimfirent 5 fint 
 quoque Stnlores (jr Diaconi^ 
 qui Eccle fi<t Striatum conjti- 
 UuntyUt his veluti mediis ve- 
 raReligioconfervari^ Homi- 
 nefque vitiis dediti fpirituali- 
 ter corripi & emendari pof- 
 fint. Tunc enim rite & ordi- 
 nate omnia fiuntinEcelefta, 
 cum viri f deles 3 & pii ad e- 
 jus gubernationem deliguntur 
 juxta Divi Pauli prtferip- 
 tum, 1 Tim. $»Confef.Belgic. Arc. 30, Caterum ubicuuque 
 locorum funt verbi Dei Miniftri, tandem atque aqualem 
 Omnes habent turn Poceftatem turn Authoritacem,^ qui 
 funt *que Omnes Chrifii unici i/iius univerfalis Epifcopi 
 & capitis Ecclefia Miniftri. 
 
 In which Harmony of thefe Confeflions, fee how both Chur- 
 ches agree in thefe five points : 
 
 Firft, That there is in the Word of God , an cxadt form of 
 Government fet down; T)etu in verbo fuo edocuit. 
 
 Secondly, That this form of Government Chrift eftablifhed 
 in his Church; Jefus Qhriftwin Ecclefia fancivit* 
 
 Thirdly,That this form of Government is by Paftors , Elders, 
 and Deacons. 
 
 Fourthly, That the true Church of Chrift ought to be thus go- 
 verned ; Veram Ecclefiam debere regi. 
 
 Fifthly, That all true Minifters of the Gofpcl are of equal 
 power and authority. 
 
 Forthereafonhcafligns,why thofe Churches fhould make this 
 Option,we cannot enough admire that fuch a pafTage fhould fall 
 from his pen, as to fay, There is little difference between their vpsa- 
 citt, andeurEpifcepacy , faveonely in ferpttuitj and Uy- Elders ; for 
 
 wiio knows not that between thefe two there is a vaft a difference 
 
 r. 
 
 2. 
 
 3- 
 
 5< 
 
 as 
 
as bet ween the Wake of Verne ajid an abfolute OWonarch. For, r , 
 the Moderator in geneva is not of a fuperiour order to his Bre- 
 thren; nor 2 9 hath an Ordination differing from them; nor 3, af- 
 fumes power of fole Ordination or Jurifdi&ion ; nor hath he 4, 
 maintenance for that Office above his Brethren ; nor ?, a Nega- 
 tive voice in what is agreed by the reft ; nor <5, any further power 
 then any of his Brethren. So that the difference between our Bi- 
 (hops and their Moderators is more then Little : But if it be fo 
 little as this Remonftrant here pretends ; then the ^Alteration and 
 Abrogation of Epifcopacy will be with the leffe difficulty, and oeca- 
 Jion the lefs diftftrbrfnee. 
 
 SECT. XV. 
 
 TVtlt there is another thing , wherein our Epifcopacy differs from 
 the geneva tModeraterfhip , befides the perpetuity ; and that is 
 the exclufm of the Lay -presbytery , which (if we may believe this 
 Remonftrant) never till this age bad footing in the Chriftian Church. 
 In which affertion, this Remonftrant concludes fo fully, with Bi»- 
 ftiop Halls Irrefragable Propofttisns, and his other Book of Epifio- 
 pacieby Divine right, as if he had confpired to fwear to what the 
 Bifhophadfaid. 
 
 * 1 Tim ? Now, though we will not enter the Lifts with a man of that 
 1 Cor. ia." 28 ! learning and fame, that Bilhop Hall is,yet we dare tell this Remon- 
 Rom.ii. 8. fir ant % that this his affertion hath no more truth in it, then the refi 
 
 * Vnde& Sj- that we have already noted. We will (to avoid prolixity) not urge 
 naggga, & po- thofe * three known Texts of Scripture ^produced by fome for the 
 ftta EceUfia c ft a bli(hing of Governing Elders in the Church, not yet vindica- 
 quorum fine ted by the Adverjanes, 
 
 Confilio nihil Nor will we urge that famous Text of * Jmbrofe in 1 Tim 5 . 
 agebatur in ec~ But if there were no Lay-Elders in the Church till this prefent 
 c'efii.Qtojqua. a g e ^ wc WO uld be clad to learn , who they were of whom Origen 
 
 ESSSt^ *" fpeaks > when hc te ^ ls U5 ' ic was tbe Cuftomc of chriaian Teach - 
 
 wHmeDo' ers » ^ t0 exam ^ ne ^ c >^ as defired to heare them, of whom there 
 clorum detidia, wctwo orders; the firft were fitechuweni, or beginners; the other 
 tmmagkfttper- was of iuch as were more pafe&:among whom \m npet Ttray- 
 bia y Aiim fell ^ yce ^l ( 7 l (pt^o^iu^y 7*t@iv{ ^ ?«$ dyoydfTay TpofwTap, &C. 
 *??*/ all( l Hl( * Novxufli prapofitifunt qui in vitam & mores eorum qui admittmtHr 
 Ori?en. Lib *. inqftirant Jtt qui turpia committant eos communi C<*tu inter dicant qui 
 conttx cdfum, verb ab tftis abhrrtnt , ex anim* complexi , meliores qmtidie reddan 1 9 
 
 There 
 
(55) 
 
 There are tome ordained to inquire into the life and manners 
 offuch as arc admitted into the Church , that chey may banifh 
 fuchfromthc pubiique A(Tembly,thac perpetrate fcandalous Acjty; 
 which place tells us plainly : 
 
 Eirft, that there were (base in the higher forms of hirers ( not 
 Teachers) who were Centres morttm over the red. Secondly, that 
 they were dcfigncd or constituted to this work, Td&yy&iU' Third- 
 ly, that they had fuch Authority intruded into their hands,as that 
 they might interdict fuch as were fcandalous from the pubiique 
 Aflemblies. We would gladly know, whether thefe were not, as 
 it were , Lay-Eclders ? 
 
 That there were fuch in the Church (diftinguifhed from others _ .^ 
 that were called to teach) appeares. Augufiine writing to his ?■* 
 (Jharge,direcls his Epiftle, Dilcclijfimis frAtribm , Clerofienioribiu* 
 & miverpt PUbi Eeclefi& Hipponenfis: where firfl: there is the ge- 
 neral cornpellation, Fratribus, Brethren ; Then there is a distributi- 
 on of thefe Brethren into the Clergiefht Elders, and thewbole Peo- 
 ple; (0 that there were in that Church Elders diftinguilhed both 
 from the Clergie, and the reft of the People, 
 
 So again. Contra Crefconium Grammaticum: Omnes vosEpifcopi, 
 Presbyteri, 'Diaconi, and Senior es [citis\ AH yon Bi/bops , E 1 ders,Dea- 
 cons, and Elders do know. What were tbofe two forts of Elders r<j,j- 4t , 
 there mentioned in one comma, and ibidem cap. 56. Teregrinus * 
 
 Tresbyter & Seniores Ecclefi<e Mnfticana Region^ tale defiderinm 
 frofeqntintHr; where again we read of Elder anA Elders, Presbyter , 
 and Seniors in one Church. 
 
 Both thofc paffages arc upon record in the publick ads, which 
 are more fully fct down by Baronitu, aAnno 303. Num. 15,16,17. 
 Asalfoby Albafpinetu, in his Edition of Optatpts: in which Ads 
 the Seniors zxz often mentioned. In that famous relation of the 
 purging of C&cMmhs and Felix , there is a copie of a Letter; Era- 
 tribns & filiis : Clero & Senioribus , Fratribus in 'Domino sternum 
 fn/fftem: Another Letter is mentioned a little bcfore,C/«rW^ & Se- 
 nioribns Ctrtbenjium in Domino aternam Saint em -1 lick Seniors were 
 interefTed in affaires concerning the Church as being the men, 
 by whofe advice they were managed. 
 
 The Letter of ^urpurius to Silvantu faitU, Aahibttcconclcricos^- 
 [cnhresplebU, Ecclefiafticos Viros, & inqnirant qnai fint ifte Dijfenfi- 
 ones: m ea qua [ant fectindum fidei Pr&ceptafiant , W here we Ice the 
 joynt power of thefe Seniors,withtheClergieki ordering Eccle- 
 
 H iiafticall 
 
ft 9 
 
 fiaftical affairs; that by their wifdoin and care peace might be fct- 
 ; J in the Church; for which caufe, thefe Scnhrs are calied Ecclt- 
 (ialftcal mn\ and yet they are difHnguifhed from Clergie men. 
 
 They are mentioned again afterwards by Maximus, faying, 
 Loqaor nomine S £ N 1 RU M Populi Chriftiani. Greg. Mag. di- 
 ilingviiflierb them alfofrom the Clergie : TabelUrium cum corfen- 
 fit S E A 7 / V R & M & Clcn memineris Ordinfindum. 
 •j4h** Scrtn* Th.efe Seniors had power to reprove offenders, otherwife why 
 % Verb- ^ ou ^ ty^Ugufline ia.)\Cum ob err or em aiiquem a Senioribut argu- 
 ^ . untur. & imvutatur aiictti cur <ibri?u fuerit y cur res aliens ptrvafc- 
 
 rtt , &c. when tney were by the hlders reproved for their tr- 
 ¥Mfi , and drunkennefs is laid to a mans charge \ &c. So that ic 
 was proper to the Seniors to have the cognizance of Dclinqents, 
 and to reprove them. 
 Awttft. in ^he ^ amc Auoufline in TfaL^6. Necejfe nos [Herat VrimUni cau- 
 
 Pfal ?8. f am > qtum,&c*£emorHm Uteris e]ufdtmEcclefi&pflyUntibtts audi' 
 Cvtc.i* re - Being requeued by Letters from the Seniors of that Church, 
 
 it was needful for me to hear the caufe of Primian, &c 
 
 So again, Optatus ,who mentioning a perfecurion that did for a 
 while fcatter the Church, (aith , Erant Ecclefia exauro & argent* 
 quam plurimaOrnamenta, qua, nee defodere terra , nee fecum for tare 
 poterat, quare fidclibns Senioribus cemmendavit tsilbafyineu*^ that 
 learned Antiquary, on that place acknowledges , that *BeJides the 
 ( lergie there were certain of the Elders ef the people, men of approved 
 life, that did- tend the affairs of the Church, of Whom this place is to be 
 ttzder flood. 
 
