A vindication of the answer to the humble remonstrance from the unjust imputation of frivolousnesse and falshood Wherein, the cause of liturgy and episcopacy is further debated. By the same Smectymnuus. Smectymnuus. 1654 Approx. 417 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 116 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2004-08 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A52063 Wing M799 ESTC R217369 99829040 99829040 33475 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A52063) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 33475) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 1973:01) A vindication of the answer to the humble remonstrance from the unjust imputation of frivolousnesse and falshood Wherein, the cause of liturgy and episcopacy is further debated. By the same Smectymnuus. Smectymnuus. Marshall, Stephen, 1594?-1655. aut Calamy, Edmund, 1600-1666. aut Young, Thomas, 1587-1655. aut Newcomen, Matthew, 1610?-1669. aut Spurstowe, William, 1605?-1666. aut [14], 168, 173-219, [3] p. printed for John Rothwell at the Fountaine and Beare in Cheapside, London : [1654] Smectymnuus: a word composed of the initials of the authors, viz. Stephen Marshall, Edmund Calamy, Thomas Young, Matthew Newcomen, and William Spurstowe. Date of publication from Wing. The words "liturgy and episcopacy" are enclosed in brackets in the title. Text is continuous despite pagination. With a final errata leaf. Reproduction of original in the University of Illinois (Urbana-Champaign Campus). Library. Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford. Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO. EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor. The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines. Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements). Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site . eng Episcopacy -- Early works to 1800. 2003-11 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2003-12 Aptara Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2004-05 Tonya Howe Sampled and proofread 2004-05 Tonya Howe Text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion A VINDICATION OF THE ANSWER TO THE HUMBLE REMONSTRANCE FROM THE UNJUST IMPUTATION OF FRIVOLOUSNESSE AND FALSHOOD . Wherein , The cause of LITURGY and EPISCOPACY is further debated . By the same SMECTYMNUUS . LONDON , Printed for Iohn Rothwell at the Fountaine and Beare in Cheapside . TO THE MOST HONORABLE LORDS AND THE KNIGHTS , CITIZENS , AND BVRGESSES OF THE HONORABLE HOVSE OF COMMONS . IT was the expectation that the whole Kingdome had of your high worth , and faithfull resolutions , to reforme what was amisse both in Church and State , which gave us the confidence to present unto you our former treatise . And now your reall performance , and noble Actions tending to the publicke peace and good , have added much more chearefulnesse in our second addresse towards you ; the rather , for that the cause in question betweene us and the Remonstrant , about Episcopacy and Liturgie , is a great part of that worke to which God hath directed your present consultations . Seeing therefore it belongs to you next under God and his Majestie , to dispose and order these things : Wee leave our endeavours at your feete , beseeching you to consider , not onely how we have vindicated our selves from the accusations of our adversarie , but more especially what may bee gathered out of it for the advancement of the reformation now happily begunne among us . The Lord of life and glory bee a Sunne and shield unto you . TO THE READER . Good Reader , THE Booke which we here undertake to answer , is so full fraught with bitter invectives , false aspertions , hyperbolicall confidence , selfe contradictions , and such like extravagancies , as that we have thought fit to lay them all before thee in one full view by way of preface , rather then to interrupt our following discourse by observing them as they lie scattered in the booke it selfe . Suffer us therefore to give thee notice of these few particulars . First , wee are deepely charged and accused not onely to the ordinarie Reader but even to the Kings Majestie himself , of misallegations , misinterpretations , mistranslations , and false quotations , and that in such an high nature as that the Authour calles God to witnesse , before whom he is shortly to give an account that hee never saw any Author that would dare to professe Christian sincerity so fowle to overlash . And this is not once or twice but often repeated with great asseveration & exclamations . Which when we first reade ( being conscious of our innocency and fidelity ) we could not but stand amazed and wonder to see our selves so unexpectedly and wee hope undeservedly transformed into men ( or rather monsters of men ) so transcedently perfidious , and so supersuperlatively unfaithfull and wicked . And indeede , if to be accused to a fault bee a sufficient argument to make us guilty , wee must needes bee for ever branded with such an high measure of ignominy , as that it is not a whole sea of water that will serve to wash off the filth of such accusations . But wee doubt not but that the ingenuous peruser of this booke will finde that as it was the glory of one of the Cato's that hee was thirty times accused and yet never sound guiltie : so it will be our honour and credit when hee shall see that all this clamour and noyse is but a bearing of false witnesse against his brethren . Si accusasse sat est quis erit innocens . It was the the wicked counsell of Matchiavell Calumniare fortiter & aliquid adhoerebit . This counsell the Papists have made use of in answering of Protestant writers , and the Bishops themselves in their answers to some of the unconforming Ministers bookes . And we have good reason to thinke that the Authour of this Defence hath trod in the same steps . For after all his generall exclamations and accusations , there are but foure places in which hee undertakes to prove us false . The first is for halfe citing of Hieroms testimonie . The second is for abusing Nazianzene . The third is for misinterpreting Origen about Lay Elders . The fourth is for foysting in Cyprian . True it is , hee tells us of want of fidelity in citing the Counsell of Antioch and Ancyra , of misalledging of Whitakers , of misenglishing Tertullian , and of guilty translating of Iustin Martyr . But hee doth not so much as endeavour to make good what he tells us , and therefore we cannot but beleeve that hee used more Machiavelisme then honestly in such aspersions . As for Authors which hee himselfe hath both misalledged and misinterpreted , wee doe not onely say it , but the Reader shall finde it demonstratively proved in the ensuring treatise . Secondly , if to be railed upon , reviled , slighted , and scorned bee sufficient to bring men into discredit , then certainely , we must be esteemed as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the dung , of scouring , and filth of the world . For never man since Mountagues Appeale , wrote with more scorne and contempt . Wee are ca●led Vaine , frivolous , Cavillers , insolent , spightfull , riotous , proud , false , unjust , triflers , factious , Brotherly slanderers , sullen and crabbed peices , Lyars , egregious and palpable calumniators , wilfully shutting our eyes against the truth such as the Readers may be ashamed off , witlesse , malicious , uncharitable , envious , frivolous wasters of unseasonable words , swelling up a windy bulke with groundlesse exceptions against our eyes and conscience , tedious and loose disputers , Patronizers of branded Heretiques , impotent , weake , and absurd men , grossely ignorant , such as fowly over-reach , men of weake judgement , and strong malice ; commonly spightfull , and seldome witty , violent and subtile machinators against , and disturbers of Gods ordinances , some whole sections meere declamations , worthy of nothing but of contempt and silence , ill bred sons of the Church , spitting in the face of our Mother , fomentors of unjust dislikes against lawfull goverment , making wickedly false suggestions , wanting witt and grace to understand the true meaning of the Jus Divinum of Episcopacy , worthy to be punished for their presumption , & disobedience , men that make no conscience by what meanes wee uphold a side and winne a Proselyte . These are the flowers with which his defence is garnished , and the titles with which he honours those whom hee calles his Brethren . Wee will make no other Apologie for our selves , but what Austin did in the same kind , who when hee was told that his railing adversarie was to hard for him , hee said it was and easie thing that way to conquer Austin , but the Reader should perceive it was Clamore not veritate , by loud crying not by truth : And what Hierom saith against Helvidius , Arbitror te veritate convictum a maledicta converti . It is a signe of a man not able to stand before the truth , when hee betakes himselfe to reproachfull language . Thirdly , if multitude of daring protestations and bold asseverations be sufficient proofes of arguments propounded , and if confident slightings , and scornefull denyalls bee sufficient answers to us , and our arguments , never any man hath better defended Episcopacie or more strongly confuted those that oppose it . In his very first page hee begges the question , and affirmes his cause to bee Gods cause , Gods truth , and if his opposers were as many Legions as men , hee would meet them undismayed , and say with holy David ; Though an host should encampe against mee , my heart should not feare , but with just confidence I gladly fly to the barre of this high and Honorable Court , ( And yet by his leave hee thought it his best wisdome to fly from this barre , and to dedicate his book to the Kings Majestie alone , and not to the two houses : ) And in another place hee saith , the Apostles practise is so irrefragable for them , that if wee doe but adde the unquestionable practise of their immediate successors : hee knowes not what more light can bee desired for the manifestation of the truth of his opinion . In his Epistle to the King hee saith , That if hee doth not make it appeare that wee have abused our Reader with false shewes of misalleadged antiquities , and meerely colourable pretences of proofes , let the blemish of his reputation leade way to the sharpest censure upon his person . ( Iust like the Authour of Episcopacie by Divine right , who is so confident against Lay Elders ; That hee offers to forfeit his life to justice , and his reputation to shame , if any man living can shew that ever there was a Ruling Elder in the world till Farel and Viret first created them : ( And yet hee could not but know that Arch-Bishop Whitgift ( as well seene in Antiquitie as himselfe ) confesseth that there were Ruling Elders in the Primitive Church . Thus also doth Bishop King ; Saravia himselfe thinkes the governement of Ruling Elders to be good and profitable . ) In his answer to our arguments , sometimes hee tells us that wee prove nothing but our bold ignorance and absurd inconsequences : Otherwhile hee saith , Poore arguments scarce worthy of a passe . These are trifling cavills not worth the answer . Verball exceptions which will sinke like light froath . Meere declamations worthie of no answer but contempt and scorne . forbeare Reader , if you can to smile at this curious subtilty : What Cabalisme have wee here ? Our quaeries are made up of nothing but spight and slander . His ordinarie answer toour Testimonies out of Antiquity is : This Authour is misalledged . That Father abused . This Councell shuffled up with little fidelitie . Away with your unproving illustrations and unregardable testimonies . And this is all the answer hee gives . Throughout the whole booke he endeavours to render us to the Reader as destitute of all learning , as if our reading had never gone beyond a Polyanthea . Hee calles us boldly ignorant . And that wee would make the Reader beleeve that wee had seene a Father . And that we would seeme to have seene the Canon Law. And that it is enough wee can shew a little reading to no purpose . But in all these and many more such like Sarcasmes and vaine Rhetorications hee doth but act the part of his Hierarchicall predecessors whose chiefe answers have beene scoffes and scornes ; and therefore what learned Rivetus saith of Bishop Mountague may with as much truth bee averred of this namelesse Author . Montacutius vir certedoctus , sed admodum praefidens , & tumidus aliorum contemptor , & suggillator . And in another place . Non potest vir ille sine convitijs quemquam a quo dissentit vel in levissimis nominare . But what strength and weight there is in such kinde of arguments and answers , let the wise Reader judge . And yet not withstanding all this confidence & Thrasonicall boasting we desire thee to observe : Fourthly , That if the whole booke were divided into foure parts , there is one quarter of which he makes no mention , but passeth it over either with scorne or silence . And where our arguments are strongest there hee slides away without answering , which cannot but make the judicious Reader beleeve that hee thought the yron to hot for him , and therefore would not touch it least it should burne his owne fingers ; as himselfe saith pag. 21. And even in those things wherein hee undertakes to answere us we cannot but give notice that wee have confitentem reum , and in effect the cause granted in those things which are most materiall . For when wee prove from Scripture the Identity of Bishops and Presbyters both in name and office , he tells us with a little varying of our words ; Wee idly loose our labour . It neede bee no scruple to us : It is in expresse termes granted , when we prove that there are not three degrees of Ministery in the Scripture ( to wit , Bishops , Presbyters , and Deacous ) hee answers , it is granted ; you speake of the Apostles writings , but I of their successors . Hee granteth also that the Primitive Bishops were elected by the Clergie , and people . That Bishops ought not to have sole power in Ordination , and Iurisdiction . That they ought not to delegate their power to others . That the ordinary managing of secular imployments is improper for them . And hee doth almost grant that there were Lay-Elders in antiquity . For whereas the Author of Episcopacy by Divine right affirmeth , that the name of Elders of the Church in all antiquity comprehendeth none but Preachers , and that therefore they onely may bee called Seniores Ecclesiae , though some others may have the title of Seniores populi , because of their civill authority . This Author acknowledgeth that besides Pastors , and besides the Magistrates and Elders of the City there are to bee found in antiquity Seniores Ecclesiastici . Indeede hee saith , that these were but as our Churchwardens , or Vestry men . But how true this is , the Reader shall see in due place : Lastly , hee grants that all that wee say in the Postscripts about the Popish Prelates is true , Celari non potuit negari non debuit . And for what we say of the Protestant Bishops he denies not the truth of it only he chides for taxing all for the fault of some . And in these things wherein hee doth diametrically oppose us , hee doth frequently contradict himselfe and his best friends . In his Epistle dedicatory hee professeth that he taxeth not our ability , yet in the same Epistle hee calles us impotent assailants , and afterwards . Men of weake judgements and strong malice . And Men that would seeme to have seene a Father . And that all that we say is nothing but bold ignorance . Pag. 94. he saith , That to acknowledge an Ordinary Evangelist is a phancy and a dreame . And yet elsewhere he makes every Preacher of the Gospell to be an Evangelist . In his Remonstrant and in his defence he saith , that Bishops had beene every where throughout all the Regions of the Christian world . And that all Churches throughout the whole Christian world have uniformely and constantly maintained Episcopacy . And yet elsewhere he denies that ever hee said , That Bishops were every where , and confesseth that there are lesse noble Churches that doe not conferre to Episcopall Governement . Pag. 161. hee tells us , that for 1600 yeares the name of Bishops hath bin appropriated ( in a plain contradistinction ) to the governors of the Church : But in other places he often grants that the Name was confounded , and ascribed to Presbyters are well as Bishops . In his 36. pag. he saith , That in his Remonstrance hee made no mention of Diocesan Bishops , whereas all know that he undertooke the defence of such Bishops which were petitioned against in Parliament , whom none will deny to bee Diocesan Bishops . In his 5. pag. ( speaking of the changing of Civill governement mentioned in the Remonstrance ) he professeth that he did not aime at our Civill Governement . Let but the Reader survey the words of the Remonstance pag. 8. and it will appeare plainely ac si solaribus radijs descriptum esset . That the comparison was purposely made betwixt the attempts of them that would have altered our Civill governement , and those that indeavored the alteration of our Church governement . And whereas he bids as pag. 135. to take our soleordination and sole jurisdiction to sole our next paire of shoes withall , yet notwitstanding hee makes it his great worke to answer all our arguments against the sole power of Bishops , and when all is done , allowes the Presbyter onely an assistance , but no power in Ordination nor jurisdiction . Lastly , in the stating of the question he distinguisheth betweene divine and Apostolicall authority , and denyeth that Bishops are of Divine