 By all thefe teftimonies it is apparent ;. firft, that in the ancient 
 Church there were fome calied Seniors* Secondly, that thefe «S>- 
 niors were not Clergie men. Thirdly, that they had a ftroke in 
 governing theChurch,andmanagingthe affairs thereof Fourthly, 
 that Seniors were diftinguifhed from the reft of the people. 
 Pa.r *i. Neirher would we k fire to chufe any ether fudges in tha whale 
 
 • controvcrfie ; then whom himfelf conftituted ; Porreign Divines, 
 
 taking the general Suffrage and practice of the Churches,and not 
 .of particular men. 
 
 As for the learned Spanhcmim whom he produceth, though we 
 give him the deferved honour of a worthy man : yet we think ic 
 too much to fpeak of him ; as if che judgment of the whole churchtf 
 Geneva were incorporated into him , as this Remonfirant doth. 
 And for Spunkcmiw himfelfe, we may truly fay, in the place cited, 
 
he dilivercd a complements rather then his judgement, which in Be- 
 dicatorit Epiflles is not unufuall. We know chat reverend Calvins 
 and learned *Beza have (aid as much upon occalion in their Epi- 
 ftlcs, and yet the Chrifttan world knowes their Judgement was to 
 the contrary 
 
 Little rcafon therefore hath this Remonftrant, todeclaime a- Par.** 
 gainft all fuch as fpcake againft this Government as unlawfull, 
 with the terms of Ignorance and fpitef 'till Sectaries, becaufc they call rp aff , ^ j. 
 the Government unlawfull: had they proceeded further go call it 
 Antichriftian , (which he charges upon them) they had faidno 
 wore, then what our eares have heard fome of their principal! A- 
 gents, their Legati a Latere fpeake publikely in their vifitathns; Doft.T)/^ 
 That however the (hurch of Fngland be as found, and Orthodox in her 
 Doftrine as any Church in the World jet in our Difcipline and Govern- 
 ment we are the fame mth the Church of Rome y which amounts to 
 as much as to fay the government is Antichriftian , unlefs they will 
 
 fey i the Government of Rome is not fo , nor the Pope Anti- 
 chrift. 
 
 SECT. XVI. 
 
 *M"Ow our Remonflrant begins to leave his difpute for the Office, 
 and flowes into the large praifes of the Perfons , and what is 
 wanting in his Arguments for the Tlace, thinks to make up in his 
 Encomiafikkj of the Terfons, that have poffeft that place in the 
 Church of God: and tells us, that the Religious Bifiops of all times 
 are and have been they that have ftronglj upheld the truth of God a- 
 gainft Satan and hps Antichrifl. It is well he fets this crown only ~ 
 upon the heads 0$ Religious Bifiops, as knowing that there are *V-^ 
 and have been fome Irrelighmones^ that have as ftrongly uphsld 
 Satan andhi,s Antichrify againft the'truth of God* But the Religion* 
 Bi [hops are they that have all times upheld the truth. What ? they ? 
 and onely they ? did never any uphold the truth, but a Religions 
 Bifhep ? did never any Religious Minifter or Profe (four preach, or 
 write, or die^ to uphold the truth, but a Keligiom 'Bifbsp? if fo, 
 then there is fome perfwafive ftrengch in that lie faith; and a 
 credulous man might be induced to rfiink,// Bifbofs go down^trntb 
 willgodorpn /ov.-But if we can produce for one Bifhop many others that 
 have been valiant for the truth, this Rhethoricall infinuation will 
 contribute no great help to their cftabUfhment. Nor indeed any at 
 
 H 2 ffe 
 
Pdg.l t • unleffe he were able to make this good of our times,** well as of all 
 
 * We may ra- others,wl\ieh he aflaies ; for faith he ,Ev en amongst our own how ma- 
 they would w ? of t he reverend & learned Fathers of the (fhureh nonliving, have 
 ve done fpwt t heir /pints , & w&rnc out their lives in thepowerfull oppofition of 
 more.Rcmcm- that man of fin ? how many f I Sir , we would fain know how 
 bring what many: that.there are feme that have flood up to bcare witneffea- 
 Maninm wis g a j n ft t foat Man offin,we acknowledge with all due refpe&,to the 
 ITf'Jnfc? Learning and worth of their Perfons. But that their Epifcopall 
 pUi'My Nequu dignity Bach added either any flame to their zeal, or any Nerves to 
 quamfbl m their ability, we cannot believe, nor can we think they would have 
 Epjfeopatu earn donelefTe in that caufe, though they had beene no Bifhops. 
 vi-tittum Gra. j3 ut w [ ia< jf t hj s b e true of fomc Bifhops in the Kingdome, is ic 
 turn f"M m rtW*> true of ail? are there jiot fome that have fpent their fpirits in the 
 blbuifte^mmi- ^Jition ofChrift , as others have in the oppofition of Antichrift? 
 mjei. Suipit'm and are there none bu Zealous, Religious Prelates in the Kingdom? 
 Severn Dtal.z, are there none upon whom the guilt of that may meriterioufly be charged, 
 Tag- 3 5» which others have convincingly and meritorhufly oppofed t And are 
 there not fome Bifhops in the Kingdome, that are fo far from op- 
 pofingthe CMan of fin , that even this Remonfirant is in danger of 
 filtering under the name of Puritan for daring to call him by that 
 name? we doubt not but this Remonfirant knowes there are. 
 PaQ> 3 5- But if he will again ft the light of his own Conscience , beare up a 
 
 known ernur out of private refpetls, (we will not fay thefe paper s ) but 
 his own Conference , /ball one day be an evidence againft him before the 
 dreaAfull Tribunal of the Almighty. 
 Pfiff.* ?, But there is yet a fecond thing that fhould endeare Epifcopacie, 
 
 and that is the careful , peaceable , painfull , confcionable mannaging of 
 their charges; to the great glory of God, and the comfort of hUfaithfull 
 people. W hich( in not feeming to urge) he urgeth to the full and 
 beyond. This care, confeience, paines of our Bifhops, is exercifed 
 and evidenced ,either in their Preaching >or in their Rulingjfor their 
 Preaching , it is true , fome few there are that Labour in the Word 
 and Dotlrine; whole perfons in that refped we Honsur: but the 
 mod are fo far from Preaching , that they rather difcountenance, 
 difcourage, oppofe, blafpherne Preaching. 
 
 It was a Non- preaching BifbopjhaLt faid of a Teaching Bi(bop,He 
 was a Preaching fixcomb* As tor the difchargc of their, office of 
 ruling, their entrufting their Chancellors, and other Officers with 
 their vifitations, and Courts (as ordinarily they do , whilcsthem- 
 Felvjes attend ths Court ) doth afcundantly -wicaei&cbeirjr^fM^- 
 
 Tbe 
 
The many and loud cries of the intolerable cpprejjfions and tyran- 
 nies of their Court- proceedings; witnefle their peaceablenejfe , their 
 unjuft fees,exa&ions,commutations; witneffe their confcionableneffe 
 in managing their Charges , to the great glory of god , and the comfort 
 of his faithful! people- 
 
 And hence it is that fo many at this day hear ill; ( how defer- 
 redly, faith this Remonftrantj God knows;) and do not your Ho- a £'l 6 * 
 nours know , and doth not this Kemonfirant know? and doth not 
 all the Nation (that will know any thing) know how defervedly 
 Some, nay, Mcft> nay, All the Bijhops of this Nation hear ill, were it 
 but oncly for the late Canons and Oathf But why [hould the faults ^ a £'^' 
 of feme, diffufe the blame to all? Why? by your owne argument, that 
 would extend thedeferts of feme ,to the patronage of All; and if it be 
 & fault in the impetuous and undiftinguifhing Vulgar Jo to involve all, 
 as to make Innoccncy it feif a fin ; what is it in a Man able to diftin- 
 guijb, by the fame implication, to (hrowdfenne under Innocencie ,the 
 tin of many under the Innocency of a fen? 
 
 But hare our Biftiops indeed f beene fo carefutl, painfull , confeion- Pag,-?* 
 able, in managing their Charges? how is it then that there are fuch 
 manifold f can daBs of the infer iour Clergy pre fen ted to your Honours 
 view , which he cannot mention without a bleeding heart; and yet 
 could findc in his heart ( if he knew how ) to excufe them ? and 
 though he confefTe them to be the fhame and mifcry of our Church, 
 yet is he not afhamed to plead their caufc at your Honours 
 B a K R E , OtiUpbriuS'Wkc , that Was the AdvccAte of every bad 
 caufe&nd to excite you by Conftaxtines example ( in a different 
 Caufe alleadged ) if not to fufTer thofe Crimes , which himfejfe 
 calls hatefull, to paffe unpunifhed, yet not to bring them to tbac 
 cpen andpublique punifitxent they have deferveJ- 
 
 But what, if pious Ccnflantine('mhis tender care to prevent the 
 Divifions that the emulation of the Biftiops of that age, enraged 
 with a fpiritofenvieand faction, were kindling in the Church, left 
 by that meancs thc'Chriftian Faith {hould be derided among Hie 
 Heathens ) did fuppreffe their mutuallaccufations,many of which 
 might be but upon furmifes; and that rot inaCcun if Jvftlre, bue 
 \nznEcckfi«jlicj!l Synode; (hall this be urged before the higheft 
 Court offufticc upon earth, to the patronizing of R*wiv*t fcandaHs* 
 and hate fud f^r«?;//r/,thar are already proved by evidence ofclcate- 
 
 witneffe?- - 
 
 ^v: eh ftrbid it to till in'v G/.tb , & ;<\^ l.zi , ^z tin >a!ii4i*b»*is j *£'& 
 
 d.jne. 
 
dene already ; Do we not know, die drukenneiTe , profaneneffc 
 fuperftition, Popifhneffe of the Englifti Clergie rings at RomedX* 
 ready? yes undoubtedly; and there is noway to vindicate the Ho- 
 nour of our Natifjt, Miniftety, 'Parliaments, Sovereigne, Religion, 
 6W;but by caufing the punifhment to ring as farre as the fin hath 
 done; that ouradverfariesthac have triumphed in their fin, may 
 be confounded at their punishments. Do not your Henours know, 
 that the plaiftring or palliating of thefe rotten members, will be a 
 greater difhonour to the Nation and Church , then their cutting 
 off; aud that theperfonall afts of; thefe jWfj of Belial, being con- 
 nived at, become Nationall fins? 
 
 But for this one fa ft of (fonfiantine , we humbly crave your Ho- 
 nours leave to prefent to your wifdomc three Texts of Scripture, 
 £^^4412.13. Becaufe they minifired unto them before their Idols , 
 and c unfed. the houfe of Jfrael to fall into iniquity , therefore have I lift 
 up my fund unto them, faith the L<>r &, and they fb all beare their iniquity. 
 And they fhall not come netre unto me , to do the Office of a Prieft unto 
 me, nor to come necre unto any of mine holy things in the mofi holy place, 
 &c 
 
 The fecond is Jerenf.^S.i o. Curfed be he that doth the vpork^of the 
 Lord negligently ,|and the third is, ludges 6,31. He that mil plead for 
 £aal, let him be put to death while it is yet morning. We have no more 
 to fay in this; whether it be heft to walk after the Frefident of Man, 
 or the Prefcript of God, your Huneun can cafily judge. 
 
 SECT. XVII.. 
 
 RUt/?*v, faith this Remunfirant ; and indeed he might well have 
 "*£'3P* flayed and fpared the labour of his enfuing difcourfe, about the 
 
 Church of England, the Prelaticall and the Antiprelaticatt Church: 
 but thefe Epifcopall Men deaie as the Papifls that dazle the eyes, 
 and aftonifli the fenfes of poor people, with the glorious name of 
 the Church,thc Church-J'he holy Mother the Church.This is the Gor- 
 gonshead^as T>o€koi* tvhite faith,that hath inchantcdthem,& held 
 Took called c ^ em m bondage to thctr Errors: All their fpeech is of thtChurch, 
 The fray to the the Church-, no mention of the Scriptures^ of Cjod the Father; but ail 
 True cbunb. of the Another the Church. Much like as they write of certain *s£- 
 Solinus. thiepia*s 3 that by reafon they ufe no marriage 3 but promifcuoufly 
 
 company together , the children only follow the Mother', the Fa< 
 thr and his name is in no requeft, but the mother hath all the re- 
 putation 
 
 * In his Pre 
 face to his 
 
(M) 
 
 putation. So is it with the Author of this RemenfiraHcs \ he ftife* 
 hrrafelf, a DutifuR fonof the Church. And it hath beene a Cu« 
 dome of late times to cry up the holy Mother the Church of Eng- 
 land, to call for abfolute obedience to holy fourc^ ^H conformity 
 to the orders of holy church ; Neglecting in the meane time god 
 the Father, and the holy Scripture. 
 
 But if we (hould now demand of them,what they meane by the p*-, -o. 
 Church of Englandh\\\s Author fecmes to be thunder-ftneken at this 
 Quefhon; and calls the very JVuefticn , a new "Divinity, where he 
 deales like fuch as holding great revenues by unjuft Titles, will 
 not fuffer their Titles to be called in Queftion. 
 
 For it is apparent, Ac fifolaribus radii* defcriptatnefet ( to ufe 
 TertuSians phrafe)that the word Church is an Equivocal! word 3 m& 
 hath as many feverall acceptions as letters; and that Dolus latetin 
 ur.iverfalibus. And that by the Church of England firft by fome of 
 thefe men is meant onely the Bifhops;or: rather the two AbrMifiopj; 
 or more properly the Arehbifiop of (Canterbury : Juft as the Jcfuited. 
 Papifts refolve the Church and all the glorious Titles of it into the 
 Pope ; fo do thefe into the ^r^i/^oracfulleft, they understand 
 it of the Bifiops and th sir party met in Convocation) as the more inge- 
 nuous of the Papifts make the Pope and his Cardinals to be their 
 Church. 'thus excluding all the fhrijfian people and Presbyters ef the 
 Ringdome ; as net worthy to be reckoned in the number of the 
 Church, 
 
 And which is more Orange , this Author in his Simplicity ( as 
 he truly faith ) never heard, nor thought of any more Churches of Eng- 
 land the* ene; and what then (hall become of his Diocif+n Churches, 
 and DiocefaK Bifiops? And what (hail we think of England, when 
 it was an Heptarchy} had it nor then kven Churches, when feven 
 Kings ? Or if the Bounds of a Kingaome muO. continue the Limits 
 andBounds of a C hurch,why are not L ngland, Scotland, and Ireland^ 
 all one church ? when they are happily united under one gracious 
 Monarch, inco one Kingdom ? We read in Scripture, of the 
 Churches of Iuiea,iLnd the Churches tofGaltfia; and why not the 
 Churches of England} not that we denie the Confociatiou or Com- 
 bination of Churches into a Provincial! or National! Synod Tor 
 the right ordering of them. But that there flioiild be no Church 
 in Er.vlandhux. a Na'iwall Chunk; this fs that which th i Auth'sr in? 
 his fimplicitj affirmed of which the vcry'rch^arfail is a 1- 
 
 tion. 
 
 Sec:. 
 
/ V 
 
 % w 
 
 SECT. XVIII. 
 
 TPHere arc yet two things with which this Remonfi ranee (huts up 
 it felf, which muft not be pad without our Obelisks. 
 rirfl\ he feoffs at the Aktiprelatical C hurcb, and the Antiprefj- 
 ticai Divifions ; for our parts, wc acknowledge no Antiprelatical 
 Church. But there are a company of men in the Kingdom , of no 
 mianranh^ o Y quality , forT/Vy, Nobility, Learning, that Hand up 
 to bear witneis againft the Hierarchic (as it now (lands:) their u- 
 furpations over Gods Church and Mimfters , their cruel ufing-of 
 Gods people by their tyrannical government : this we acknow- 
 ledge; and if he call thefe the esfntiprelotical church , we doubt 
 not but your Honours will confider , that there are many thou- 
 sands in this Kingdom, and thofe pious and worthy perfons, that 
 thus do, and upon mod juftcaufe. 
 
 It was a fpeech ofErafmus of Luther \Vt qui/que vir eft optimus r 
 it a Mitts Scripts minimi offiendi ) The better any man was, the lefs 
 offence he tookat Luthers Writings : but wemay fay the contra- 
 ry of the Prelates, Ut qnifque vir eft opttmtuMa illorumfaclis magts 
 cffendi-Thz better any manis.the more he is offended at their dea- 
 lings. And all that can beobje&ed againftthis party, will be like 
 that in Tertullian. Bonus vir ( ajus § 'ejus , fed malm tantumfluia An" 
 TertulLad- tipreUtictts. But he upbiaids us with our Divijions & Subdivifions, 
 werf. Gent. Co do the Papifts upbraid the Proteftants with their Lutheranifme, 
 Calvinifme, and Zuinglianifme. And this is that the Heathens ob- 
 >eded to the Chriftians, their Fra&ures were fo many, they knew 
 not which Religion to chufe if they (hould turn Chriftians : And 
 can it be cxpe&ed that the Church in any age (hould be free from 
 Divifions, when the times of the Apoftles were not free ? and the 
 Apoftle tells us,/* muft needs be that there be divijions : in <jrtg>Na<>. 
 dayes there were 6co Errours in the Church ; do thefe any wayes 
 derogate from the truth and worth of Chriftian Religion ? 
 