authority as ordained immediately by Christ. And yet he saith , That Christ himselfe hath laid the ground of this imparitie in his first agents . And that by the evidence of Timothy and Titus , and the Asian Angels ( to whom Christ himselfe wrote ) he hath made good that just claime of the sacred Hierarchy . This is the summe of that ( good Reader ) that we thought fit to praemonish thee of . Wee now dismisse thee to the booke it selfe , and commend thee and it , to the blessing of God. A Vindication of the ANSWER to the humble Remonstrance . SECT . I. IF wee thought our silence would onely prejudice our selves , wee could contentedly sit downe and forbeare Replyes , not doubting , but intelligent men , comparing cause with cause , and reason with reason , would easily see with whom the truth rests : but wee fearing that many who have not either ability or leisure to search into the grounds of things themselves , would fearce thinke it possible , that so much confidence as the Remonstrant shewes , should be severed from a good cause , or so much contempt should bee powred upon us that are not the bad defenders of a cause much worse . Wee must discharge our duty in cleering the cause and truth of God , and that will cleer us from all the foule aspersions which the Remonstrant hath been nothing sparing to cast upon us . Whose Defence in every Leafe terms us either ignorant , lyers , witlesse , falsifiers , malicious , spightfull , slanderous , violent , and subtill Machinators against the Church , and disturbers of her peace , &c. and this not onely in a cursory way , but in such a devout and religious form , as we make question whether ever any man before him did so solemnly traduce , speaking it in the presence of God , that he never saw any Writer professing Christian sincerity so fouly to overlash . To the presence of God before whom his protestation is made , our accesse is equall , and at that Tribunall wee doubt not , through the grace of Christ , but to approve both our selves & our cause . And had we the same accesse unto our Sovereigne , wee should lesse regard those bitter invective accusations , wherewith hee hath so profusely charged us in his Sacred eares . But our meanesse forbids us to make immediate addresses to the throne , which he hath made his refuge : yet may it please that Royall Majesty , whom God hath anointed over us , to vouchsafe an eye unto these papers , wee have that trust in the Justice of our Sovereigne , the goodnesse of our Cause , the integrity of our consciences in all our Quotations , as we doubt not but his Majesty will cleerly see , that our Persons , cause , and carriage , have been misrepresented to him . The cause our Remonstrant saith is Gods ; it is true of the cause agitated , though not of the cause by him defended : and we desire ( what ever he hath done ) to manage it in Gods way ; to love in the truth , and speak the truth in love . The charity of our Remonstrant wee will not question , though in the first congresse hee doth as good as call us Devils : because so often in his book he cals us Brethren . But that which hee calls truth , and the truth of God , we must crave leave to doe more , then bring in question , notwithstanding the impregnable confidence of this Irrefragable Doctor . Our Histories record of Harold , Cupbearer to Edward the Confessor , that wayting on the Cup , he stumbled with one foot , and almost fell , but that hee recovered himself with the other ; at which his father smiling said , Now one brother helps another . The Remonstrant calls us Brethren , and supposeth hee sees us stumbling in the very entrance of our answer , and what help doth our Brother lend us ? Onely entertains us Sannis & Cathinnis , and tels us , it is an ill signe to stumble at the threshold . Yet not alwayes an ill signe Sir , wee accept this stumbling for such an Omen , as Caesar had at his Landing in Affrick , and our William the Conquerour at his first landing in England , which they tooke for the first signe of their victory and possession . An what 's this Stumble ? The Answer mentions the Areopagi instead of the Areopagites , Grande nefas ! Of such an impiety as this , did Duraeus once accuse our Learned Whitakers , from whom wee will in part borrow our answer : It is well the good of the Church depends not upon a piece of Latine . But can our Remonstrant perswade himselfe , that his Answerers should have so much Clarklike ignorance , as never to have heard of Areopagita ? If he can , yet we are sure he can never perswade his ingenious Readers , but some one at least of that Legion , which hee fancies conjured up against his Remonstrance , might have heard of Dionysius Areopagita , that by a man that had not studied to cast contempt upon us , it might have beene thought rather a stumble in the Transcribers or Printers , then the Authours . But what if there be no stumble here ? What if the fault be in the Remonstrants eyes , and not in the Answerers words ? What if hee stumble and not they ? and what if it be but a straw he stumbles at ? For though Areopagus be the name of the place , and Areopagitae the name of the persons ; yet it is no such impropriety in speech , to signifie the persons by the place : had wee said the Admired sonnes of Iustice , the two Houses of Parliament , had this been such a Soloecisme ? and will this Remonstrant deny us that liberty , for which we have Natures Patent , and the example of the best Authors in other Tongues , To smooth , or square , to lengthen , or cut off Exoticke words , according as will best suit with our own Dialect ? If we were called to give an account of this Syllabicall Errour before a Deske of Grammarians , wee could with ease produce presidents enough in approved Authors : but we will onely give an instance in the word it self from Ioan. Sarisburi . lib. 5. de Nugis Curialibus , cap. 9. Eum [ Senatum ] vero Athenienses Areopagum dicebant eo quod in illis totius populi virtus consisteret . We hope our Remonstrant hath now recovered his stumble , and next we find him leaping , being as good at leaping over blocks , as hee is at stumbling at straws : it is his practice through his whole booke , what ever objection made by us , he finds too heavy to remove , he over-leaps it . This course hee begins here , for wee having charged him with some words sounding to contempt in his Preface , he falls a quarrellling with our Logick , for calling that a Preface , which hee intended as one of the main pieces of the substance of his book . Which certainly , if Captatio Benevolentiae be the work of a Preface , he that reads the Remonstrance to the ninth page , will find that the preceding pages have been but by way of insinuation ; and there he comes to the proposition and narration of his cause . But if our Logick was bad , hee knew his Ethicks were worse : and therefore these misdemeanours which we justly charged upon him , and he knew not how to excuse or answer , his Politicks taught him to leap over . Counting all to the fourth page , as light froth that will sink alone ; which seems to us a strange piece of Physik ; and if we would cry quit with the Remonstrant , & make our Reader as merry with him , as he would make his Readers with us , wee could tell him a Tale in the margent * . But some thing it seems is of a little more solid substance , it is as scum that will not so easily sink alone ; wherein you appe●l to indifferent eyes to judge whether we do not endevour to cast unjust envy upon you against the cleer evidence of any knowing mans conscience . Content . Onely put the case right : you tell your Judges that you had said , That if Antiquity may be the rule , the Civill policie ( as in generall notion ) hath sometimes varied , the Sacred never ; the Civill came from Arburary Impos●rs , the Sacred from men inspired : now these gracious Interpreters would draw your words to the present and particular government of our own Monarchie , as if you implied that variable and arbitrary ; and are not ashamed to mention that deadly name of Treason . Our charge upon this is , that in the judgement of this Remonstrant , if any had dared to attempt the alteration of Monarchicall Government , they had been lesse culpable then in petitioning the alteration of Episcopall , and conclude , that if he had found such a passage in any of those whom he cals lewd Libellers , all had rung with Treason , Treason . Now let the indifferent Reader , let the most Honourable Parliament , let the Sacred Majesty of our King Judge whether we doe the man wrong . First , this we know , that one of the most confident Advocates of Episcopacie hath said it , that where a Nationall Church is setled in the orderly regiment of certain grave Overseers , to seek to abandon this forme , and to bring in a forreigne Discipline , is as unreasonable as to cast off the yoke of just an● hereditary Monarchy , and to affect many headed Soveraignty : which wee thinke is an assertion insolent enough , that sets the Mitre as high as the Crowne : God blesse our sacred Monarchie from such friends . But this Remonstrant rises higher , and sets the Mitre above the Crown . Telling us , that Civill Government comes from Arbitrarie Imposers , this from men inspired , and is in that respect by the Remonstrant challenged to be of divine right . If Civill Government here include Monarchie , as by the Remonstrants owne explication it doth , certainly this is to advance Episcopacie above Monarchie , and to make it more sinfull and dangerous to alter Episcopacy , which , according to the Remonstrant , challenges God for the founder , then Monarchie , which saith this Remonstrant according to originall Authority had its foundation in the ●●ee Arbitrement of men . Yet did we never say that this was Treason ; knowing such crimes to be above our cognizance ; wee mentioned indeed the name of Treason , but as from your mouth , not our own . We said , If you had found any such in any , &c. the world would have rung with the loud cryes of treason , treason : it was our conjecture which you have now made good in this defence , For you that are so full of charity to impute it to us , as if that wee had vilified the judgement of King Iames , as you do pag. 23. whom we mentioned not , but as a most famous , and ever admired Prince , had any ●ord faln from us ( which through the grace of God we hope never shall ) tending to the disparagement either of the Royall Person or power , What work would you have made with that ? Be sparing , Sir , of charging your poore Neighbours so impetuously with malice and uncharitablenesse , till yee have taught your selfe to be more charitable , and lesse mali●ious . To what wee alleaged in the instance of William Rufus King , and Pope Pius , to shew that Episcopall Government , which he calls sacred , naturally tends not onely not to depend upon , but to subdue the civill authority to it selfe ; His answer is , first , That William Rufus was a Prince noted for grosly irreligious . That those were tyrannicall Popish Bishops . That the Pope was Antichrist . That he answered so because hee was unwilling they should shew as good cards for their standing as hee pretended for his own . And lastly , all this makes nothing against our Bishops , who professe , notwithstanding the divine right of their calling , to hold their places , and the exercise of their jurisdiction wholly from the King. So then here is no Falsification : all that was produced is granted true , onely exception taken against the persons produced . King William hee was irreligious . Daniel observes that former times being unhappy in their compilers of History ( the Scepter which rules over the fames of Princes ) who for the most part were Monks , had all their Princes personated either Religious or irreligious as they humoured or offended the Bishops Rochet , and the Monks belly . No wonder then if so small a friend to Bishops be condemned as irreligious . But then those Bishops were Popish , Tyrannous Bishops . But it was not their Popery , but their Episcopall dignity that made them tyrannize ; and it was their Tyranny and not their Popery that made them odious to their King , who was Popish as well as they . And it hath beene ever usuall to both former and latter Bishops to tyrannize over such as feare them , and to flatter such as they feare . The Pope hee is Antichrist ; wee are glad to heare you call him so ; some thought a yeere agoe you would scarce have given him such a nickname , unlesse you meant to have falne out with the rest of your brethren : and what if the Pope be Antichrist ? may wee not bring the testimony of Antichrist against Antichristian Bishops ? As Paul brought the witnesse of a Cretian Poet , against Cretian Liers . May not we alleage Beelzebub against Beliall without honouring him ? But the Pope so answered because he was unwilling they should shew as good cards for their standing as he pretends for his own ; grant it so , what will follow upon that but this ? That Bishops clayming the same grounds for their standing that the Pope doth , aspire to be as independant from Princes as the Pope is , and that they have no more Divine Right , then the Pope : But what 's this to our Bishops who professe , notwithstanding their Divine Right , to hold their places , and exercise of Iurisdiction wholly from the King ? Surely ours have begun to affect the same Exemption from Secular power , to make large and haughty strides towards an independant Hierarchie . So that it is no envious upbraid to parallell ours with the former Bishops . For it hath well appeared that the Hierarchicall Episcopacie is full of such high and large principles of Pride , Ambition , Tyranny , as can be circumscribed in no moderate bounds : But is always swelling to the affectation of an Absolute Ecclesiasticall Monarchie . And it is worth the enquiring , whether the three last books of Hookers Ecclesiasticall Politie be not suppressed by him that hath them , because they give the Prince too much power in Ecclesiasticall matters , and are not for the Divine Right of Bishops . But we shall be chid anon , and accused of spight for this , as wee are for the observation formerly made upon his comparison between the attempts of Alteration in our Neighbour Church by the Episcopall faction , and that which is now justly desired by the humble Petitioners to this Honourable House . This saith the Remonstrant , is a foule slander to charge the name of Episcopacie with a Faction For a fact imputed to some few . Were they but a few that did attempt and prosecute that alteration ? the more is our misery , that a few Bishops can put both Kingdomes into so dangerous a combustion , what stirre would they all make if they should unite their powers ? And were they but a few that were the Factors for that Attempt ? how then was it that one of the Episcopall Tribe in publike Court called the Scotch designe Bellum Episcopale ? and where were the rest of the peaceable Orthodox Bishops the while ? that might in love to peace & truth have opposed those bold attempts , & not have suffered a few , upon whom you now leave the guilt of faction , to expose the deare and precious name of Episcopacie to that obloquie . Let the Remonstrant never cry fie upon his brethren , that dare challenge Episcopacie of Faction : but fie upon his Fathers the bishops , that have subjected it to that challenge : had bishops done so in Cyprians time , we doubt not but the●e would have bin fonnd Presbyters who would have said as much , and need never have feared Gaoles nor Pillories , nor high Commissions , the holy Discipline wherewith the Fathers of the sacred Hierarchie have of late yeers visited such offences . SECT . II. WEE are in this and the following Sections not to contend for words , but things , things precious to the Remonstrant , Liturgie , and Episcopacie , for which he fights , tanquam pro aris & focis . The subject of this Section is the Liturgie , where first he fals upon us for the Alterations , and Additions , mentioned by us , which hee calls such an envious and groundlesse suggestion as must needs cover our faces with a blush . Truly , Sir , If we were able to produce no fuller evidence of this then you have done of your Iewish Liturgie ever since Mosestime , we should blush indeed ; but if wee can bring forth instances of such Alterations as shall prove this present Liturgie to be none of that , which hath beene confirmed by Parliamentary Acts ; keep your blushes to make Liveries for yourself and friends . The Liturgie confirmed by our Parliamentary Acts is the same which was made and confirmed in the fifth and sixth of Edward the sixth , with one alteration , and additions of certaine Lessons to be used upon every Sunday ; and the forme of the Letany altered and amended , and two sentences onely added in the delivery of the Sacrament : And none other or otherwise . But this booke is so altered from that , that in it is left out , First a clause in the Letany , From the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome , and all his detestable enormities , good Lord deliver us , &c. 32. Chapters of the Old Testament , a Prayer against death , a Rubrick , or declaration of the manner of the presence of Christs body and bloud in the Sacrament . Besides some other things of lesse moment . Secondly , added 26 Apocryphall Chapters , more to be read 47 Proper Lessons , The Prayers for Bishops and Curats , many Collects after the Communion , A Rubrick in the examination of private Baptisme . In the Calendar Fish dayes are now called Fasting days . A Catalogue of Holidays . Thirdly , many things changed ; in the title of Confirmation , the words for imposition of hands are added . In the Epistle for Palm-sunday , in the