 But as for the Divifions of the Antiprelatieal party, fo odioufly 
 exaggerated by this tlemonftrant: Letusaflure your Honours, 
 they have been much fomented by the Prelates, whofc pra&ice 
 hath been according to that rule of LMachiavil: Divide & lm- 
 pera&cA they have made thefe divifions, & afterwards complain'd 
 of that which their Tyranny and Policy hath made. It is no won- 
 der, confidering the paths our Prelates have trod , that there are 
 Divifions in the Nation.The wonder is our divifions are no more , 
 
 no 
 
/ 
 
 / 
 
 no greater ; and we doubt not but if they were of that gracious. 1 ) 
 
 fpirit, and fo intircly affc&ed to the pcac e of the Church as Greg, 
 Nmz.. was, they would fay as he did in the tumults of the people, 
 Mittt nos in mare, & non erittempeftas ; rather then they would hin- 
 der that fweet Concordance^ and confpiration of minde unto a Go- 
 vernment that (hall be every way agreeable to the rule of Gods 
 Word , and profitable for the edification and fl ourifhing of the 
 Church* 
 
 Afccondthing we cannot but take notice of , is the pains this p 4 , 2 ; 
 Author takes to ad? ance his <Prelaticall Church: and forgetting what *" 
 he had faid in the beginning: th*$ this part} was fo numerous jt could 
 not befummed; cells us now, thefc feveraU thoufandsare pun&uallj ™X*4 T ' 
 takulatcd* But we doubt not but your Honours will connder that 
 there may be multi homines, &pauciviri; and that there are more a- 
 gainft them then for them. 
 
 And whereas they pretend , that they differ from usonely in a 
 Ceremony or an Organ- pipe, (which however is no contemptible 
 differcne: ) yet it will appeare that our differences are in point of a 
 fuperiour Alloy. Though this Rcmonftrant braves it in his multi- 
 plied Queries wh*t are the hands of this Church? what the difiintlion of Pd£4 I . 
 thepreftftonrs and Ktlighn* what grounds of faith? what new Creed 
 do they hold different from their Neighbours? what Scriptures ? 
 what Baptifme ? what mcanes of Salvation other then the reft? yet 
 if he pleafed he might have filcnced his owne Queries : but if he 
 will needs put us to the anfwer , we will rcfolve them one by one . 
 
 Firft, ifheaskwhat arc the bounds of this Church ? we anfwer 
 him out of the fixt of their late founded Canonstwhere we finde the 
 limits of this Prelaticai Church extend as farreas from the high & 
 lofty Promontory of A rchbifhops, to the Terr* incognita of an,#v. 
 
 If what Dtfiintlion of prsfejjors and Religion) we anfwer, their wor- 
 shipping towards the Eaft, and bowing towards the Altar proftra- 
 ting themfeives in their approches into Cheches, placing all Reli- 
 gion in outward formalities, are vifible differences of thefe profef- 
 fours and their Religion 
 
 Ifvsbat r.ew freed they have, or what grounds of Faith differing 
 from their Neighbours ? we anfwer , Epifcopacy by divine right is 
 the firft Article of their Creed, Abfolute and blinde obedience to all 
 the Commandementsof the Church (thatts, the Lifhop and his 
 Emifl&ries) cle&ion upon faith forefcen, the influence of works in- 
 to J unification y falling from grace, &o $ 
 
 If *hat Scripture?** anfwer t the Apocrypha and unwritten Tra- 
 ditions, i 
 
 1} J f 
 
 >Ki 
 
If whit B-iptifr* ? a B*p:ifm of ab folate Necefficy untofalvation;. 
 a.n.i yc: unfufficient unto fal^acion: as not fealing grace to the Car 
 kin* away of finne after Baptifme. 
 
 If what EHr-bvifi? an Eucharift that muft he adminiftred upon an 
 Altar or a Table fet A!tar-wife,railed in an Eucharift,in which there 
 is fuch a prcfencc of thrift, (though Modum ntfeiunt) as makes the 
 place of its. Adminiftration the throne of <jod t the place of the Refi- 
 dence cf the Almighty ; and impreflcth fuch a holineffe upon it at 
 * makes it not only capable, but worthy of Adoration. 
 
 // what chrifi? a Chrift who hath given the fame power of abfo* 
 lution to a Prieft that himfelfe hath, 
 
 If what Heaven? a Heaven that hath a broad way leading thither, 
 and is receptive of Drunkards, Swearers, Adulterers, &c. fuch a 
 heaven as we may fay of it, as the Indians faid of the heaven of the 
 Spaniards: Unto that heaven which fome of the PrelatlcaU Church li- 
 ving and, dying in their fcanUlom finnes, and hatcfull enorraitie*- 
 go to, let our foules never enter, 
 
 Jfrvhort meanes of SalvMionlwe anfwer, confeflion of finnes to a 
 Prieft, as the mofrabfolute, undoubted, necefTary , infallible meaner 
 of Salvation. 
 jUr.41. Farre be ic from us to fay with this Remsnjtrdnt, We do fully a- 
 
 gree in all thefe and all other Doftrinall, and prafticall points of 
 Religion,and preach one and the fame faving truths. Nay, we muft 
 rather fay as that holy Martyr did, We thankjjodweare none of you. 
 Paij.42. Nor do we becaufe of this diffenfion fcare the cenfure of un- 
 
 charitablenefs from any but uncharitable men But it is no unufuall 
 thing with the Prelates and their party,to charge fuch as proteft a- 
 gainft their corrupt opinions and wayes,with uncharitablencfle and 
 Schifme, as the PapifUdotheProteftants: and as the proteftants 
 do juftly recriminate v and charge that Schifme upon the Papifts, 
 whicji they objc&to vft;So may we upon the Prelates: And if 4u- 
 fiin may be judge, the Prelates are more Schifmaticksthcn wc.Qui- 
 ctinque ("faith he) invident bonis % ut quarant occafionesexcludendi eos, 
 ant degracUudiyVel crim'ina ftu fie defendere parati font (fiobjettdvel 
 yreditd fuerint) Ht etiam cenventicHlorum congregationes vel Scclefve 
 ferturbatUnes cogitent excitare, jam fchifmAtkiffint. Whofocver en- 
 vie thbfc that arc good, and fceke occafions to exclude and de- 
 grade them,and are To ready to defend their faults, that rather then 
 they will leave them, they will devife how to raife up troubles in 
 the Church, and drive men into conventicles and corners, they are 
 theSchifmaticks. 
 Aoi that allthc world may take notice what juftcaufc we have 
 
 to 
 
i 
 
 to complain of Epifeopacie^as it now flands, wc humbly Cray c leave ) 
 
 to propound chefc Queries. 
 
 Queries abut £pifcopacie, f 
 
 WHcther it be tolerable in a Chriftian Church, that Lord Bi- x 
 
 (hops fhould be held to be Jure Divino; And yet the Lords 
 day by the ibme men to be but Jure Humtuo ? And that the fame 
 pcrfons ftiould cry up Altars in (lead of Communim-TaUes, aiid 
 Tr'ufts in (lead of Ministers > and yet not JudaUe, when they will 
 not fuffcr the Lords Day to be called the Sabbath-day, for fcare of 
 JuAaUing? Whereas the word SM*th\% a generall word,fignifying 
 a day of reft, which is common as well to the Chriftian Sabbath, as 
 to thejewifti Sabbath, and was alfo ufedby the Ancients , Ruftmu 
 in Fjal>^-j.Grigtn.H$m> 2 i,,in Num. Gregery Nttvan. 
 
 Whether that aflcrtion, No Bi(hop,No King;and no Ceremonie, ft 
 
 no Biftiop; be not very prejudicial! Co Kingly Authority? For it 
 feemes to imply, that the Civill power depends upon the Spiritual, 
 and is fupported by Ceremonies and Biftiops. 
 
 Whether feeing it hath been proved , that Bifliops (as they are 
 now aflcrted) are amcerc humane Ordinance, it may not by the 
 fame Authority be abrogated, by which it was fir ft eftablifhed; 
 efpccially 3 confidering the long experience of the hurt chey have 
 done to Church and State ? 
 
 Whether the advancing of Epifcopacic into Jus Divinum , doth 
 not make it athtngfimply unlawfull to fubmit to that Govern- 
 ment ?Eccauie that many confciencious men that have hitherto con- 
 formed to Ccremonicf and Epifcopacy,have done it upon this 
 ground, as fuppodng that Authority did not make them matters of 
 worftiip, but of Order and Dcccncie, &c. And thus they fatisficd 
 their confeiences in anfweringthofcTcxts,cW^2« 20,21, i2.Matth. 
 15.9. But novvfincc Epifcopacy comes to be challenged as a Di- 
 vine Ordinance, how (hall we be refponlible to thofe Texts ? And 
 is it not, as it is now aflertcd , become an Idoll, and like the Bra- 
 zen Serpent to be ground to powders 
 
 Whether there beany difference in the point of Epifcopacy be- 
 tweenc J*u Divinum.&nA.fus Mpoftolkum ? Becaufe we finde fome 
 claiming their ftanding by Jus Divinum; others by J us Apoflolieum. 
 But we conceive that Jus Apoftoltcum properly taken, is all one with 
 JusDivinum. For Jus Apojtolicttmis fuch a Jus, which is founded 
 upon the Ads and Epiftles of the Apoftics, written by them fo as 
 to be a perpetual! Rule for the fuocceding Administration of the 
 Churches this Author faith/T^ao And itiisjjfaspis T$iv'i*tim\ 
 as well as A pofielicti?*. Bui if by Jm Apoflalicutn they mean impro* 
 
 I 2 Ptriv 
 
. 
 
 n perly (as fome do) fuch things which are not recorded in the Wri- 
 
 tings of theApoftles, but introduced, the Apoftles being living, 
 they cannot be rightly faid to be Jnrt Aprfiolico , nor fuch thingi 
 which the ApofHes did intend the Churches fhould be bound unto. 
 Neither is Bpifcopacie as it imports a (uperioritic of power over a 
 Presbyter, no not in this fenfe ^ure Apofiolico^ as hath beene already 
 proved, and might further be manirefted by. divers Tcftimonics, 
 if need did require. We will only inftance inOJ/W^-a man famous 
 for his immoderate moderation in controverted Points of Religion, 
 who in hisCortfultat. Articvl.iq- hatti this faying, An Epifcoptttu 
 inter ordlnes hccletUflicos pwen&us fit , inter Theotogos & fitnoniftod 
 non CMtvenit? Convenit sntev inter mnes,ApofttUrHm at ate inter Pref- 
 bjternm & Epifcopnm nuRHrndifcrmenfuiffe, &c. 
 
 6 Wether the diftin&ion of Beza , between Epifcofus 1)ivi*Hf 9 
 HnmAntHy & Diabolicus,be not worthy your Honours confiderati- 
 on? By the Divine Bifhop, he meanes the Bifhop as he is taken in 
 Scripture, which is one and the fame with a Presbyter. By the hu- 
 mane Bifhop he meanes the Bifhop chofen by the Presbyters to be 
 Prefidenc over them,and to rule with them by fixed Lawesand Ca- 
 nons. By the Diabolical Bifhop , he means a Bifhop with foie pow« 
 cr of Ordination and Jurifdidion, Lording it over Gods heritage, 
 and governing by his owne will and authority. Which puts us in « 
 minde of the Pointer that Limned two pictures to the fame pro- 
 portion and figure ; The one he referred in fecrct, the other he ex- 
 pofed to common view. And as the phanfie of beholders led them 
 co cenfure any line or proportion, as not done to the life, he mends 
 it after direction : If any fault be found with the cye,hand,foot,&c 
 He corrects it, till at laft the addition of every mans fancy had de- 
 faced the firft figure,and made that which was the Picture of a 
 man, fwcll into a monfter: Then bringing forth this and his other 
 Pi dure which hec had referved, he prefented both to the people. 
 And they abhorring the former, and applauding the latter,he cried, 
 Hunt p$pnl*s fecit : This deformed one the People made: Thia 
 lovely one I made. As the Painter of his Painting, fo (in Beta's 
 fenfe) it may be faid of Bifhops, God at fir ft infti tuted B ifhops ,fuch 
 as are all one with Presbyters ; and fuch are amiable , honourable 
 in all the Churches of God. But when men would be adding to 
 Gods inftitutten, what power, preheminence, Jurifdi&ion, Lord- 
 linefs their phanfie fuggefted unto them, this. divine Bifhop loft his 
 
 ».~ mmUu* Original beauty, and became to-be Hnrntnus* And in conclufion 
 mm pr* * (by thcfc ^ d oAcr aditions f wclitng - int0 a p pe) DiMic*. 
 
 7 Whether the Ancient Fathers, wh$n they call ft$tr M»k§- % 
 
 "" " I****? 
 
v " 
 
 Ums>Timt\>j, and Titus Biftiops, did not fpcak according to tfic 
 Languageof the times wherein they lived, rather then according to 
 thetrucacceptionofthewordBifhop ? and whether ic be not true 
 which is here laid in this Book, that they arc called Bifhops of e^- 
 Itxandris, Ephefw ,Hitrtif«Um y &c in a very improper fcnfe,becaufe 
 they abode at tliofe p'aces a longer time then at other places ? For 
 fure it is,if ChrifT made Peter and James Apoftles(which are Btfhopi 
 over thewhole world) and the Apoftlcs made Marly, 7 im thy and 
 Titus Evangelifts, &cit feemes to us that it would have been a 
 jrcat fin in them to limit themfelres to one particular Dioceffc 
 and to leave that calling in which Chrift had placed them. 
 Whether Presbyters in Scripture are called * f ony*iimi & vfUfJpmil & 
 
 and that it is an office,rcquired at their hands,torulc and to govern' 
 as hath bin proved in this BookjThe Bifhopscan withont fin arro- 
 gate the excrcifc of this power to themfclves alone , and why they 
 may not with the fame lawfulneis, impropriate to themfclves alone 
 theKcyof Do£rinc( which yet notwithstanding al would condemn) 
 as well as the Key of Difcipline, feeing that the whole power of the 
 Keys is given to Presbyters in Scripture as well as to Bifhops;asap« 
 ftm,M4t. 16.19. where the power of the Keys is promifed toPr/rr, 
 in the name of the reft of the Apo Ales, and their fucceffors • & given 
 to all theApoftlcs, and their fucceffors, ,f/*M 8. 19. fobm.io.z^. 
 And that Presbyters fuccccdthc Apofties, appears not onely, M*u 
 *8. ao. bat alfo,^^/.ao.28. where the Apoftle ready to leave the 
 Church of Efhefus commends the care of ruling and feeding it to 
 the Elders of that Church.»To this Ireuaus witneffeth, lib 4 csp^. 
 44-Tbis Bifhop JernU againft Harding y ArtU^.Sttb. 5,6. faith,that 
 all Paftors have equall power of binding and loofing with Ftttr. 
 Whether fir.ee that Biihops affurac to themfclves power tempo- 
 rail (to be Barons 3 and to fit in Parliament, as Judges, and in Court ^ 
 of Star-Chamber, High Coramiffion, and other Courts of Jufticc) 
 and alfo power fpirituall over Minifters and People, to ordain , fi- 
 lence^ufpcnd .deprive excommunicate, &c. their fpiritual power be 
 not as dangerous (though both be dangerous) and as much to be 
 oppofed as their temporal ? 1 Becaufe the fpiritual is over our con- 
 sciences, the temporal, but over our purfes. 2 Becaufe the fpiritual 
 have more influence into Gods Ordinances to defile them , then the 
 temporal. 3 Becaufe fpiritual judgements and evils arc greater then 
 other. 4 Becaufe the Pope was Antichrift, before he did aflame a* 
 cy temporal power. 5 Becaufe the Spiritual is more inward and Icffc 
 difecrned: and therefore it concerns all thofe that have Spiritual 
 eyes,tnd defire to worlhiy God in fpirit and truth,to confidar, and 
 
 endeavour- 
 
( enclave"** to alrorateihtii Spiritual ufurpa tiers as well asthcir 
 
 Temporal. 
 \ 10 Whether Jerius be juflly branded by Epiphanius and Anfiin fora 
 
 Hercttcke (as Tome report) for affirming BifhopSjand Presbyters to 
 
 be of an equal power? 
 €^pk4MjM Vv 7 « fay, as fome report, for the truth is, he ischarged with he- 
 
 iaith he did, refie mecrly and oncly becaufe he was an Arrian. &$ for his opini- 
 on™* Ipfum an f trie parity of a Presbyter with a Biftiop ; this indeed is called 
 dogmatum no- ^ Aqfli»,propri*m dogma Aerii, the proper opinion of A er ins- And 
 MM* -faith in by Epiphanius it is called Dogma fnriofum ScfiolidHw,* mad and fool- 
 ArtLnorum ifti opinion , but not an herefie neither by the one nor thc other. 
 k*refi» u? fum. But let ns fuppofe (as is commonly thcught)that he was accounted 
 Epiphan. accu- an Heretkk tor this opinion: yet notwithstanding, that this was 
 fed him , be- ^ ui t jj C private opinion of Epiphanms 9 and borrowed out of him by 
 
 tha? fyptvfit d*P n > an< * an °pi mon noc t0 be allowed, appeares : 
 
 Yum prices d*5 Firft, becaufe the fame Authors condemne Atrins % as much for 
 
 not opuhUn reprehending and cenfuring the mentioning of the dead in the pub- 
 
 cis qui ex hac Jkj UC prayers, and the performing of good works for the benefit of 
 
 vita difaffc- t ^ c d ea d. And alfo for the reprehending ftata jejuni*, and the keep- 
 
 y afn\^if' in 8 of thc WC€k bcforc Eaftcr as a f olcmncFaft; which if worthy of 
 Xi«"becaufe condemnation, would bring in moft of the reformed Churches in- 
 he XAAjto* 0- to the cenfure of Herefie. 
 
 , ->ea o rare , vel Secondly, becaufe not onely Saint ffitnm, but tsfnfti* himeflf, 
 
 ■ofen-epromoY- Stitilhs, ^rimafins^bryfofiome, TheoJoret, Occnmn'ms, TbcopkilaZt, 
 
 tMbUmmm. wcrc f the fame opinion with Atrius (as Michael Medina obfcrvcf 
 
 in the Council of 7"rt*f ,and tatti writen,Z*£.i. defacr.bem.erigine.) 
 
 and yet none of thefc deferving the name of Fools, much leffc to 
 
 be branded for Hercticks. 
 
 Thirdly, becaufe no Counecll did ever condemne this for Here- 
 fie; but oa the contrary, concilium Aqnifgranenffjib Lukvkt ru 
 Whktkei Ke- !m P' l,anno Sitf.bath approved it for true Divinity out of the Scri- 
 fponfM Cam- ture,That Bifhopsand Presbyters are equal, bringing the fame texts 
 pian. rau 10. that Aerius doth, and which Spipbanms indeed undertakes to an- 
 liath thefc fwer; but how (lightly let any indifferent Reader Judge. 
 words; ii Whether the grcae Apoftafic of the Church ofKomtimth not 
 Aerium Epipba- been, in fwerving from thc Difciplinc of Chrift, as well as from the 
 w'm & Aug*- doftrine? Forfeit fceros by that text, z-Tbeffa^ And aifo,Zte/rA 
 
 i^ameZT' l8#7 *° d divCrS 0thcr5, And if f °> lbcn iC much concerncs a11 thofc 
 &prateV'eoi tn . at .defirc thcpunty of thc Church , toconfidcr , how necre the 
 
 Antiquipaiech. Difciplinc of the Church of England borders upon Antichrift; 
 
 €t fi P res by* 
 
 Serum Epiftapo square fitbtreticHmsiibilCatbolicumiffepotefl. Cu»<\Aerh HicronymmdePref- 
 
 ijter-k wmno fenfit lttos mm jure divwo £.? if c opts abates effe flawit* 
 
 left, 
 
left, while they endeavour to keep out Antichrift frcm" entring by 
 the door of dodrine, they fhould fuffer him fecretly to crcen inby 
 the door of Difcipline , cfpeciaily confidering, what is here faid in 
 this Bookc,That by their own confefiion the Difcipline of the church 
 if £>}gUnd is the fame with the Church of Rome. 
 