Name of Jesus , turned into , at the Name of Jesus , besides such smaller alterations , which himselfe acknowledges . These are sufficient to evince that the Liturgie now in use is not that Liturgie that was established by Act of Parliament , and therefore that Act binds not to the use of this Liturgie , as we conceive . Now if to these we should adde the late alterations in the use of the Liturgie , Bringing in loud Musique , uncouth and unedifying Anthems , a pompous , superstitious Altar-service , wee thinke any indifferent eye will say this is not the Liturgie established by Parliament : wee hope that these alterations are so visible , as any , that will not fully shut their eys , will say it is with this misaltered Liturgie as with the disguised Dames mentioned of old by Doctor Hall. And we hope , nay we know wee have some Bishops of our minde in this , as well as you have some of yours ; & how ever you slight the words of one of them , not inferiour to any of them that wee know , with an effut●it labiis : yet it is a subtile shift you have to pervert the Bishops words . For whereas hee said that the Service of the Church of England was now so drest , that if the Pope should come and see it , he would claim it as his own , but that it is in English , The Remonstrant would seeme to understand by this onely such an inoffensivenesse , in the devotion of it , as the Pope himself could find no fault in it : whereas the Bishop meant such a symmetry and correspondency of our present devotion and service with the Popish , as was in his esteem just matter of Humiliation to al the Bishops in the Kingdom , in a day of solemn & national Fasting . Instead of bringing out those great applauses , that forreigne Divines and Churches have given to our Liturgie , hee falls ( though more gently then hee is wont ) upon Master Calvin for his Tolerabiles ineptiae , as if that hee did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . It seemes the Remonstrant did not either consider the occasion of that Censure , or else his not Omniscient eyes never saw the Epistle that the Learned Calvin wrote to the dispersed at Frankfort , which would tell him that the occasion of this Censure was the troubles raised up among the English Exiles then at Frankford , about the booke of Liturgie ( which was then as since a spring of unhappy contentions in the Church ) hereupon he writes a Letter to them , wherein hee useth that phrase of tolerable fooleries : and in a Christian way perswades both disagreeing sides to accord : which he puts not upon them by way of authority , but Christian advise : nay , he says more , that these fooleries were tolerable then , yet he doubted not if Religion flourished in England , many of these would be removed , and other things amended : and though they might begin with such weak rudiments , yet it was behovefull for the grave and pious Ministers of Christ to rise to a higher pitch , &c. So that here Master Calvin did not unwarrantably intrude in alienam rempublicam : Nor did any other then would become any of our grave and learned Divines , in the case of the Wafers , or Lords Day Markets of his Charge , if called unto that service , as Master Calvin was to this . The Remonstrant leads us from the English Liturgie , to a Discourse of Liturgies in generall : which wee call unparalleld , because no man that ever wee have seene drew the line of Liturgie so high as hee hath done , even as high as Moses time ; to which his answer is , Perhaps there are some things our not omniscient eyes have not seene , and perhaps this may be one of them : and perhaps there are some things which hee hath confidently avouched that his Lincean eys have not seen , and perhaps this is one of them ; or else we should see it too . But that needs not saith the Remonstrant for wee almost yield the question before wee argue it : the happier man hee to obain that by concession that hee never could by argumentation : but how doe wee yield the question ? in granting an order of divine administrations observed in Church Assemblies , but denying an imposition of set forms . We find in antiquity , that when the Church met together upon the Lords day , first the Scriptures were read of the old and new Testament , after the reading followed an Exhortation to the practice and imitation of what was read , then they all rose and joyned in Prayer : Prayer being ended , they went to the Sacrament , in the beginning whereof the President of the Assembly powred out Prayers and Thanksgiving according to his ability , and the people said Amen ; then followed the distribution of the Sacrament : After that the collection of Almes , &c. this was Iustine Martyrs Liturgie . Will you now see Tertullians ? First , the Congregation meets , and doe as it were besiege God with their prayers , wherein they pray for the Emperors , for their servāts , officers , & c ? then they went to repeating the Scriptures according to the time and occasion , then they edified themselves in faith and hope by holy exhortations . There they had also the exercise of Discipline , there they had their Love-feasts which began and ended with prayers , and were celebrated with singing of Psalmes . This was Tertullians Liturgie . From these two Writers of the purest times , it is evident that it was the custome or order of the Church in their Assemblies to pray , read , and expound the Scriptures , administer the Sacraments ; but that there were set formes of Prayer prescribed and imposed upon the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that they were tyed to read such and such Scriptures , that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had words of exhortation put into his mouth , that hee must use without adding , or altering , or diminishing , all which are in a stinted Liturgy , this doth not appear , but rather the contrary , Tertullian saith , Coimus ad sacrarum literarum commemorationem si quid praesentium temporum qualitas aut praemonere cogit aut recognoscere . And now we hope our Remonstrant wil see how we will avoid our own contradiction . To say there was an order of administrations although there were no set and prescribed formes is no contradiction : You see it in the Churches practice . To say there was an order of prophecying given to the Church of Corinth by the Apostle Paul , and yet no stinted forms of prophecying imposed upon them , wee hope the Remonstrant himselfe will say is not contradictory . But these quotations are blasted already ; it is but a silly ostentation of antiquity , that these men bring against the Liturgie ; so is all wee bring if the Remonstrant may be judge : but wee appeale to the learned Reader . And what can our Remonstrant accuse us of : First in our quotation of Tertullian , Wee mis-english it , Sine Monitore quia depectore , without any prompter , but their own heart . Is this a mistranslation ? what then will you say to that approved Glossator Zephirus ? who thus expounds this place ; Our Prayers are not dictated to us as are the Prayers of the Heathens , by their Priests , but proceed from the bottome of our hearts , &c. Is not this to pray without any other prompter but their own hearts ? Nor doth Heraldus contradict this sence . If Zephirus his Glosse like not you , your English likes us , as well as our owne , and proves what wee desire . Sine Monitore : not being urged by any superiour injunction , though wee thinke Monitor may as well be translated prompter as injunction ; but if no injunction , how could it be a Liturgy , a commanded , imposed forme ? and if neither of these , neither Zephirus nor your own please you , then take Nicholas Rigaltius . The Heathens had a Monitor that led them along in their prayers , out of a writing , that they might misse nor mistake no words , &c. yet what is this to a prescribed forme ? yes , if they prayed sine Monitore , it overthrows a prescribed forme , read it as you will ; if you read it without a prompter it overthrowes a forme , if it be as you read it without any Superiour injunction , it overthrows a prescribed forme . But why may not we saith the Remonstrant , as well argue , that because our Ministers doe ordinarily in their pulpits pray for the King in their own expressions , therefore there is no forme of Liturgie enjoyned ? quite from the purpose ; we shew you in Tertullian , where there were prayers that were not stinted and prescribed forms , shew us if you can in Tertullian , any such there were . Our other testimony out of Terullian and Austine , is full to the purpose we intended ; wee brought them to prove that it was free for Christians to pray as their occasions did require , without being limited to prescribed formes : and though we will not say peremptorily there were no publique Liturgies in Augustines time , yet we dare say the place hee brings proves it not , in which there is not one word of prescribed or publike forms . The next place he quarrels with , is Iustin Martyr , the fault there is in the Translation , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is guiltily translated the instructer of the people , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , falsly turned according to his ability . We must quit our selves of both these crimes : First , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , we render not the word but the person , the instructor of the people , because the same Father but a few lines before told us , that was his proper work , and why should the Remonstrant cal this a guilty translation ? Did he think we were affraid to use the word President or Bishop , for fear of advantaging the adverse cause ? No such matter , take it , translate it you , Bishop if you please , make this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in the Apocalyps , what will you gain by it ? but this , that such a President or Bishop there was in every Congregation , whether in the City or Country . But besides the supposed guilt , we are charged with false Translation for turning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , according to his ability , if this be a false Translation , let the crime lie upon Langius , and not contradicted by Sylburgius in his notes , who before us translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quantum pro virili potest , which wee know not how to conster better then according to his ability . And this Remonstrant grants they did pray according to their ability , and so ( saith he ) do ours , and yet we have a publike Liturgie , and so had they . It followeth not , that they had because we have ; we would fain see better proofe of it . The Remonstrant thinks it is proof enough to picke a quarrell with what wee have spoken , and therefore scorns to trouble himself any further then to tell the Reader it is Magisterially said by these men that set and imposed formes were not introduced till the Arrian and Pelagian Heresies did invade the Church , and as Clerkly they confute themselves by their own testimony . So then , if wee cite testimony , it is not Magisterially spoken , and how is it Clerkly confuted ? Besides what wee have done our selves , he vouchsafes us the honour to bestow a marginall confutation upon us out of Conc. Laod. cap. 19. we will doe the Canon and the Cause right , and give you the full view of it . Oportere seorsum primum post Episcoporum Homilias Catechumenorum Orationem peragi , & postquam exierunt Catechumeni eorum qui poenitentiam agunt fieri orationem , & cum i● sub manum accesserint & recesserint fidelium , preces sic ter fieri . Vnam quidem scilicet primam silentio , secundam autem & tertiam per pronuntiationem impleri ; deinde sic pacem dari , & sic sanctam oblationem perfici & solis licere sacratis ad altare accedere & communicare . We desire the Reader to remember that the question is not about a set Order or Rubrick , ( as the Remonstrant calls it ) of administrations , but about set and imposed forms of prayer . Now what doth this Canon require ? that after Sermon , Prayer should be made first for the Catechumeni , Secondly , for the penitents , Thirdly , for the faithfull . But doth it binde to set forms of prayer in all these ? that the Reader sees it doth not , for some of the prayers required in that Canon are mentall prayers , therefore not stinted , nor prescribed praiers , as appears by that clause in the Canon , which the Remonstrant ( shuffling up with much lesse fidelity then we have done the Milevitan Councell ) leaves out in his quotation But Clerklike wee confute our selves . First , in going about to prove that set and imposed formes were not introduced till the Arrian and Pelagian heresie did invade the Church , by the testimony of a Councell that was before Arrianisme . Hee that is so quicke to take others in their self cōfutations , doth as Clerklike confute himselfe , in granting that the Laodicean Councell was between the Neocesarian , and the Nicene , and yet so long before Arrtanisme , as it seemes ridiculous to referre from the one to the other : Now the Neocesarian Councell was as Binius from Baronius computes in the yeer 314 , and the Nicene was 325 , or according to Eusebius , 320. And was the Arrian heresie just born at the period of the Nicene Councell ? if not , why may not the Arrian Heresie invade the Church before the time of the Laodicean Councell , especially considering that the heresie of Arrius did trouble the Church sometime before it borrowed Arrius his name ; and under his name , some yeers doubtles , before the Nicen Councell . Yet our meaning was not , to affix the introducing of set formes into the Church upon that Councell ; the Remonstrant if that he had pleased might have conceived , that speaking of the bringing in such formes , wee shew how it was done by degrees . And first as a step , the Laodicean Councell did forbid mens varying their prayers as they listed , and did enjoyn all men to use the same prayers : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . This Remonstrant saith , we said , was a forme of mans owne prescribing . No , we said of a mans own composing ; and how wil the Remonstrant disprove it from the words of the Canon ? To prove our assertion we brought the words of the Councel of Carthage , which our Remonstrant derides as a grosse absurdity to explicate the Councel of Laodicea , by that of Carthage , which is yet no more then Z●naras did before us . But as the Remonstrant relates it , the Fathers of Carthage will afford us little help . You shall heare themselves speak Reader , and then judge . Vt nemo in precibus , velpatrem pro filio , vel filium propatre nominet , & cum ●ltari assistitur semper ad patrem dirigatur Oratio , & quicunque sibi preces aliunde describit non iis utatur nisi prius eas cum fratribus instructoribus contulerit . Where it appears first , that this Canon was made for poore ignorant Priests that knew not the difference between the Father and the Sonne . Secondly , that when this Canon was made , there was no set forme in use in the Church , for it cannot come under the possibility of imagination , that a man having a set form lying before him , should so grosly mistake as to name the Father for the Son , or the Son for the Father . Thirdly , that the limiting or circumscribing the liberty in prayer was such as did not tie him to a set Liturgie , but hee might use the help of any other prayer , so he did conferre with the more learned of his Brethren . The Milevitan Councell went something further , wherein hee challenges our fidelitie in shufling up the Councell ; our fidelity in citing of this Councell is nothing inferiour to his in this , and far above his in the former . Let the Reader consider how much difference there is between what we speak , and what the Remonstrant reports from this Councell , and judge of the fidelity of both . If wee have for brevity sake given too short a representation of the Canon , it will appeare upon are view , to redound onely to our own prejudice . The Canon is this , Placuit etiam illud ut preces vel orationes , &c. quae prob●tae fuerint in Concilio sive praefationes &c. ab omnibus celebrētur . Nec altae omnino dicantur in Ecclesia nisi quae à prudentioribus Tractatae , vel à Synodo comprobatae fuerint ne forte , aliquid contra fidem , velper ignorantiam , vel per minus stu●ium ●it compositum . Where wee observe that this is the first mention of prayers to bee approved or ratified in a Synod and the restraining to the use of them . Secondly , that the restriction was not such but there was a toleration of such Prayers as were tractatae à prudentioribus used by the wise and prudent men in the Church as well as of those Prayers that were approved by the Synod . Thirdly , that the occasion of this restriction was the prevention of Errour in the Church , ne aliquid contrae fidem , &c. So that here the Remonstrant may see how that we have made it good , that liberty in Prayer was not taken away , and set formes imposed , till the Arian and Pelagian Heresie invaded the Church : his owne quotations would have told him this . Next to these Testimonies , as a strong inducement to us to think that there were no Liturgies of the first and most venerable antiquity producible , wee added this consideration , that the great admirers of , and searchers after ancient Liturgies either Iewish or Christian could never yet shew any to the World. And now we verely thought that if the Sun did this day behold them , the Remonstrant whose eys are acquainted with those secrets and rarities that wee cannot bee blest with the sight of , would have brought them to publique view for the defence of his owne Cause , but wee feare if there ever were any such , the World hath wholy lost them : he cannot serve you with a whole Liturgie , such fragments as hee found served in , wee shall anon tast off . His miserable mistake in saying that part of the Lords Prayers was taken out of the Iewish formes , we pardon because hee doth halfe acknowledge it . So do wee , his prudent passing by in silence what wee objected against his confident assertion of Peter and Iohns praying by a forme , and that which wee brought of the Publican and Pharise to make good what we objected , because we know he cannot answere it . Three things hee speaks of , The Lords Prayer , the Iewish Liturgies , and Christian Liturgies , for the Lords Prayer hee saith nothing can bee more plain then that our Saviour prescribed to his Disciples , besides the Rules , a direct forme of Prayer , we grant indeed nothing can be more plaine then that both our blessed Saviour and Iohn taught their new Converts to pray , yet the Remonstrant will have a hard task to prove from Scripture that either Iohn or our Saviour gave to their Disciples publique Liturgies or that the Disciples were tied to the use of this forme . But though his proofe fall short in the Lords Prayer , yet it is sure he saith , that Christ was pleased to make use in the Celebration of his last and heavenly Banquet , both of the fashions and words , which were usually in the Iewish Feasts , as Cassander hath shewed in his Liturgica . Yet Cassander who is his sure proof saith but this , observasse videtur seemes to have observed . Secondly , the evidence of all this comes from no better authour then Maymonides who wrote not till above a 1000 yeers after Christ. Thirdly , though it were granted that our Saviour did pro arbitrio or ex occasione , use the fashion or words usually in the Jewish feast , it doth not at all follow that he did assume these words and fashions out of Iewish Liturgies ; an Arbitrary custome is one thing a prescribed Liturgie is an other . Yet to prove such a Liturgie , that he might ( as far as he can ) stand to his assertion , he brings something out of Capellus , the Samaritan Chronicle , and Buxtorfius his Synagoga Iudaica . We begin with what he brings out of a Samaritan Chronicle , sometimes in the hands of the famously learned Ioseph Scaliger , out of which hee tels us of an imbezel'd book , wherein were contained the Songs & Prayers used before the Sacrifices : which although we might let passe without danger to our cause , and answer , that they were onely divine Hymnes wherein there was alwayes some thing of prayer ; because the Remonstrant himselfe in his second mentioning of them names onely Songs : and were there any thing for set prayers , it is like hee would have put down some thing of them in the Authors own words , as well as hee hath burthened his margent with some thing which is nothing to the purpose . But we shall make bold ( under correction ) to examine the authority of his Samaritan Chronicle . Ioseph Scaliger had certainly but two Samaritan Chronicles ( had he had any other he would certainly have mentioned it when hee undertooke to speake of all accounts & Chronicles ) whereof that shorter is printed in his Emendat . Temporum , lib. 7. which is so fond and absurd a thing , that hee calls it ineptissimum : and there gives this censure of the Samaritans in point of antiquity : Gens est totius vetustatis , etiam quae ad ipsos pertinet , ignarissima : They are a people most ignorant of all antiquity , even of that which doth most concerne themselves . And more he would have said against it , if he had lived to know how much it varied from the Samaritans owne Pentateuch , as it is since discovered by that learned Antiquarie Master Selden in his Preface ad Marmora Arundeliana . This wee know is not the Chronicle the Remonstrant means : there is another which Scaliger had , of which himself thus : Habemus eorum magnum Chronicon ex Hebraica lingua in Arabicam conversum , sed charactere Samaritano descriptum : is liber incipit ab excessu Mosis , desinit infra tempora Imperatoris Adriani , &c. Wee have also their great Chronicle translated out of the Hebrew into the Arabick tong●e , but written in a Samaritan character : which Book begins from Moses departure , and ends beneath the times of Adrian the Emperour , &c. Of which Book Scaliger his own censure is , that though it hath many things worthy of knowledge , Yet they are crusted ●ver with Samaritan devices , and judge how much credit wee are to give to this Book for antiquity , as farre as Moses , which makes no mention of their own originall any other ways , then that they came out of Egypt by Moses : doth not so much as speak of any of the ancient Kings of Samaria , nor the defection of the ten Tribes under Rehoboam , and doth onely touch the names of Samson , Samuel , David , &c. as Scaliger speaks in the beginning of his notes ; and so will let your Samaritan Chron●cle passe , and give you leave to make the best of it . But to this testimony , what ever it be , wee oppose the testimony of a learned Iew , who is rather to be heard , then a Samaritan . The famous Rabbi Moses Maymonides , who pleaseth to read part of his first , second , and eleventh Chapters , in his Mishneh of the Law , Halachah Tephillah , shall evidently finde , that from Moses his time to Ezra ( above a 1000 yeeres ) there were no stinted forms of prayers heard of in the Iewish Church , but every man prayed according to his ability . Secondly , that in Ezra his time eighteene short forms of Prayers were composed for the scattered Iews , which had lost the use of the holy language ; because they thought it best to continue their Prayers and Worship of God in that sacred tongue . Thirdly , but not a word of any set forms which the Priests or Levits were to use , but only to helpe the ignorant Iews , to expresse themselves in prayer to God in the holy language ; at the time or houres of prayer , Which the men of the great Synagogue had appointed : Peter and Iohn went up together to the Temple at the houre of prayer , being the ninth houre . Though we alleage not this of Maymonides , as a testimony to command beliefe , yet wee conceive it farre more to be regarded then any Samaritan Chronicle . Secondly , hee hath some scraps of Iewish Liturgies out of Capellus , concerning which a short answer may serve ; first there is not one of the Iewish Liturgies now extant , which was made before the Iews ceased to be the Church of God : for besides the eighteene short formes before mentioned , there were no other made till Rabbi Gamaliel his time , who according to the judgment of learned Criticks is that Gamaliel mentioned in the Acts , ( from whom Paul got such bitter principles against Christian Religion . ) But whensoever they began , Capellus would laugh , should he heare what a strange conceit this Remonstrant had gotten from him , that the Iewish Liturgies were as ancient as the time of Moses , merely , because he parallels some Iewish phrases which hee found in them with certaine phrases in the Gospell , which the Iews retained by Tradition from their Fathers , and put into their Liturgies . But Buxtorfius would fal out with him , that he should so much abuse him , as to say he had affirmed that Maymonides took his Creed out of the Liturgie ; for the man is not guilty of any such grosse mistake : he saith indeed , that the Articles of the Iewish Creed are printed in the Liturgies , but withall hee tels the Remonstrant , that Maymonides was the first composer of them , whence therefore the Iews put them into their Liturgie . Thus wee leave his Iewish Liturgie , which the Reader will easily see to be more Iewish , then hee could justly suppose our instance of William Rufus was , and that it affords him as little furtherance . For Christian Liturgies , which the Remonstrant had affirmed to have been the best improvement of the peace and happinesse of the Evangelicall Church ever since the Apostles times , we challenged the Remonstrant , setting aside those that are confessedly spurious , to produce any Liturgie that was the issue of the first 300 yeers ; in answer to which , he brings us forth the Liturgies which we have under the names of Iames , Basil , and Chrysostome : to which our Reply may be the briefer , because hee himselfe dares not vouch them for the genuine writings of those holy men . Onely , saith hee , we have them under their names : Secondly , he confesseth there are some intersertions spurious in them . Thirdly , all that he affirmes is , that the substance of them cannot be taxed for any other then holy and ancient : what censure the learned Criticks , both Protestants and Papists have p●st upon these Liturgies , we hope the Remonstrant knows ; we will onely mind him of what the le●rned Rivetus speaks of the Liturgies of Iames , Peter , Matthew , Mark , has omnes profectas esse ab inimico homine q●i bonae semenii Domini , nocte super seminavit z●z●nia solidis rationibus probavit Nobilisque & illustris Philip Morneus lib. 1. de Missae & partihus ejus . Which because the Remonstrant so often finds fault with our misenglishing , wee leave to him to see if hee can construe these Zizania to be any other then these Liturgies , and this inimicus homo to be any other then the Devill . Nor will his implication of the ancient ▪ Councell of Ancyra helpe him , which forbade those Priests that had not sacrificed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Will the Restrant say that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , was to serve in the holy Liturgies , that is , reading set Litnrgies , he may as wel say that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the reading of set Homilies . Balsamon , Zonaras , Dionysius , Isidore , and Gentian Harvet doe all translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aliquod munus sacerdotale subire . And that the Remonstrant may not delude himself nor others with the ambiguitie of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as if every mētion of these did by implication prove such a Liturgie , as for which he contends . Let him know that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is variously used in Antiquity sometimes for all the Ministeriall Offices , so Zonaras in Concil . Antioch . Can. 4. and so Concil . 4. Ancyra . Can. 1. quoted by himselfe , if hee would either have observed , or acknowledged it : sometimes only for prayer , so Balsamon in Can. 12. Concil . Sardic . 6. Sometimes singing of our Psalmes is tearmed by Chrysostome , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The same Father expounds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Acts 13. by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Hom. 27. in Act. so that for the proof of such Liturgies as are the Subject of this question , it is not enough to shew us the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in antiquity , let him shew the thing before he so Dictator-like condemne those for giddy heads that will not take his word for proofs , and believe it was the undeniable practice of antiquity to use Liturgies and formes of prayer , because he saith so . His supercillious censure upon our passage about conceived prayer , is not worth the taking notice of , he saith , We are sullen and crabbed pieces , tecchy and quarrelsome men , and why ? because we said his large prayses of conceived prayer , were but a vantage ground to advance publike forms the higher , how truly judg ; what cause we had so to think wee declared from the cruell and ungodly practices of the late times which he will scarce take notice of . Our arguing about the originall and confirmation of our Church Liturgie , he calls wrangling . For the originall , the Remonstrant said it was taken out of the ancient Models , not Roman but Christian : here wee tooke notice of the opposition betweene Roman and Christian , because by the Remonstrant made Termini sese mu●u● removentes : which we perceive now hee is not willing should passe for his meaning , hee will not have it meant of an opposition , but of a different modification . Though his instances brought to exemplifie it are not all ad oppositum . We will not make digressive excursions into new controversies , though wee are not affraid of burning our fingers with his hot Iron . Only wee tell him , that the Suffrages of unquestionable Divines are not so unanimous , but that from some of them wee could fetch sparks to fling in the face of him that desired their suffrages , without burning our-own fingers . Compare what the booke called the Old Religion speaks of the Church of Rome , p. 6. where a speech imputed to Luther is justified as a charitahle and not too indulgent a profession , viz. That under the Papacie is all good , true Christianitie , the very kernel of Christianity , &c. Compare this with what the Bishop of Salisbury saith in his begged suffrage , who thus speaks , That the Church of Rome is no more a true Church than an arrant Whore is a true wife to her husband . To disprove what he affirmed , that the Liturgy was taken out of Models not Roman but Christian , We produced King Edwards Proclamation , to which he answers nothing , onely ownes that , and scornes us : thinking to wipe off all exceptions with the glorious names of Martyrs and Confessors that composed it . For whom ( though wee dare not glory in man ) yet wee blesse God as well as he . But with all if we should say there were some holy Martyrs and Confessors of the same reformed Religion that were Opposers of it , and suffered in opposition even to a persecution , the lives of some of them being pursued from City to City , ( which he knows is most true , and so may any that will read the booke called the troubles of Frankfort ) Would this be a sufficient argument in his judgment for the remo●all of it ? But this is not the strength by which our Liturgie stands , it stands confirmed by Parliamentary Acts , and King Iames his Proclamation ; to which wee answered , that neither the King nor the Parliament intended such a rigorous pressing of the Liturgie as we have felt . Secondly , that neither our own Laws nor the Proclamation of that ever admired Prince are as unalterable as the Lawes of the Medes and Persians ; this he cals a bold flout , of purpose to render us odious to our dread Sovereigne , and the Honorable house ; as likewise in the next page seems to impute that language to us , which is his own : our loyall hearts startle to think of a repetition of the words , they are in pag. 23. of the Defence , and are concerning King Iames , whom in the clause wee had last in hand , wee mentioned with the deserved memory of a famous and ever admired Prince . We confesse in some passages of that booke , wee tooke liberty to use some cheerfull expressions , provoked thereto by the strange confidence , and little strength of our Remonstrant , Remembring that of Tertullian , It wel agrees with truth to laugh , because it is of a pleasant disposition , and to sport with her competitors , because it is secure , and feares not the wals of her bulwarks . But what ever we have done in other places , here ( wee attest the great Searcher of hearts ) it never came into our thoughts to use a light expression , much lesse to flout in so bold a manner as hee accuseth us . Nor doe wee thinke it possible that any charitable Reader could suppose wee aimed at any other then what we expresse more plainly pag. 20. of our answer , of the power of Princes and Parliaments in changing their laws . His next business is with our queres , the first whereof was this , Whether it be not fit to consider of the alteration of the Liturgie , which we hoped had beene presented in such modest termes ( speaking of an alteration , not an utter abrogation , of consideration of an alteration not prescribing the alteration , onely of a fitnes of such an alteration , not of the necessity of such an alteration as should never have occasioned such a sarcasticall Declaration , as he their makes . The thing propounded is so equall that the Remonstrant who makes conscience to agree with us in as little as hee may : here is forced to confesse much against his will ( for which we may thank the Honorable Parliament ) there is some need of alteration , but this cōfession is joined with such a height of sco●n●t seems to threaten those who ever they are that should dare attempt it , & exprest in such away of diminution , as gives just cause to suspect , it is a meer designe to gain upon the Parliament , and by a pretended shadow of an alteration to prevent a reall and totall reformation ; he tels us of wiser heads then our own , that will consider of the alteration : if here hee mean the Parliament , hee meanes the same to whom wee have presented these considerations , concerning whom wee doubt not , but they will make another manner of an alteration then the Remonstrant speaks of , consisting onely of a bare change of a few expressions , and that in the manner of them Onely . But if these wise heads hee here speaks of , are such as his own , that it may be are complotting some kind of a castigation of the Liturgie , then wee feare that although the times will not serve to make such an alteration , as that of the English Liturgie sent into Scotland : yet the alteration is like to be no better than in Queene Elizabeths time , when the Parliament having given order for the alteration and correction of the Letany , all the Alteration that was made in it , was onely the taking out of that one suffrage , from the Pope of Rome , and all his detestable enormities , good Lord deliver us . The Remonstraut tels us of a Martyr ( whom he cals Silly and Ignorant , wee dare not ) Doctor Taylor that magnified the Liturgy to Bishop Gardiner , as compleat ; but where this story is you tell us not ; wee could answer story with story , which would please you much lesse then this doth us : we could tell you of a Martyr that said it was the Mark of the Beast to receive from the Bishop a Licence to preach ; Wee could tell you of that Doctor Tailor , who when hee was degraded , having his corner Cap , and the rest of his Priestly Robes put on , when they were taken off again , said hee , now I am rid of my fools coat . That our proposition of entring into consideration about altering the Liturgie , might not seeme unreasonable , wee set downe our reasons enforcing such alteration ; all which the Remonstrant brings under the severity of his censure . First , ( wee say ) it symbolizeth so much with the Popish Masse , as that the Pope would have approved it : which hee denyes not , if he had , we could have proved it from a man above suspition in this cause , Doctor Morton . Onely hee saith , If the Devill confesse Christ to be the Son of God , shal I disclaim the truth , because it passed through a damned mouth ? but you know Sir , that Christ would not receive such a Confession from the Devils mouth , nor Paul neither , Act. 16. and loth wee would be to go to the Devill to learne a confession . It is true , Gold in the impurest Chanell is not to be contemned , but what need we goe to the Chanell for gold , when wee can have it in the purest stream ? or what need we goe to the Roman Portu●se for a Prayer , when wee can have one more free from jealousies in another place ? Will a wiseman goe to the Stews to seek an honest woman to make his wife ? Our second Reason why wee propounded this quaere was , because this was composed into this forme on purpose to bring the Papist to our Churches , which wee finde to bee with so little successe , &c. In answer to which the Remonstrant first commends the project as charitable and gracious . The nature of the project wee never intended to dispute , onely wee produced this to shew that there was not the same reason for the retaining of this forme , that there was for the first introducing of it , because experience tels us it hath not prevailed to that end to which it was at first designed . Yes it did , saith the Remonstrant ; for Sir Edward Coke tels us , till the eleventh yeere of Queene Elizabeth all came to Church , those times knew no recusant . Pardon us Sir , If we tell you that it was not the converting power of the Liturgie , but the constraining power of the Law that brought them thither ; which afterwards not being pressed with that life and vigour that it had bin , gave incouragemēt to the Popish fact ō , to take heart : adde also , that at the same time the Pope negotiated to have her Liturgie to be allowed by his authority , so as the Queene would acknowledge his Supremacie , which when it grew hopelesse , then the Jesuitish Casuists begun to draw on the Papists to a Recusancie . But might the complying of our Papists be attributed soly to the inoffensivenesse of our Liturgie ; Yet what credit is this to our Church to have such a forme of publike worship , as Papists may without offence joyne with us in , and yet their Popish principles live in their hearts still ? How shall that reclayme an erring soule , that brings their bodies to Church , & leaves their hearts stil in error ? And wheras the Remonstrant would impute the not winning of Papists rather to the want or weaknesse in preaching ; Be it so , in the mean time , let the Bishops see how they will cleere their souls of this sinne , who having the sole power of admitting Ministers into the Church , have admitted so many weak ones , and have rejected so many faithfull , able Preachers , for not conforming to their beggerly rudiments . And when we said that this our Liturgie hath lost us many rather then wonne any , Wee meant not onely of such as are lost to the Popish part . But let the Remonstrant take it so , it is neither paradox nor slander . For let an acute Jesuite have but this argument to weild against a Protestant not well grounded in our Religion ( as too many such there are in England ) It is evident that the Church of Rome is the ancient and true Church , and not yours , for you see your Service is wholly taken out of ours , How would a weake Christian expedite himselfe here ? To the third reason , this quaere was grounded upon the many stumbling blocks the Liturgie lays before the feet of many . He tels us that these stumbling blocks are remov●d by many . We confesse , indeed , endeavours used by many , whether effected or no that we question ; wee know it is no easie thing , when a scruple hath once taken possession of the conscience to cast it out again . Among the many , the Remonstrant is pleased to refer us to Master Fisher ( for himself will not vouchsafe to foule his fingers with the removing of one of those blocks we mentioned ) whose book , among all that have travelled in that way , we think that any int●lligent Reader will judge most unable to give solid satisfaction to a scrupling conscience . Tell us wee beseech you , is it enough for a conscience that scruples the Surplice , to say , That it is as lawfull for you to enjoyn the Surplice , and punish the omitting of it , as it was for Solomon to enjoin Shimei , not to goe out of Jerusalem , and to punish him for the breach of that injunction ? or , That the Surplice is a significative of divine alacritie and integritie , and the expectation of glory ? Is it possible that a man that reads this should stūble at the Surplice after ? The Cross is not onely lawfull in the use of it , but the removall of it would be scandalous and perillous to the State ; Baptisme is necessary to salvation ; Children dying unbaptized are in a forlorne condition , therefore Midwives may baptize , &c. Let the Reader judge whether this be to remove stumbling blocks from before the feet of men , or to lay more . But if this Remonstrant think Master Fisher so able and happy a remover of those occasions of offence , wee wonder how his quick sight could see cause of any alteration , so much as in the manner of the expression , knowing Master Fisher undertakes the defence not onely of the Substance , but of the very Circumstances and Syllables in the whole Book . But his last put off is this , that if there be ought in it that may danger scandall , it is under carefull hands to remove it . The Lord be praysed it is so : it is under carefull hands and hearts , more mercifull then this Remonstrant is , to remit troubled Consciences to No Better Cure then Master Fishers Book , who we hope will do by those as the Helvetians did by some things that were stumbled at among them ; though they were none but Anabaptists that stumbled at them , yet the State did by Authority remove them , and Zwinglius their professed adversary gives them thanks for occasioning the removall . To the fourth , which was that it is Idolized and accounted as the onely worship of God in England , &c. At Amsterdame , saith hee ; but hee knew wee spoke of such as adore it as an Idoll , not such as abhorre it as an Idoll , though it pleaseth him to put it off with a scoffe , retorting upon us , others say , rather too many doe injuriously make an Idoll of preaching , shall wee therefore consider of abandoning it ? We hope , Sir , you are not serious , if you be , & that not a little your self is guilty of Idolizing the Liturgy . Dare you in cool bloodequalize this very individuall Liturgy with Gods Ordinance of preaching , and say there is as little sinne or danger in considering of the utter abandoning of preaching , as there is in the abandoning of this present established Liturgie ? Cave dixeris . The fift Argument was from the great distaste it meets with in many . This hee imputes to nothing but their ill teaching , and betakes himselfe to his old shifts of diversion , and saith , By the same reason , multitudes of people distasting the truth of wholsome doctrine , shall we to humour them abandon both ? It is a griefe to see this distast grow to such a height as tends to a separation ; and it is as strange to us that this Remonstrant should have a heart so void of pity as that the yielding to the altering or removing of a thing indifferent ( which stands as a wall of separation betwixt us and our brethren ) should be presented to publike view under no better notion then the humouring of a company of ill taught men , or as the Remonstrant elsewhere calls them brainsick men , or as another Booke , men that have need of dark roomes and Ellebore . For that ill teaching to which hee imputes this generall distast , if there be any such , wee for our parts are innocent ; our care for our part hath beene to informe our people , that such stumbling blocks as these are not sufficient causes of Separation . But wee thinke , nay , we know , that some few Prelats by their over-rigorous pressing of the Service-book and Ceremonies , have made more Separatists , than all the Preachers disaffected to the Ceremonies in England . Our last reason was from the difference betweene this and all other Churches . To which he answers , that difference in Liturgies will breed no dis-union between Churches . Secondly , if it be requisite to seeke conformity , our is the more ancient Liturgie , and our the more noble Church : Therefore fit for them to conforme to us rather then we to them . It is true , every difference in Liturgies doth not necessitate a dis-union of Churches : but here the difference is too large to be covered with a few fig-leaves . It is too well known , our Ceremonies and other things in our Liturgies will not downe with other reformed Churches : to the second , it is not the precedencie in times that gains the Glory , but the exactnesse of the work . Our first Reformation was onely in doctrine , theirs in doctrine and discipline too . For the third , that ours is the more noble Church . We desire not to ecclipse the glory of this Church , but rather to intreat the Lord to increase it a thousand fold , how great soever it be , and to ennoble it in this particular , in removing what ever is a stumbling block out of the way of his people . But why saith the Remonstrant should we rather conforme to the Liturgies of the Reformed Churches , then those of all other Christians , Grecians , Armenians , Copths , &c. should we set down what wee have read in the Liturgies of those Churches , wee believe the Remonstrant would blush for intimating , there is as much reason to conform to their Liturgies as those of the Reformed Churches . Our second quaere is not so weak as this Remonstrant supposeth ; it is this , whether the first Reformers of Religion did ever intend the use of a Liturgie , further then to be a help in the want , and to the weaknes of the Ministers ? In way of Answer he asketh , Whether we can think that our Reformers had any other intentions then all other the founders of Liturgies . No , indeed , wee thinke no other , and howsoever the Remonstrant according to his confidence tels us that the least part of their eare was the helpe of the Ministers weaknesse , yet their words tell us it was the main drift of those that first brought prescribed forms of prayer into the Church ( and therefore wee conceived it might possibly be the intention of our Reformers also ) witnesse the 23 Canon of the fourth Councell of Carthage , ut nemo patrem nominet profilio , &c. So the Composers of the Liturgie for the French Church in in Frankfort , He formulae serviunt tantum rudioribus , nullius liberiati praescribitur . These formes serve onely for the ignorant , not prescribing to any mans liberty . And were it so that the mayn drift of the Composers of Liturgies were to helpe the d●votion of the people , yet ( what a help to devotion many find it , though we dispute not ) it will be hard f●r this Remonstrant to perswade many thousands who desire with devout hearts to worship God , that the being constantly bound to the same formes , though in themselves neither for matter nor composure subject to just exception , will prove such a great help to their devotion . But this wee are sure , that if the knowing before hand the matter and the words wherewith it should be clothed make people the more intent upon devotion , if this be an infallible argument , it pleads against the use of present conception , either in praying or preaching , or any other administration either publike or private : and how contradictory this is to what the Remonstrant hath professed of his reverent and pious esteem of conceived prayer , let himselfe see . It is neither boldly nor untruly said , that all other reformed Churches , though they use Liturgies , do not bind Ministers to the use of them : If we may trust the Canons and the Rubricks of those Churches we may both boldly and truly say it . In the Canons of the Dutch Churches , agreed upon in their Synod , we find a Canon enjoyning some days in every week to be set apart for preaching and praying , and the very next Canon saith , the Minister shall conceive prayers either by the Dictate of the Spirit , or by a set forme . So in the first Rubricke of the Liturgie of Geneva , the Minister is to exhort the people to pray , quibus ei visum fuerit verbis , in what words he shall think fit ; and though that Liturgie containe formes of prayer for publike use , yet we doe not finde in all that Liturgie where they are tyed to the use of those forms , and no other ; we finde , where they are left free , as in one place , in Dominico die mane haec ut plurimum adhibetur formula , Upon the Lords Day in the morning , for the most part this prayer is used ; for the most part , then not alwayes . So in another , after the Lords Super , this thanksgiving or some other like it is used ; then they are not absolutely tied to the use of that : and by this wee have learned how to construe what he hath quoted out of Master Calvine . And indeed any man that reads that Epistle may easily construe what was Master Calvines judgement about Liturgies , not that men should be so tied to words and forms , as to have no liberty to recede from them . For in the same Epistle hee doth advise to have a summary collection of doctrine which all should follow , and to the observing of which all , both Bishops and Ministers should be bound by Oath ; Yet we hope the Remonstrant will not say that Calvine did advise that Bishops and Ministers should be bound by oath not to vary from that forme of doctrine ? Calvine advises a set form of Catechisme , will the Remonstrant say that Calvine meant the Ministers should never vary from the syllables of that forme , provided they did dictate pro captu populi , in quibus situs sit verus Christianismus ? The very words by himself quoted shew what Calvins end was in advising a set Liturgie , viz. to helpe the simplicity and unskilfulnesse of some , to prevent the innovation of others , & that the consort of all Churches among themselves might more certainly appeare , all which ends may be obtained without limiting all Ministers to the words and syllables of a set forme , provided they pray to that effect . Which is all that is required in the Liturgies of other Churches . Wee could name you many other Liturgies , wherein there are not further bounds laid upon the Minister then thus , Hae sunt formulae , quas tamen sequitur Minister pro suo arbitrio , These are forms which the Minister follows according to his liking . And again , Spiritus sanctus non est alligandus formulis , The Holy Ghost is not to be tyed to forms . Minister concludit Orationem , quam pro suo arbitrio dicit . Haec esto formula nisi quid ille suâ sponie possit melius . The Minister concludes the prayer , which hee sayes according to his own discretion : let this be that forme , except of his own accord hee can doe better . In another , Minister ad precandum hisce aut similibus verbis invitat ad hunc modum orat , in these or the like words . And by this , ( we hope ) the Remonstrant seeth that what wee have said , was more truly then boldly spoken . As for the Lutheran Churches , though we blesse God for that truth , that is among them , for that glorious instrument of their Reformation , yet we think the Remonstrant will not say , that the Lutheran Churches came out so perfectly in the first Edition , but that desiderantur nonnulla ; nor can he be ignorant , that in the ordinary phrase of writing , they are called the Protestant Churches , the other the Reformed Churches : and what if the Reformed Churches be as the Remonstrant calls them , out of his respect hee beares them , but a poore handfull ? yet is this handfull in respect of purity , of truth , and worship among them , to be preferred before all the Christian World besides . The Rubrick in the Liturgie of Edward the sixth , saith he , is misconstrued , Because it intends onely the peoples ease and more willing addiction to hearing . Two of the very ends for which wee desire a liberty ; which if some Ordinaries ( upon his certain knowledge ) have often yielded , many now upon our certaine knowledge have denied it , and ordered Sermons should rather be constantly cut short then any part of the Liturgie omitted , why should it be a fault in us to desire that as a favour from this Honourable House , which the Remonstrant grants an ordinary may without offence yield at his own discretion ? 3 The Homilies we say are left free , reason therefore the Liturgie should : which argument he confesseth might hold force , did they utterly abridge all Ministers of the publike use of any conceived prayers . We know some men have endevoured sacrilegiously , to rob all Ministers of the exercise of the gift of prayer , on what occasion soever : And our argument is as strong against limiting in prayer , as it is against limiting in preaching , either in whole or in part , and he saith nothing against it , onely determines tanquam è Cathedrâ , that it is no lesse sacrilege to rob the people of a set form , by the liberty of a free expr●ssion , Then it is to rob them of the Ministers gift of preaching or praying . But the Remonstrant must prove that set forms and Liturgies stinted and enjoyned , are not onely lawfull , but Ordinances of God , and not only warranted but commanded , as well as preaching or praying , before he doe so peremptorily conclude the taking of set formes away by the liberty of a free expression to be sacrilege ; and his bold closure of this Answer , how true it is let him look in what we have said before of the Liturgies of other Churches . 4 His fourth Answer , That it is a false ground , that the imposing of the book tyes godly men from exercising their gift in prayer , would have been condemned for heresie in some Consistories in England , within these few yeeres , by such as did , from the imposition of the one , forbid the other . Whether the liberty of prayer be infringed wholly , by a set Liturgie , wee dispute not . But it is beyond dispute , that the not binding to a Liturgie would endanger the liberty of prayer lesse . 5 Our fift Reason was , because many deny their presence at our Church-meeting , in regard of those imposed prayers , and we finde no better way to recover them from that distance in which they stand , then by leaving the Liturgie free . The Remonstrant saith , There is no reason of such alienation from our assemblies upon such grounds . The reasonablenesse or unreasonablenesse of this we determine not ; in the mean time wee are sure thus it is . For our parts we professe , that wee are not against a free use of a Liturgie , nor doe we count a Liturgie a sufficient ground of separation from the Church , we say with Augustine , Non putamus scindendas esse Ecclesias , propter ea quae nos ex se , neque digniores , neque indigniores , coram Deo facere possunt . Yet wee feare it is not the Remonstrants Dilemma that will reduce such as upon this ground are upon point of forsaking our Church assemblies . The Liturgie ( saith hee ) is either good or evill , if evill it is not lawfull to be used , if good it is not unlawfull to be imposed . The persons of whom wee speake , and with whom in this argument he hath to deal will deny both , and tell him the Liturgie is neither good , nor yet may lawfully be imposed if it were good , it may be the Remonstram might have work enough to perswade some men of either : and whether it be easier to satisfie the consciences of many thousands in England , that are troubled about this , by argument and disputing , or by loosing the bond of imposition , and taking away the cause of dispute and trouble , or to behold the confusion that will follow , if the Lord do not in mercy direct to some means of prevention , is not hard to determine . The Remonstran● inclines to the third , and making it but a small matter , turns it off with O miserable misled people , whom nothing will reclaim but a perfect confusion ! a perfect deformity , a more profitable nonsence ! And so confident he is that this will be the issue , that though this confusion appeare in no other Churches who perhaps ( hee grants contradicting himselfe ) begun without a Liturgie ; yet with us it could be no lesse then what hee hath prophesied : yea , so resolute he is not to yield to a liberty in what is established , that whereas wee said that liberty in Liturgies could breed no more confusion then liberty in the Homilies , we evidently see by his answer , that had the reading of Homilies beene as strictly enjoyned as the Book of Common-prayer , the ablest Minister in England , were the Law in the Remonstrants hands , must be held as strictly to them , as to this . Yea , lastly , whereas wee had said , that if enjoyned at all , it might be as a punishment upon the insufficient , thereby to quicken them up to more diligence and care : he scoffs at this as a singular project and unheard of mulct ; and yet himselfe comes out with a project about preaching , never a whit better , and doth as good as confirme our saying in the latter end ; Surely where God hath bestowed gifts , it is fit they should be imployed , and improved to the best advantage of his people : But where there is nothing but an empty , over-meening , and proud ignorance , there is great reason for a just restraint . Let the ingenious Reader peruse the words , and consider how much they differ from that which he calls our singular project : and withall judge whether this conclusion of the Remonstrant after all his wrangling against our Queres , be not as like Bellarmines , tutissimum tamen , &c. as if it had beene cast ●n the same Scull ? How this way that the Remonstrant hath chosen would speed , let the Reader judge : In the meane time we blesse God , who hath put it into the hearts of others , into whose hands hee hath concredited the work , to judge more wisely , and consider more mercifully ; and to professe in the hearing of some of us , that they would willingly part with that which was indifferent to themselves , if they were but truly informed , it was offensive to others . According to that of Gregory , Those customes which are knowne to bring any burthens upon the Churches , it becomes us to consider of the removing of them . Thus we have vindicated the first part of our answer concerning Liturgie , Wherein we professe , as in the presence of God , that wee have written nothing out of a spirit of contention and faction , but onely as lovers of the Truth , and the peace of the Church , which is now miserably divided in judgement and affections , and like a young Hart upon the mountains of Bether ; which rents and distractions , wee are so far from fomenting , that wee would willingly goe over divers Seas ( as Calvin once said ) to finde out one uniforme way of worshipping of God , in which all Christians might happily agree . We well know that peace is the Helena , that all are suiters unto ; and wee know as well , that peace without truth is as a painted Iezabell , and to be thrown downe by all those who are on the Lords side . And therefore it hath and alwayes shall be our chiefe care and prayer , that peace and truth may kisse & greet each other : And we hope that the Worthies of that Honourable Assembly , who are the great Patrons of peace and truth , will give a candid interpretation to these our endeavours , and will doe that for which present and succeeding generations may justly record them as the Nehemiah's , Ezrae's , and Zorobabels , of our decayed Ierusalem . SECT . III. THe businesse of the third Section , is to extricate himselfe from those snares , in which his owne words have entangled him : his affection to his cause , had transported him to use some over-reaching expressions , lifting up the Antiquitie , and extending the Universalitie of Episcopall Government beyond truth , vilifying ( as wee know his custome is ) vvhatsoever hath been spoken or vvritten to the contrary . Those things we laid to his charge ; Now see how miserably he excuseth himself : read the Remonstrance , our c●llections from it in this Section , and judge whether he hath sufficiently redeemed his credit , who hath neither made any one ingenious confession of an oversight , nor yet made good what he had spoken ; yet hee enters with his wonted confidence , perswading himself he hath blown away all the arguments of the former Section , and lays on us unmercifully , calling us Cavellers , Leasers , Slanderers , Calumniators , worthy to be spit upon , &c. Such let us be esteemed , if we be found deserving . His first care , and almost his greatest , is , to cleere himself from that which we spake of but by the way ; His condemning all , that either writ or spoke against Episcopacy , as weak , or factious , The God of heaven knows this ( saith hee ) never came within the verge of my thoughts . Sir , wee cannot parly with your thoughts , but certainly if it were not in your thoughts , your words mistake their errand : For this proposition , Episcopacie is cryed downe abroad either by weake or factious persons , We beseech you , let your Logick ( the want whereof you upbraid us vvith ) tell us , quae , quanta , qualis ; if any man should say it grieves his heart to heare , how the pure Protestant Religion is cryed downe abroad , by either weake or factious persons , would this have been interpreted to concerne onely such as cry downe the Protestant Religion here in England ? Certainly , abroad not being limited , as it was not in your Remonstrance , though now you would limit it in your Defence , is a vvord of such vast extent , as reacheth not onely beyond the bounds of the Parliament , but of the Kingdome too . But see how justly you deale with us , where you personate us as saying , Sure the man is not in his right wits , hear how he raves , sure hee is in a deep phrensie : vvho ever spake of the Remonstrant so contumeliously ? It is language more like his , vvho sends men to darke rooms , and to Ellebore . Wee said indeed , the Remonstrant was self-confounded , and vvee know as vvell as you can tell us , there is a self-confusion that is the effect of extream sorrow , such a sorrow as makes men speak they knovv not vvhat ; and so did this Remonstrant : some of vvhich expressions hee yet justifies , some he minces . This he justifies , and saith , hee ever will ; that hee is no peaceable , nor wel-affected sonne of the Church of England , that doth not wish well to Liturgie and Episcopacie . What ? tell us novv once for all , whither the Parliament doe not here come under the verge of your Proposition ? Whom before you vvere so carefull to exempt by one vvord abroad . For this is vvell knowne , if all those of the Nobilitie , Gentrie , and Communaltie , that at this time stand not vvell affected to the present Liturgie , and Hierarchie , are to bee counted factious and ill affected , the Reverend Fathers will have multitudes of disobedient sons to disple . In the next page , he endevours to make good vvhat he had spoken in the Remonstrance , that Episcopall government , by the joynt confession of all Reformed Divines , derived it selfe from the times of the Apostles ( vvithout the contradiction of any one Congregation gregation in the Christian World ) unto this present Age. His Defence is first , he said nothing of Diocesan Bishops ( then as good have said nothing at all ) but spake onely of Episcopall Government : But vvas it not that Sacred Government vvhich some seek to wound ? and vvhat is that but Government by Diocesan Bishops ? vvhich he must prove to derive it selfe from the Apostles times , or else eat his vvords . Nay , more then so , hee must prove that the joynt Confession of all Reformed Divines acknowledge it ; and not think to put the Reader and us off , with telling us , no true Divines ever questioned , whether Bishops were derived from the Apostles or no , but what kind of Bishops they were ; Wee know what kinde of Bishops the Remonstrant pleads for , and of them he said , by the joynt confession of all Reformed Divines , they were derived from the Apostles : prove this , or acknowledge your errour . It is this kind of Bishops you must prove hath continued in the Christian World unto this age , without the contradiction of any one Congregation . We tell you of Scotland without Bishops : you would put us off with China and Brasile , &c. but are they parts of the Christian World , as Scotland is ? You never meant that every place through the whole World hath had a continued line of Bishops ever since the Apostles , we thought you had ; for we are sure it is the assertion of Episcopall men : else what is the meaning of Doctor Halls semper and ubique ? and what is the meaning of that irrefragable proposition ? no man living , no History can shew any well allowed and setled Nationall Church in the whole Christian World , that hath been governed otherwise then by Bishops , in a meet and moderate imparity , ever since the times of Christ and his Apostles , unto this present age . And what means that other expression ? Turne over all Histories , seeke the records of all times and places , if ever it can be shown , that any Orthodox Church in the whole Christian World , since the time of Christ , and his Apostles , was governed otherwise then by a Bishop , Superiour to his Clergie ( unlesse perhaps during the time of some persecution , or short interregnum ) Let me forfeit my part of the cause . The instances brought to prove the falsnesse of that Assertion , that Episcopacie had never met with contradiction in any Christian Congregation , The one hee turns off with the evasion of a personall quarrell ; whereas the Histories tell us it was an ancient custome ; and adds an odious Marginall ill becomming his so deeply protested loyalty to his Sovereigne , as if it were no lesse crime to offer an affront to a Prelate , then to the King. The other instances of the Reformed Churches , he puts off with this shift ; that if wee did not wilfully shut our eyes , we might see he limited his time unto this present age . Good Sir , bethink you , take up your Remonstrance , read your own words , Mark the Parenthesis . Episcopall Government derives it self from the times of the Apostles without any interruption ( without the contradiction of any one Congregation in the Christian World ) to this present age . The limitation of time here , hath reference to the continuance of Episcopacie , not the contradiction of Episcopacie , that 's hedged in with your parenthesis , which excludes your limitation . Just such another is your next , having said , Episcopall Government continued in this Iland ever since the plantation of the Gospel , without contradiction ; and being here taken in the manner , to salve your credit , you would here alter your words and sence , and make it , that it cannot be contradicted , that the forme of this Government hath continued in the Island ever since the first plantation of the Gospel ; pray review your words , and see how well they admit this sense . Were this Ordinance meerly humane , and Ecclesiasticall , if there could no more be said for it , but that it is exceeding ancient , of more then fifteen hundred yeares standing , and that it hath continued in this Island since the first Plantation of the Gospel , to this present day , without contradiction . You would make the sense to goe thus , this proposition is true without contradiction , that Episcopall Government hath continued in this Island : we say the sense must be thus , that this Government hath continued without contradiction , or hath received no contradiction , during all the time it hath continued , untill this present day . If any impartiall Reader would not take the words in that sence we did , rather then in the sence you have drawn them to , let us be counted slanderers . But in excusing the last mistake , he would be a little more serious . The Remonstrant had said ; Except all Histories , all Authors faile us , nothing can be more certain then this truth . Wee cry out here of such a shamelesnesse , as dares equall this opinion of his of Episcopall Government , to an Article of our Creed . This he doth seriously deny , professing he spake it only as an ordinary phrase in hourly discourse ; and did Hee so too , that in Episcopacie by divine Righ , Part. 2. pag. 47. faith , That for his part , hee is so confident of the divine institution of the Majoritie of Bishops above Presbyters , that hee dare boldly say , there are weighty points of Faith , which have not so strong evidence in Scripture . And the same Author in the same place professeth , that men may with much better colour cavill at those blessed Ordinances of God , viz. ( consecration and distribution of the holy Eucharist , and baptizing of Infants ) then quarrell at the divine institution of Bishops . God give the man lesse confidence , or more truth : is not this to equalize this fancie to an Article of the Creed ? Wee would not have cast away so much time and paper upon this worthlesse businesse , but onely to cleer our selves from that uncharitablenesse , falshood , lying , and slandring , wherewith the Remonstrant here bespatters us . It is in his power to save himselfe and us this ungratefull labour , if hee will give lesse scope to his luxuriant pen , speak more cautiously , let his words be more in weight , and lesse in number . SECT . IV. IN the next Section , the Remonstrant according to his Rhetorick , saith , Now I hope , they wil strike ; it is a Trope , sperare pro timere . He had pleaded for the establishment of Episcopacie , the long continuance of it in the world , and in this Island : this we called Argumentum galeatum , quoting Hierom for that Epithite , for which his great learning scoffs us . Well , wee must put it up ; an argument , or if you will an Almanack , ( for it is growing out of date apace ) and calculated for the Meridian of Episcopacie , &c. meaning the argument , though applyed to Episcopacie , might serve for any other Right , Custome , Order , Religion , that might plead antiquity , which hee denies not , but plainly grants , saying , it is calculated for whatsoever Government ; if so long time have given it peaceable possession ; in so much , that could the Presbytery plead so long continuance , hee should never yield his vote to alter it . No , should not ? to bring in that Episcopall Government which ( saith the Remonstrant ) hath such a divine institution , as not only warrants it , where it is , but requires it where it may be had . How can these things consist ? Surely if your grounds for the Divine Right of Episcopacie be Convictive and Irrefragable , you must renounce that Government which is meerly humane , and