 Whether Epifcopacie be not made a place of Dignity,rathcr then z 2 
 
 Duty, and deiiredonely for the great revenues of the place? And 
 whether, if the largcnefTe of their revenues were taken away, Bi- 
 ihops would not decline the great burthen and charge of foules 
 ncceflarily annexed to their places, as much as the ancient Biihops 
 did, who hid chemfelves, that they might not be made Bifhops and 
 cut off their cares, rather then they would be made Biihops : S . 9 W*> *'/** 
 whereas now Biihops cut offthe cares of thofe that fpeak againfl llb - 6 - c *?- 10 ' 
 their Bilbopricks? 
 
 How iccomes to pafs> that in BngUttd there is fuch increafeof 13. 
 Popery, Superftition, Arminianifm, and prophanenefs, more then 
 in other Preformed Churches ? Doth not the root of thefe Difor- 
 ders proceed from the Biihops and their adherents, being forced to 
 hold correfpondencie with Rme>to uphold their greatncfs,and their 
 Courts aud Cgnons,wherein they fymbolize with Rome I And whe- 
 ther it be not to be fcarcd,that they will rather confent to the bring* 
 ing in of Popery , for theupholdingof their dignities, then part 
 with their dignities for the upholding of Religion ? 
 
 Why fhould EngUnd that is one of the chicfeft King- *4 
 
 domes in &WN , that feparates from Antichrift , maintain 
 and defend a Difcipline different from all other Reformed Church- 
 es, which ftand in the like Separation ? And whether the conti- 
 nuance in this Difcipline will not at laft bring us to commumon- 
 with Rome, from which we are feparated v and to feparation fr^m 
 the other Reformed Churches f untp which we are united? 
 
 Whether il be fit that the name Bt(hop , which in Scripture is 
 common to the Presbyters with the Biihops (and not only in Scri- 
 pturc,but alfo in Antiquity for fome hundreds of yecrs) fhould ftiil 
 be appropriated to Biihops, and ingrolTcd by them, and not rather 
 to be madecommon to all Presbyters ; and the rather becaufe ? 
 
 Firft, we finde by woful experience , that the great Equivocati- 
 thatlieth in the name Bilhop, hath been, and is at this day a great 
 prop and pillar to uphold Lordly Prelacy j for this is the great Co- 
 li*h, the matter-piece , and indeed the oncly argument with which 
 they think to filcnce all oppofers; to wit , the Antiquity of Epifco- 
 pacie, that it hath continued in the Church of Chrift for i^co 
 yeers,&c which argument is cited by this Remonfirant w^w/r*** 
 
 vfq** 
 
 1; 
 
'tfqiu & ufque.tiow it is evident that this argument is a Paralogifm, 
 depending upon the Equivocation of the namcBifliop.For Bifhop« 
 inthe Apoftics time were the fame with Presbyters in name and 
 office, and fo for a good while after. And when afterwards they 
 came to be diftingui(hcd,the Biihopsof the Primitive times differ- 
 ed as much from ours now , as Rome ancient from Rome at this day, 
 as hath been tufficicntly declared in this Book. And the bed way to 
 confute this argument is by bringing in a Community of the name 
 Bifnopto a Presbyter as well as to a Biftiop. 
 
 Secondly, becaufe we finde that the late Innovators which have 
 fo much difturbed the peace and purity of our Church, did firft be- 
 gin with the alteration of words; and by changing the word Taitt 
 into the word tAlttr, and the word Minifter into the word Prie{t % 
 and the word Sacrament into the word Sacrifice , have endeavoured 
 to bring in the Popifb UWafs- And the Aportle exhorts us, 2 77*. 1. 
 15. To hold fafi the firmof foundmrds: and 1 TsmjS.iOm fo avoid 
 the profane novelties of work- Upon which text we will only men- 
 tion what the Rhemifts have commented , which we conceive to 
 be worthy consideration. (Nam infiruunt nes mn filum docentes % 
 ftdetiamerrantes.) The Church of God hath alwayesbeen as di- 
 ligent to refift novelties of words , as her ad verfaries are bade to 
 invent them, for which caafe (he will not have us common. cate 
 with them, nor follow their faihions and phrafe newly invented, 
 though in the nature of the words fometimes there be no harm. Let 
 us keep our forefathers words, and we (hall eafily keep our old-and 
 true faith, that we had of the firft Chriftiansjlet them hy,<Amend* 
 went, Abftinence, the Lords Supper, the Communion-Table, Elders, 
 Ministers , Superintendent * Congregation, So be it, Praife'je the Lord> 
 MorningTrayet 9 Evening Prayer, and the reft as they will ; Let us 
 avoid thofe novelties of words, according to the Apofiles prefcript, 
 and keep theold terms, Penance, Faftfriefis£h*rch,BiJhop, CMafs, 
 Mattin, Even-Song, the B*Sacrament, Altar ; Oblation, Hofi,Sacifice, 
 Hallelujah , Amen ; Lent, <P aim- Sunday, I hrtfmafs, and the words 
 will bring us to the faith of our firft jipofiles , and condemn thefe 
 new Apcftatesy new faith and phrafe. 
 Sh*tft.i6* Whether having proved that God never fci fuch a Government 
 
 in his Church as our Epifcopal Government is , we may lawfully 
 any longer be fubjeft unto it, be prefent at their Couns t obey their 
 Jnjmtlions, and especially be inftruments in publifhing, and execu- 
 ting their Excommunications and lAbfoimions I 
 
 And thus we have given (as we hope) a fufficienj: anfwer, and as 
 brief as the matter would pftmit, to the Rwwprant* With whom 
 
 though 
 
\rj 
 
 though we agree not in opinion touching Tplfapacu and Lhurgle ; 
 yet we fully confent with him, to pray unto A'mighty God, who « 
 great in power, and infinite in wifdomjo poure down upon the whole Honou- 
 rable Affemblyjhefpirit ofwifdom,and under/} an ding s t he fpirit of faun- 
 ftl & might, the fpirit tf knowledge and of the fear of the Lord: That you 
 may beabletodifcern betwixt things that differ 5 frperate between the 
 precious And the vile, purely purge away our drofj, and take away aH our 
 tin, root out every plant that is not of our heavenly Fathers planting: That 
 fo you way raifeup the foundations of many generations, anhbe called the 
 Repairers of breaches, and Refiorers of paths to dwell in. Even fo>Amen. 
 
 TTHough we might have added much light and beauty to our 
 Difcourfe, by inferring variety of Hiftories upon feveral occali- 
 OiiJ given us in the Remonstrance , the anfwer whereof we have un- 
 dertaken; efpccially where it fpcaks of the bounty migrations Mu- 
 nifictnet of Religions Princes toward the Hi/bops , yet unwilling to 
 break the threcd of our difcourfe , and its connexion with the Re- 
 monfl ranee by fo large a digreffion , as the whole [erics of Hiftoric 
 producible to our purpofc , would extend unto: Wehavechofen 
 rather to fubjoyn by way of Appendix , an hiftorical Narration of 
 thofe bitter fruits, Pride i RebeUion,Treafon t UnthankfHlnefs,&c.^^h 
 have iflued from Epifcopacy , while it hath flood under the conti- 
 nued influences of Sovcreigne goodnefs. Which Narration would 
 fill a Volume, but we will bound our felves unto the Stories of this 
 Kingdom, and that revolution of time which hath paffed over us 
 fincc the crcdion of the See of Canterbury. And becaufc in mod: 
 things the beginning is obferved to be a prefage of that which fol- 
 lows, let their Founder Auftin the Monk come firfl to be confider- 
 cd. Whom wcmayjuftly account to have been fuchtotheEn- 
 glifli, as the Arrian Biftiops were of old to the Goths, and the Je- £ f( ja. 
 fuits now among the Indians, who of Pagans have made but Am- Holinfh. 
 ins and Papifts. His ignorance in the Gofpel which he preached is Speed- 
 feen in his idle &: Judaica 1 confultations with the Pope^about things 
 dean and unclcan;his proud demeanour toward thcBritifti Clergy, 
 appears in his Council called about no folid point of faith, but ce- 
 lebration of Eafter, where having troubled and threatened the 
 Churches of Walcs,and afterwards of Scotland,about Romifh Ce- 
 remonies , he is faid in fine to have been the ftirrer up of Sthelbtrt, 
 by means of the Northumbrian King, to the flaughtcr of twelve 
 