Ecclesiasticall , be the Antiquity of it never so venerable , if it stand in Competition with that which may plead a jus divinnm . To divert that which he saw would overthrow this plea , intitling the Pope to as much strength in this argument as the Bishops , he will needs add this : That long continuance may challenge an immunity from thoughts of alteration , uulesse where the ground of the change is fully Convictive and Irrefragable . But first , Sir , you must not make a limitation in your conclusion , above what was in your premises ; but since you are at a dead lift , wee will take it in , and yet tell you , that this helps you no more , then the Pope still : if he may judge , hee will say there is no reason for his abolition : may others judge , the ground is fully Convictive and Irrefragable . The Bishops being Judges , and the Remonstrant , they determine ; no reason in the world for the change of Episcopacie ; but what if others that must be Judges in this controversie see grounds Irrefragable , and Convictive : where 's your argument from the long standing of Episcopacie ? The other things which hee refers to their more proper place we shall expect there . Onely for his confident challenge he makes to us , to name any man in this Nation that hath contradicted Episcopacie till this present age : We must put him in remembrance , that in his Remonstrance his words were unto this present day . Which unlesse hee will have recourse to his Trope , is more then this Age , if by this age hee mean this last Century : but let it be this age , we can produce instances of some ( and that long before this Age ) in this Kingdome that have contradicted Episcopacie ; and our instances shall not be mean. That blessed man Wickliffe ages ago did judge there ought onely to be two Orders of Ministers , and who these be hee expresseth in the following words , viz. Presbyters and Deacons , if there be but two Orders of Ministers in the Church Presbyters and Deacons , then where is your Sacred Order of Episcopacie ? And if Wickliffe deny the being of that Order , doth hee not contradict it ? In the following page he saith , Pauli , &c. That in the time of Paul , two distinct Orders of Clergie men were sufficient , Priests and Deacons : Neither was there in the time of the Apostles any distinction of Popes , Patriarchs , Archbishops ; it was enough that there were Presbyters and Deacons . So , there is one in this Nation , who before this age contradicts Episcopacie . Of him also Walsingham saith , That this was one of Wickliffs errours , that every Priest rightly ordained , hath sufficient power to administer all Sacraments ( and consequently Orders and Penance ) for they were then esteemed Sacraments . Consonant to this of Wickliffe , was the judgment of Iohn Lambert , who in his answer to Articles objected against him saith , thus , As touching Priesthood in the Primitive Church ; when vertue bare ( as Ancient Doctors doe deem , and Scripture in mine opinion recordeth the same ) most room , there were no more officers in the Churches of God then Bishops and Deacons , that it Ministers ; as witnesses , besides Scripture , Hierome full apertly in his Commentaries upon the Epistles of Paul. Though these were but single men , yet they were Martyrs , therefore wee hope their words will beare some weight . Wee could tell you further that Richardus de media Valla in 4. Sent. Dist. 24. quaest . 2. Non ordo qui est Sacramentum , sed potius quaedam ordinis dignitas Episcopatus dicendus est : Episcopacie is not to be called order , but a kind of a dignity of an order . Guli . Occam Anno 1330 Quod Sacerdotes omnes cujuscunque gradus existant , sunt aequalis autoritatis , potestatis , & jurisdictionis institutione Christi : sed Caesaris institutione Papam esse Superiorem , qui etiam potest hoc revocare . That all Priests of whatsoever degree they be , are of equall authority , power , and jurisdiction , by the institution of Christ : but by Caesars institution the Pope is the Superiour , who may also recall this . We could tell you further of one Gualter Mapes , a man whom History records famous for Learning , who flourisht in the yeere 1210 , that wrote many books : among the rest , one called A Complaint against Bishops . Another against the Pope and his Court. Another to the wicked Prelats . In which he cals the Pope Plutonem & Asinum , Prelats , Animalia bruta , & stercora : Whether this man did contradict Episcopacie or no ? let themselves judge . But we are sure , if any man a few yeers agoe should have so written or spoken , it had been a crime next L●sae Majestatis : we could tell them of many more , but the Remonstrant desired but to name any one , we hope we shall indifferently well satisfie his desire , by that time we have mentioned one more , Robert Longland , a Scholer of Wickliffs , who put forth a Book in English , called the Ploughmans Dream , which ends thus , God save the King and speed the plough , And send the Prelates care enough , Enough , enough , enough , enough . If single instances will not serve the turn , wee can give instance of a combination of learned and godly men in Oxford ; who being called in question before the King , and the Bishops of the Kingdome , were condemned to be stigmatized and banished the Kingdome ( the fatall punishment of the Adversaries of Episcopacie ) for saying that the Church of Rome was the Whore of Babylon , the barren fig-tree that God had cursed , and for saying , non obediendum esse Papae & Episcopis , that neither Pope nor Bishops are to be obeyed . If this be not enough , wee can produce the combination of the whole Kingdome , Anno 1537 ( somewhat above an age ago ) out of a Book called , The institution of a Christian Man , made by the whole Clergie in their Provinciall Synod , set forth by the authoritie of the Kings Majesty , and approved by the whole Parliament , and commanded to be preach't to the whole Kingdome , wherein speaking of the Sacrament of Orders , it is said expresly , that although the Fathers of the succeeding Church after the Apostles , instituted certain inferiour degrees of Ministery , yet the truth is , that in the New Testament , there is no mention made of any other degrees or distinction in Orders , but onely of Deacons or Ministers , and Presbyters or Bishops , and throughout the whole discourse makes Presbyters & Bishops the same : from whence it is evident , that in that age the whole Clergy knew not any difference made by the Scriptures between Presbyters and Bishops , and by this time ( we hope ) you have more then one in this Kingdome , who have contradicted your Episcopacie before this age . And if we should expatiate beyond the bounds of this Kingdome , wee might with ease produce , not onely testimonies of Schoolmen but of others , who acknowledge but two Orders in the Ministery ; but seeing you required onely home-born witnesses wee ll trouble you with no other : and intreat you to make much of them . Onely we shall intreat the Reader to view , to his abundant satisfaction , Doctor Reinolds his Epistle to Sir Francis Knowls , who shews out of Chrysostome Hierom , Ambrose , Augustine , Theod. Primasius , Sedulius , Theophilact , that Bishops and Presbyters are all one in Scripture , and that Aerius could be no more justly condemned for heresie , for holding Bishops and Presbyters to be all one , then all those Fathers with whom agree ( saith he ) Oecumenius , and Anselme Archbishop of Canterbury , and another Anselme , and Gregory , and Gratian : and affirms , that it was once enrolled in the Canon Law for sound and Catholike doctrine , and thereupon taught by learned men , he adds further that it is unlikely that Anselme should have beene Canonized for a Saint by the Pope of Rome , and the other Anselme and Gregory so esteemed in the Popes Library , that Gratians Works should be allowed so long time by so many Popes for the golden fountain of the Canon law , if they had taught that for sound doctrine , which by the whole Church in her most flourishing time was condemned for heresie , and concludes that they who have laboured about the Reformation of the Church , these five hundred yeeres ( of whom he names abundance ) have taught that all Pastors be they intitulated Bishops or Priests have equall authority and power by the Word of God , and by this the Reader may know Doctor Reinolds his judgment concerning Episcopacie . There is one thing more belongs to this Section , as to the proper seat , and that is the establishment which he seeks to Episcopacie frō the laws of the Kingdom , to which we having answered , that Laws are repealable , the Parliament having a Nomotheticall power , He answers though laws are repealable , yet fundamentall laws are not subject to alteration upon personall abuses : Secondly , that he speaks not against an impossibility , but an easinesse of change , which our guiltinesse would willingly overlook . But consider , we beseech you , how fitly is Episcopal Government made a piece of the fundamentall Laws of the Kingdome ? How did the Kingdome then once stand without Bishops , as in the very page , you had now to answer , you might have seen once it did ? For doth not the Marginall tell you from Sir Edward Coke , or rather from an Act reported by him in the 23 yeere of Edward the first , that the holy Church was founded in the state of Prelacie , within the Realme of England , by the King and his progenitors , which your guiltinesse will needs overlooke , for feare you should see that there was a King of this Realme of England , before there was a Prelacie . And how then is Episcopacie one of the fundamentals of the Kingdome ? And whereas you say you spake onely against an easinesse of change , read your words in the eighteenth page of your Remonstrance , A man would thinke it were plea enough to challenge a reverend respect , and an immunitie from all thoughts of alteration : is this to speake against an easinesse , or rather against a possibility of change ? For your conclusion , that things indifferent or good , having by continuance and generall approbation beene well rooted in Church and State , may not upon light grounds be pulled up , Good Sir , never trouble your selfe about such an indifferent thing , as Episcopacie is . Never feare , but if Episcopacie be rooted up , it will be done by such hands as will not doe it upon light grounds . SECT . V. THey that would defend the Divine right of Episcopacie , derive the pedigree of it from no lesse then Apostolicall , and in that right , divine institution ; so did this Remonstrant . This we laboured in this Section to disprove , and shew , that it might be said of our Bishops , as of those men , Ezra 62. These men sought their Register among those that were reckoned by Genealogie , but they were not found : therefore were they as polluted put from the Priestho●d . For the Bishops , whose pedigree is derived from the Apostles , were no others then Presbyters : this we evinced by foure mediums out of Scripture , but insisted onely upon two , the identitie of their name and office . Before wee come to the Remonstrants answer , wee will minde the Reader of what the Remonstrant saith , That we have a better faculty at gathering then at strewing : which if we have , we shall here make good use of our faculty , in gathering the choice flowers which himself hath scattered ; yielding unto us the mayn Scripture grounds whereby the Patrons of Episcopacie have endevoured to uphold their cause . For himselfe confesseth the Bishops cause to be bad , if it stand not by divine Right , and compares the leaving of divine right , and supporting themselves by the indulgence and munificence of religious Princes , unto the evill condition of such men , who when God hath withdrawn himselfe , make flesh their arme . And whether himselfe hath not surrendred up this divine right , judge by that which followeth . Our main argument was , That Bishops and Presbyters in the originall authority of Scripture were the same . Hee answers in the name of himselfe and his Party , This is in expresse terms granted by us . We argue it further , That we never find in Scripture any other orders of Ministery but Bishops and Deacons . He answers , Brethren , you might have spared to tell mee that which I have told you before , And adds , That when wee alleage the Apostles writings , for the identity of Bishops and Presbyt●rs , we oppose not his assertion , because he speaks of the monuments of immediate succession to the Apostolike times , but we of the writing of the Apostles . And for the two other arguments drawn from the identitie of the qualifications of Bishops and Presbyters for their Office , and Ordination to their office , hee answers Ne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quidem . And yet notwithstanding , that the Reader may not perceive how the Remonstrant betrayes his own cause , he deals like the fish Sepia , and casteth out a great deal of black inke before the eyes of the Reader , that so hee may escape without observation . But wee will trace him and finde him out , where hee thinks himselfe most secure . For first , he falsly quotes our answer . Whereas wee say , That in originall authority Bishops & Presbyters are the same , he tels us , we say , That Bishops and Presbyters went originally for the same , That is , saith he , There was at first a plain indentity in their denomination . Which two answers differ , Immane quantum ! And yet howsoever this very identity of denomination in Scripture is of no small consequence , what ever the Remonstrant makes of it . For the proper ends of Names being to distinguish things , according to the difference of their natures , and the supream wisdome of God being the imposer of these names , who could neither be ignorant of the nature of these offices , nor mistake the proper end of the imposition of names , nor want variety to expresse himselfe , the argument taken from the constant identity of denomination , is not so contemptible as the Remonstrant pretends . Especially considering that all the texts brought to prove the identity of names prove as intrinsecally , the identity of Offices , which we did cleerly manifest , by that text , Titus 1. 5 , 6 , 7. Where the Apostle requiring Presbyters to be thus and thus qualified , renders the reason , because Bishops must be so . Which argument would no ways evince what the Apostle intended , if there were onely an idenditie of names , and not also of offices and qualifications When the names are the same , and the Offices distinct , who but one that cares not what hee affirmes , would infer the same offices as a consequent from the identity of their names ? Who would say that the properties of the Constellation called Canis ought to be the same with the bruit creature so called , because they have both one name ? And this we desire the Reader to take the more notice of , because the Remonstrant passeth it over in silence . Secondly , the Remonstrant seemes to recant that which he had before granted , & tels us that though in the Apostolike Epistles there be no nominal distinction of the titles , yet here is a reall distinction and specification of the duties , as we shall see in due place . But this place is in Vtopia , and wee shall finde it paulò post finem , for wee finde it no where in this book ; but we hope in due place faithfully to performe the contrary to what hee hath deludingly promised , and also to shew how these words of his doe contradict what himselfe saith in other places of his book . The testimonies brought out of antiquities , to shew that the names of Bishops and Presbyters were used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , hee calls trifling , and challengeth us to name any one of his Writers that hath stood up in the cause of Episcopacy that hath not granted and proclaimed this which we contend for . Wee answer first , the better is our cause , when our adversaries are forced to grant us thus much . Secondly , the Authours we alleage , doe as well hold the offices of Bishops and Presbyters , to be used in Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as well as the names . Thirdly , though we cannot name the man , yet hee who names himselfe the humble Remonstrant , in the 96 page of his Defence , doth impropriate the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Acts 20. to Bishops in an imparity distinct from meere Presbyters , saying , If they were indeed Bishops , and not mere Presbyters as the word it selfe imports , &c. And wee thinke you should know the name of this man. We mentioned Anicetus , Pius , Higinus , Telesphorus , under the denomination of Presbyters . You Answer we could not have brought a stronger argument against our selves . Why ? They are called Presbyters as well as Bishops . Ergo , the names are used indifferently . Doth it not fully prove as much as we intended ? But they are famously known ( say you ) to have been in a height of elevation above Presbyters . It is yet to be proved they were so : yet how ever , no such elevation as did advance them into an order above Presbyterie . For Irenaeus speaking of the Successors to the Apostles saith , Cum Prebyterio ordine sermonem sanum & conversationem sine offensâ praestant , ad informationem & correctionem reliquorum , And our Remonstrant granting an identitie of names , and yet thinking to maintain a distinction of offices out of Irenaeus , comes neerer to the sence of the Popish Commentator Feuardentius , then of the orthodox Father Irenaeus . To Cyprian whom the Presbyters called frater , Hee replyes that though the Presbyters were so familiar with him as to call him brother , yet he did never so condiscend to them as to call them Bishops , but stifly maintains the eminencie of his superiority , and is sometimes honour ●dutth the st●le of Beatissimus Papa . To all which wee answer , first , that as the Presbyters call Cyprian brother , so he cals them Brethren , Colleagues , Fellow-Presbyters , &c. And Augustine a Bishop , writing to Hierom a Presbyter , disdains not to write in this style , Domino dilectissimo , & in Christi vesceribus honorando , sancto fratri & Compresbytero Hieronymo . So to Praesidius , Domino beatissimo & merito venerando fratri Consacerdoti Praesidio : Yet was Praesidius but a Deacon as Hierome saith . For Cyprians maintaining his Superiority stifly , wee are sure he never maintained it so stifly as this Remonstrant and our Bishops doe : for he ( as we fully shewed in our Answer ) never maintained any sole superiour power , but disclaimed it wholly , yet this is the thing our Bishops contend for , as you may read , Episcopacie by Divine Right , part . 