 K hundred 
 
\7V 
 ImwirtA af thofe poor laborious Monks of *B anger. His Succeffbrs 
 bufied in nothing but urging RndinftitutingCeremonies,and main- 
 taining Precedency wepafs over. 
 jiMnfr* cut Till Dtwfitn, the Sa : nted Prelate, who of afrantick Necro- 
 JlC*P*™w m w»«er 5 and (ufpefted fornicacour, was (horn a Monk , andafter- 
 Qfbor*** ward* made a Biihop. His worthy deeds are noted by Speed, to 
 
 fjfcdm* have been the cheating King SIdredoi the trcafure committed to 
 ' tv.s keeping; the prohibiting of marriage, to the increafingof all 
 
 fikhinefsinthc Clergy of thofe times; as the long Orationof King 
 Edg*r in Stow well tteftifies. 
 Eiw Cwf* in Edward the Confeffors dayes , Robert the Norman no fooner 
 Archbifhop of Canterbury, but fetting the King and Earl Godwin 
 at variance for private revenge^hroath'ta Civil War, till the Arch- 
 Hclfi>i$i» bi&op was banilhc* 
 
 JP/& Cw-7' N° w #^'* w c ^ e Conquerour had fet up Lwktfrank. Bifhop of 
 
 Canterbury , who to requite him, fpent his faithful fervicetothe 
 
 £wJ 44s Fop: (7rc£07 ; in perfwading the King to fubjeft himfelf and his 
 
 F State to the Papacy, as himfelf writes to the Pope, Snap Jed mn 
 
 ferfuafi. 
 WitlfJtof* 1 he treafon of *Anfelm to Mu/ms was notorious , who not con- 
 
 tent to withftand the King , obftinately in money-matters, made 
 fuit to fetch his P all or Inveftiture of Archtepifcopacy from Rome, 
 which the King denying as flat agai-nft his Regal Sovereignty , he 
 went without his leave , and for his Romifti good fervice received 
 great honour from the Pope, by being featcd at his right foot in a 
 Synod, with thefe words , Inelu&amus bune in orbe noftro tanquam 
 ait trim orbit Papam. Whence perhaps it is that the See of Canter- 
 bury hath affeded a Patriarchy- in ourdayeSi This lAnfelm alfo 
 condemned the married Clergy . 
 He*> I Henry the Firft reigning, the fame Anfelm deprived thofe Pre- 
 
 lates that had been Inverted by the King , and all the Kingdom is 
 vext with one Prelate , who the fecond time betakes himfelf to his 
 old fortrefs at Rome, till the King was fain to yield. Which done, 
 and the Archbifhop returned, fpends the reft of his dayes in a long 
 Hol/bin*$7. contention and unchriftian jangling with York, about Primacie. 
 Which ended not fo , but grew hoc between 7"^ and London, 
 _ as Dean to Canterbury, driving for the upper feat at Dinner, till the 
 ~ King feeing their odious pride, putthem both out of doors. 
 ftttinfcii. Tofpeakof Ralph zndThftrftan, the next Archbiftops, pur- 
 fuing the fame quarrel, were tedious,as it was no (mail moleftation 
 to the King and K'ngdom,! burfi an refufing to ftand to the Kings 
 doom t and wins the day , or elfc the King mud be accurVd by the 
 
 Pope; 
 
\ / J7 
 
 Popt; which further animates him Co try the madery with Wil- Helirtfi^i, 
 Horn next Archbtlhop of Canterbury, and no man can end it but 4;. 
 
 their Father the Pop;, for which they ti av .*l to Ro me. In the mean 
 while , marriage is fliarply decreed agamlt , Speed 448. and the 
 Legate Cremmenfis, the Dedamouragainit Matrimony taken with 
 a Strumpet the lame night. 
 
 In King Stephens Reign , the haughcy Bifliopsof C/inttrlury K.Stephen* 
 m& Winchester bandy about Precedency; and to Rome to end the 
 Duel. Theobald goes to Rome againft the Kings will ; interdicts the Holinfh.^ 
 Realm, and the King forc't to fuffer it ; till refufingco Crown Eu- 58^9. 
 ftace, the Kings Son, becaufe the Pope had fo commanded, he flies 
 again. 
 
 Becks?* pride and out-ragious trcafons are too mani fell ; re- Henry 2.] 
 figning the Kings gift of his Archbifhoprick to receive it of the 
 Pope ; requiring the Cuftody of Rocheftcr-cMe , and the Tower 
 of London , as belonging to his Seignorie. Protects murthering 
 Priefts from Temporal Sword; Handing ftifly for the L- berries and speed 461. 
 Dignities of Clerks, but little to chaftife their vices, which befides ouc Q £ ^^ 
 other crying fins , were above a hundred murthers fince Henry y r ^ enSt 
 the Seconds crowning , till that time : to maintain which , moft Yet this mans 
 ofthcBiftiopsconfpire, till the terrour of the Kingmadethem lif e isktdy 
 (brink ; but 5^*obdures, denies that the King of England* Printed in Eng 
 Courts have authority to judge him- -And thus was this noble ^fn, as a thing 
 Kingdifquietedbyaninfolent Traitour , in habit of a Bifhop, to be imitated. 
 a great part of his Reigne ; thcLand in uproar ; many Excom- Holmfi. jo. 
 municate , and accurfed ; France and England fet to War , and Speed 469. 
 the King himfelf curbed , and controlled ; and laftiy , difci- 
 plin'd by the Bifhops and Monks : firft , with a bare-foot pe- 
 nance, that drew blood from his feet, and laftly , with fourfcore 
 ladies on hisanointed body with Rods. 
 
 In the fame Kings time it was that the Archbidiop of Torl^ 
 driving to fit above Canterbury , fquats him down on his lap, 
 whence with many a cuff he was thrown down. Hd'mjh og. 
 
 Next the pride of W- Longchamp , Bifhop of Elie, was notori- Richjrd 1 . 
 ous,who would ride with a thousand horfe ; and of a Go\ern- <p^ 1 :o, 
 our in the Kings abfence , became a Tyrant ; for which flying in 120,122* 
 Womans apparel he was taken. 
 
 To this fucc^eds contention between Canterbury and York., a- 
 boutcarriage of their CrofTes , and Rome appeal'd to : the Bifhop 
 of Durham buyes ah Earldom . } 14# 
 
 No fooner another King a but Hubert another Archbifhop to v • f 7^ 
 
 K z vex *' 
 
\/f/ 
 
 sc*-'-' 
 
 \ 
 
 Speed $03* 
 
 Speed 5 op. 
 
 Hen £. 
 *$>&&> 1S8. 
 
 Ho/. 247. 
 
 53°- 
 
 Edward 1 . 
 J7o//& 2 So. 
 HcifajCi, 
 
 Htf/^.315, 
 
 Fdrrard 2. 
 Speed 5 ~+ 
 
 Edward 7, . 
 Speed ^6 > 
 
 vex him , and left that were not enough' , made Chancellour of 
 En^Lmd. And befides him, 7<^rj of 7«r<. who refufing to pay a 
 Subfidy within his Precin&s, and therefore all his temporalities 
 feaz'd ; excommunicates the Sheriff, beats the Kings Officers, and 
 interdicts his whole Province. H*£*rf outbraves the King in Chrift- 
 mafs houf- keeping: hinders King fthn by his Legantine power from 
 recovering NormAndy After him Stephen Langtonfet up by the Pope 
 infpitcofthe King, whooppofing fuch an affront , falls under an 
 incerdid,with his whole Land ; andatthefuitof his Archbifhop ta 
 the Pope, is depos'd by Papal Sentence; his Kingdom given to Phi- 
 lip the French King, Langtons friend; and laftly , refigncs and cn- 
 fcuds his Crown to the Pope, 
 
 A ftcr this tragical Stepben y thc fray which 'Boniface the next Arch* 
 bifhop but one had with the Canons of Saint f Bartho/mtws i is as 
 pleafant; the tearing of Hoods and Cowles , the miring of Copes, 
 the flying about of Wax Candles, and Cenfors in the fcuffle, can- 
 not be imagined without mirth;as his,oathswere loud in this bicker- 
 ing , fo his curfes were as vehement in thecontention with the Bi- 
 fhop of tvinckefter for a flight occafion. But now the Bifhops had 
 turned their concerting into bafe and fcrvile flatteries, to advance 
 themfelves on the ruinc of the fubjeds. For Peter deRupibut Bifhop 
 ofWinchefter pcrfvvading the King to difplaceEnglifh Officers,and 
 fubftitutc Poictiv)nes,and telling theLords to their faces,that there 
 were no Pcercs in England, as in France^ but that the King might 
 do what he would, and by whom he woold , became a firebrand 
 to thecivill wars that followed* 
 
 In this time Peckam Archbifhop of C**> in a Synod was tamper- 
 ing with the Kings liberties, but being threatened defifted. But his 
 fucceflbr winchelfej on occafion of Subfidics demanded of the 
 Clergie, made anfvver, That having two Lords, one Spirituall, the 
 other Tcmporall, he ought rather to obey the Spirituall govcraou* 
 the Pope, but that he would fend to the Pope to know his plea- 
 fure, and (0 perfifted even to beggcric. The Bifhop of Durham al- 
 fo cited by the King flies to Rome* 
 
 In thedepofingofthis King who more forward, thenthe Bi- 
 fhop of Hereford ? witneffe his Sermon at Oxford , My head, my 
 head akctb, concluding that an aking and tick head of a King was 
 to be taken off without further Phyfick. 
 
 John the Archbifhop of C*nterbury$tf$tdLt& to hinder the Kings 
 glorious victories in Flanders, and France-, by flopping the convey- 
 ance of monies committed to his charge, confpiring therein with 
 vvish rhe Pope. But not long after yvas conftitutcd that fatal! 
 
 pramumre, 
 
\r jy 
 
 prammire,\\h\d\ was the firft nippingof their courage^o feek aide Hcifi.409 
 at Romt. And next to that , the wide wounds that wicklefte made 
 in their (ides. From which time they have been falling, and thence- 
 forth all the fmoak that they could vomit, was turned againft the 
 rifing light of pure do&rine- 
 
 Yet cou'd not their Pride mifTeoccafion to fct other mifchief on Richard i. 
 foot. For the C itizens ofLonden rifing to apprehend a riotousfer- 
 vaac of the Bifhop of Salisbury then Lord Treafurcr, who with his 
 fellowes flood on his guard in the Biihops houfe ? were by the Bi- 
 fhop who maintained the riot of his fervant, fo complained of, that Holfi 4-78.- 
 the King therewith feized on their liberties ,and fet a Governour 
 over the Citie. And who knowes not, that Thomat ArundtX Arch- 
 bifhop of Canterbury was a chief inftrument and agent in depofing 
 King Richard, as his anions and Sermon well declares. 4 & e * 
 
 The like intended the Abbot of Wcftminfter to Henry the fourth, Henry 4. 
 who for no other reafon , but becaufc he fufpe&cd that the King 
 did not favour the wealth of the Church, drew into a moft horrible 
 confpiracie the Earlcs of Kent, Rutland, and Salisbury , to kill the 
 King in a turnament at Oxford, who yet notwithstanding was a p 
 man that profeffed to leave the Church in better ftate then he *** * **' 
 found it. For all this, foone after is Richard Scroop Archbifhop of Speed6^i. 
 T$rk in the field againft him, the chiefe attraftor of the rebellious Holjh. 529. 
 party. 
 
 InthefctimesTfe)«M/^r^^//agreatperfecutorof the Gofpel Henry*. 
 prcachedj by Wikclefs followers , dies a fearfull death, his tongue fo 
 fweliing within hismouth,thathemuftof neceffity ftarve.Hisfuc- 
 ccflbr C hickelej nothing milder diverts the King, that was looking 
 
 too nccrly into the fuperfluous revenues of the Church, to a bloo- c a a q 
 dywarre. 2>fttab&. 
 
 All the famous conquefts which Henry the fifth had made in Henry 6- 
 France , were loft by a civil diffenfionin England, which fprung 
 firft from the haughty pride of Beaufort Bjfhopand Cardihallof 
 PTinchefter, and the Archbifhop of ror^againft the Prote&or,<S/*d Ho/Jt?.<p6. 
 6jq. In the civill warres the Archbifhop fides with theEarleof Pate6io. 
 Wdrvticl^md Marchm Kent, Speed 682. 
 
 Edward the fourth, Mountacute Archbifhop of Tor^ one of the Edwards. 
 chicfc confpirators with *f4nr/<-£againft Edward the fourth,and af* Speed (99. 
 tierwards his Jaylor, being by Warwick* trcafon committed to this 
 Bifhop. 
 
 In Edward the Fifths time, the Archbifhop of Tbn^was, though toward 5* 
 perhaps unwittingly (yet by a certain fate of Prelacie) the unhap- 
 py inftrument of pulling the young Dukeof 2V^out of Sanctu- 
 ary Jnto his cruel Uncles hands. Things 
 
imngs ucing fetled in fuch a peace , a? afcer the bloody brawls 
 was to the afHided Realm howfoever acceptable, though not fuch 
 as might be vvifhed : Morton Biftiep of Ely , enticing the Duke of 
 'Bftckinghjm to cake the Crown, which ruin'd him,opened the veins 
 of the poorfubjeds to bleed afrefh. 
 
 The intolerable pride , extortion , bribery , luxury of Wtlfq 
 uYl Archbifhopof Yor^ who canbe ignorant of ? felling Difpenfatt- 
 
 /10/.545. tionsbyhis power Legantine for all offences, intuiting over the 
 4 6lt Dukes and Peers , of whom fome he brought to dcftru&ion by 
 
 bloody policie, playing with State-affairs according to his humour, 
 or benefit : caufingTcw/wj, got with the blood of many a good 
 SoulJier, to be rendred at the French Kings fecret reqneft to hiro, 
 not withouc bribes; with whom one while fiding , another while 
 with the Emperour , he fold the honour and peace of England , at 
 what rates he pleafed ; and other crimes to be feeninthe Articles 
 againfthim, #V**jW<9i2. andagainftall theBifhops in general, 
 91 1, which when the Parliament fought toremedie, being moll: 
 exceffive extortion in the Ecclefiaftical Courts, the Bifhops cry 
 out; Sacriledge , the Church goes to ruinc , as it did in 'Bohemia, 
 with the Schifrne of the Hnjfites y Ibid- After this , though the Bi- 
 Sfeedjfy* (hopsceafed to be Papifts; for they preached againft the Popes Su- 
 premacie , to pleafe the King , yet they ceafed not to oppugne the 
 Gofpel,caufing Xw^i//Tranflation to be burnt,yea,they agreed to 
 the fuppreffingof Monafteries, leaving their revenues to the King, 
 Hc/992, to make way for the fix bloudy Articles , which proceedings with 
 all cruelty of inquifition are fet down , Helin/h.pag^6. Kill they 
 were repealed the fecond ofSdwardthc Sixth, flopping in the mean 
 while the caufe of Reformation well begun by the Lord CromweL 
 Speed 79:. And this mifchief was wrought by Steven Gardiner, Bifhop oftvin- 
 Speed- chefter. The fix Articles are fet down in Speed ,pag.j9 2. 
 
 Statxt. Ben* The Archbifhop of Saint Andrews, his hindring of England) and 
 8. Anno 35- Scot lands Union, for fear of Reformation, Speed 794. 
 
 " c. As for the dayes of King Edtvard the Sixth , we cannot but ac- 
 
 \dward6- knowledge to the glory of the rich mercy of God , that there was 
 a great Reformation of Religion made even to admiration. And 
 yet notwithftanding we do much diflike the humour of thofe ,that 
 cry up thofe dayes as a compleat pattern of Reformation, and that 
 endevour to reduce our Religion to the firft times of King Sdward, 
 which we conceive were comparatively very imperfedt^there being 
 foure impediments which did much hinder that blefled work. 
 The three Rebellions. One in Henry the Eighths time , by the 
 1 Priefts of Lincth and Torkejhire , for that Reformation which 
 
 Crsm* 
 
cmwd had made. iTheJother two in King Edrwds dayes. One in 
 
 firnrpal, the other in Ycrkejhirc 
 
 The ftrife that arofe fuddenly araongft the Peers ,emulating one 
 tnothers honour, Speed, p*g& 37- 
 
 The violent oppofition of the Popiih Bifnops , which made 
 Martin Bucer write to King Fdwrd in his Book de Regnt Chrifti, 
 M.i.ctp.i-vLni fay, Your Majefty doth fee, that this reftoring a- 
 gain the Kingdom of (Thrift, which we require, yea, which the fal- 
 vation of us all required , may in no wife be expected to come 
 from the Biftiops, feeing there be fo few among them which do 
 underftand the power and proper Offices of this Kingdom; and ve- 
 ry many of them by all means (which poflibly they can and dare) 
 cither oppofe themfelves againft it,or defer and hinder. 
 
 The deficiency of zeal and courage even in thofe Bifhopswho 
 afterwards proved Martyrs, witnefs the (harp contention of Ridley 
 againft Hooftr for the ceremonies. And the importunate fuit of 
 Crtnmtr and Ridley for toleration of the Mafs for the Kings fifter, 
 which was reje&ed by the Kings not only reafons,but tearsjwhere- 
 by the young King fhewed more zeal then his beft Bifhops, 839. 
 
 The inhumane butcheries, blood- (beddings , and crueltiesof 
 (j vainer , Bonner , and the reft of the Biftiops in Queen Maries 
 dayes, are fo frefh in every mans memory , as that we conceive it a 
 thing altogether unneceflary to make mention of them. Only we 
 fear left the guilt of the blood then (bed, fhould yet remain to be 
 required at the hands of this Nation , becaufe it hath not publickly 
 endeavoured to appeafc the wrath of God by a generai and folemn 
 humiliation for it. 
 
 What the pracYces c f the Prelates have been ever fince, from the 
 begininningof Queene £liz,abctbto this prefentday, would fiil a 
 volume (like E&kicls Roll) with lamentation, mourning, and wo 
 to record. For it hath been their great deiigne to hinder al I further 
 Reformation; to bring in do&rines of Popery, Arminianifme, and 
 Libertyiifrnc,to maintaia,propagate and much encreafe the burden 
 of.hrmane ceremonies: to keep out, and beat down the Preaching 
 of the Word, to filence the faithful! Preachers of it, to oppofe ana 
 perfecutc the moft zealous profe flours, and to turn all Religion in- 
 to? pompous out. fide; and to tread down the power of godjinefc 
 Infomuch as it is come to an ordinary Proverb, ihat when any thing 
 is fpoiled , we ufe to fay , 7 he Bifiop's jcot hath keen in it r nd in 
 this (and much more which mi £hcbc faid ) fulfilling Bifhop % #*«- 
 
 ners 
 
\/ w 7 
 
 im Prophecie , who when he faw that tn King 'Ed***b™ 
 on, there was a rcfervation of Ceremonies and Hierarchy* 
 bly reported to have ufed thefe wordi : Since thtj **v< "l* 
 •four Brntth , it veil n*t be Ung tr$ thtj wiile*t*fi*r B«f' 
 
 FINIS. 
 
 v * 
 
 s 
 
> 
 
 
 

 
 
 
:v 
 
 *\ 
 
 ^jt 
 
 IS* 
 
 X 
 
 \ 
 
 f 
 
 •xr 
 
 > 
 
 ^V 
 
 T £ 
 
 vr 
 
 * •