2 pag. 16. As for the glorious Title of Beatissimus Papa Cyprianus , we tell you , in that age , it was a title common to Presbyters as well as Bishops , as appeares ex Bibliotheca Patrum , Primum , singulos habent Papas , sic enim vocant Presbyteros vel Curiones , in singulis Parochiis , cum uno Diacono . It is therefore but a meere false supposition of the Remonstrant , that the title Papa was never given to a meer Presbyter . And we hope the name Papa is as great , and Rome will say as incommunicable , as the Remonstrant would make the name Episcopus , out of Cyprian . In the next Paragraph , the Remonstrant leaving the indentity of names , addresseth himself to the great question about the distinction of the Offices of Bishops and Presbyters . And here we demanded , and now demand againe , What these men , that maintaine the office of a Bishop distinct from a Presbyter , make the Bishops proper office ? Is it to edifie the Church by Word and Sacraments , &c. Here saith the Remonstrant , They fall somewhat unhappily upon the very words of the branded Heretike Aerius . Good Reader , compare the expressions , and see whether they be the very words : but had we faln upon the very words , how can that man that hath said so often , the Liturgie is never the worse , because the words of it are taken out of the Roman Portuise , tr●duce either our persons or cause , for falling unhappily upon the words of Aerius ? But it seems he is very willing to take all advantages , to involve us in the crime of Heresie ; For in this , and severall other passages , hee chargeth us with being the Disciples of that frantick Heretike Aerius , which makes us almost suspect , that great deserving Champion of Episcopacy , Franciscus à Sancta Clara , had a hand in this Remonstrance , who hath driven the Divine right of Episcopacie so high , as to charge all with heresie that deny it . But how ever , the Remonstrant should have done well , to have given better satisfaction to our tenth Quere concerning Aerius , and taken away what wee spake , before hee cry out against him as a stigmatized Heretike . But if hee scorn to answer us , we would intreat him to lend Bellarmine a lift in answering the famous Doctor Whitakers , Who sayes , I answer , Aerius was not accounted by all for an heretike : Epiphanius indeed , and Augustine following him , reckon him among the heretikes , but if he held nothing besides those things , he was not an heretike , for the Scriptures and Fathers themselves confirme all these : and Theodoret in his booke of the Fables of the Jews , doth not ranke him among heretikes , nor the Ecclesiastical history , but rather Eustathius that did oppose him , &c. If your greatnesse will not stoop to answer a single Doctor , we will subjoyn a second , Learned Doctour Willet Contr. Gen. 5. Quaest. 3. and a third , Chemnitius in Exam. Concil . Trid. parte 4. de Orig. Iejunii , and a fourth , Springlius de hodiernis haeresibus part . 1. l. 3. c. 2. which have spoken as fully in the justification of Aerius his opinion , as ever your answerers did . But what saith the Remonstrant to this Aerian question ? Brethren , God speed you with your question . Sir , if you speak this cordially , and seriously , wee are glad of your ingenuity , that though you have called us Heretikes , yet our heresie is not so damnable , but you dare bestow an Ave upon us . But if you speak this scoffingly , as we are verify affraid you do , then we beseech you in the feare of God , consider how you will answer this taking of Gods Name in vain , before that great tribunall , to which you make such bold appeals . The office wee distributed into administring , Word and Sacraments , Orders and Discipline . For the first , administring the Word and Sacraments , this the Remonstrant grants in common to Bishops and Presbyters without any difference but what our distance makes : Which exception wee understand not , unlesse your meaning be that Bishops may preach as often , and as seldome as they please : and wee must preach no oftner then they give us leave . The quarrell as he makes it ( we called it controversie ) lies especially in the power of Ordination and Iurisdiction ; which say wee by divine Authoritie is common to all Presbyters , which yet our Bishops have impropriated to themselves . To prove that the power of Ordination was in the hands of Presbyters , wee produced the 1 Tim. 4. 14. to this he answers nothing of his own : onely tels us in an Hyperbole , it hath received answer , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and he gives but one , and that borrowed too from Calvine , who takes Presbyterium of the office , not of the persons . Wherein saith the Remonstrant he follows the judgment of Hierome , Primasius , Anselme , Haymo , Lyranus , Erasmus , and others , as Bishop Downham hath shewed . Wee doe believe that this is borrowed of Bishop Downham , for had he consulted with those Authours , hee might easily have seen how little they favour that exposition . For what saith Hierome , whom Primasius follows in his very words ? Prophetiae gratiam habebat cum ordinatione Episcopatus . Doth this prove that Presbyterium is there the name of the office ? If so ? You must grant Episcopacie and Presbyterie to be the same office , which is the verie question . But wee would faine know , why cum ordinatione Presbyterii or Episcopatus should bee understood rather of the office , then of the person : when , ( in proprietie of phrase ) if they had meant it of the office they would rather have said ordinatio ad Episcopatum , then Episcopatus . For Anselme , what saith hee ? Impositionem manuum eam dicit , quae in ordinatione ejus facta est , quae manuum impositio fuit presbyterii , quia per hanc impositionem accepit presbyterium , id est , Episcopatum , vel haec impositio manuum fuit presbyterii , qui Latinis dicitur Senior , quia ipse Apostolus , qui juxta hunc sensum presbyter intelligitur , imposuit manus suas cap●● ejus dum illum consecraret Episcopum . The comment is a sufficient confutation of it selfe , for the first exposition wracks the text with a violent and unusuall hyperba●on . And therefore hee recedes from that , and falls upon a second , Presbyterii qui dicitur Senior , quia Apostolus ipse , &c. Now what an unlikely exposition is this ? What Authour can these followers of Anselme produce , wherein Presbyterium is called Senior . For those other , Lira , Haymo , and Erasmus , we will oppose to them the Fathers of the Greek Church , who are likely to know best the genuine sence of the Greek Text. The same Doctor Do●nham ( from whom the defendant hath borrowed these interpretations ) tels him that Chrysostome , Theodoret , and other Greek Fathers understand it of the persons , and not of the office . As for learned Calvin , in his Institutions we grant he understands it of the office , yet in his Comments ( wherein wee may more justly expect the full sense of the Text ) he compares these two interpretations together , and let any Reader judge , which he prefers , Presbyterium qui hic Collect●vum Nomen esse putant pro Collegio Presbyterorum posi●um , RECTE SENTIUNT MEO JUDICIO : Tametsi omnibus expensis , diversum sensum non malè quadrare fateor , ut sit nomen officii , Ceremoniam pro ipso actu ordinationis posuit . Itaque sensus , Timotheum cum prophetarum voce ascitus fuit in Ministerium , & deinde solemni ritu ordinatut , simul gratiâ Spiritus Sancti instructum fuisse ad functionem suam exequendam . Now which sence doth Calvin preferre ? Of that which we give , hee speaks positively , Recte sentiunt . Of the other , he onely saith , Non malè quadrat . And that this Text must needs be understood of the persons ordaining , and not of the office Timothy was ordained too , will appeare by these reasons . For first , it cannot stand with the signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : The office or dignitie ( as le●rned Criticks observe ) is rather called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Nor can it well stand with the sence and construction of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What shall it be governed of ? Would not any Grammarian refer it to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , immediatly preceding , rather then to the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , from which it is so farre dis-joyned . The words in the Greek lye thus . Neglect not the gift that is in thee , which was given thee by proph●cie and the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery . Now according to the sence the Remonstrant strives for , it is thus . Neglect not the gift of the office of the Presbytery , which was given thee by the laying on of hands . Bishop Downham himselfe , without the bold foysting in ( to use the Remonstrants words ) of a Parenthesis into the Text , cannot make this interpretation good . We thought we had sufficiently proved this interpretation in our answer , by producing all the Texts in the new Testament , in which the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used , and shewing that in them it signifies the persons , and not the office , and severall Texts out of Hierom , Ignatius , & Concil . Ancyr . to the same purpose . The Fathers and Councels hee is willing to passe by in silence . The Scripture hee pecks at , and tels us wee doe meerly delude the Reader ; For there it is meant of Elders of the people not of the Church Good Sir , do not you delude your self , & your reader too out of a desire to traduce us . Be they Elders of the people or of the Church , it is sufficient to prove that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies not the office of Presbyterie , but the persons in that office . And this also may answer that objection , which he makes from the 2 Tim. 1. 6. For though we grant indeed Master Calvin was more skilled in the harmony then our selves , ( the Remonstrant might have let it passe so without putting it among his Errata , turning it to themselves ) yet wee must crave leave herein to dissent from Master Calvin , as well as Beza , Cameron , Chameir , and others since him have done before us . And let not the Remonstrant call it boldnes in us , to say that power of Ordination is communicated to Presbyters , because Hierome and Concil . Aquisgr . still except Ordination , we must rather marvell at his boldnesse in putting that upon us which we spake not : wee say indeed , pag. 24. of our answer , it was in the hands of Presbyters . The Remonstrant would have us say Communicated to Presbyters , that wee might seeme to acknowledge the power of Ordination to be originally in Bishops , and in Presbyters onely by derivation from them , which we never meant ; and if we ever did use the word Communicated , it was onely to note a Community in that power , not a derivation of it : as for his authors which he alleages for sole Ordination , let the Reader please to view our answer , pag. 37. 38. wherein hee may receive full satisfaction , and the rather because the Remonstrant passeth over it . The third part of that office which the Bishops call theirs , is ruling . To prove this to belong to Presbyters as well as Bishops , we cite Heb. 13. 17. Here the Remonstrant cryes out , Oh injurious imputation ! do wee not give you the title of Rectores Ecclesiarum ? And doe we not commit to you regimen Animarum ? So then you grant this place is rightly both interpreted and applied ; but you give us , say you , the title of rectores Animarum , & regimen Animarum . You give us ? No , it is the Scripture gives it us : yet you would assume it to your selves , and perswad , that as the Pope communicates to his Bishops partem solicitudinis , so you to us Presbyters : but if the Scriptures gave us no more then you do , it would prove 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . You make your selves the sole Pastors , us but the Curates ; your selves , Chancellours , Officials , the sole Iudges , us but the executioners of your and their sentences , whether just or unjust . The other Text 1 Thes. 5. 12. and those four things observed from thence for the confirming of this assertion , the Remonstrant passeth over : so hee doth our argument which was this , They which have the same name , the same Ordination to their office , the same qualification for their office , the same work , to feed the flock of God , to ordain Pastors and Elders , to rule and governe , they are one and the same . But such are Bishops and Presbyters , ergo . And thus deals hee also with the two quotations , the one of the Councell of Aquisgra . the other out of the writing of Smalcald ; all which being to hard for the Remonstrant to evade , hee leaps over to a conclusion of such strange things , as hee never went about to prove in his Section . SECT . VI. HAving from Scripture manifested the Identity of Bishops and Presbyters in their originall institution ; we applied our selves in this section to finde out the authors and occasion of this imparity which now appeares between them . To expedite our selves from needlesse controversies , we laid downe three particulars , as consented to by both sides : First , that the first and best antiquity used the names of Bishops and Presbyters promiscuously ; this the Remonstrant subscribes to . Secondly , that in processe of time some one was honoured with the name of Bishop , the rest were called Presbyters : this the Remonstrant quarrels , and desires to know what was this processe of time , chargeth us either with error or fraud , confidently defends this time had no processe at all , but was in the very 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the living Apostles , and undertakes to make this good in the sequell . And how he doth that , you shall find in this very section page 59. where to that of Hierom , The Presbyters governed the Church by their common Councel , he answers , So they did doubtlesse altogether , till Episcopacy was setled , who dare deny it ? Here the Remonstrant grants a processe of time betweene the planting of the Church by the Apostles , and the setling of Episcopacy in the Churches Shall we say now this is the Remonstrants either errour or fraud , not to set downe how long it was before Episcopacy was setled in the Church ? let him take heed another time how he charge men with error or fraud , for affirming that which himselfe cannot but give his Suffrage to . The third thing agreed upon was , that this was not nomen inane , an idle title , but attended upon with some kind of imparity : the question was digested into these tearmes . Whether the impropriation of the name , and the imparity of the place and power of a Bishop be of divine right ? The Remonstrant for feare of mistaking , desires to explicate the tearmes of the question , and therefore tels , how fetching the pedegree of Episcopacy from Apostolicall ( and therefore in that right divine institution , ) he interprets himselfe to understand by divine right , not any expresse Law of God , requiring it as of absolute necessity to the being of a Church , but an institution of the Apostles inspired by the holy Ghost , warranting it where it is , and requiring it where it may be had ; but , Nihil infelicius Retorico definiente : the Remonstrant if he would avoyd mistaking , or at least would not say that he was mistaken , should have dealt a little more clearely and punctually in the stateing of the Question . For first he tels us , that it is an institution of the Apostles inspired by the Holy ghost : if the Remonstrant be not here mistaken why doth he page 47. in expresse terms grant us , that in originall authority of Scripture , Bishops and Presbyters were originally the same . For so were our words , not as the Remonstrant reports them , went for the same : and why againe , when we tell him we never finde in Scripture these three orders , Bishops , Presbyters & Deacons ( we say not the names , but orders ) why doth he grant that in the same page , and flie from the writings of the Apostles to the monuments of their immediate successers ? can we imagine that the Apostles did by inspiration from the holy Ghost , ordaine any thing in the Church of God as of perpetuall use ; the record where of is not found in sacred Scripture , which was given by the same inspiration to the same men ; if we may imagine it , sure we cannot beleeve it . And if it be an institution of the Apostles inspired by the holy Ghost , why must it be distinguished from the expresse law of God ? doth he make it but an evangelicall counsell ; not requiring it as necessary to the being of a Church ; sure this is some opinion of a newer cut ; for the last defendant of Episcopacy before this Remonstrant saies thus , The power of Ordination hath beene ever held so intrinsecall to Episcopacy , that I would faine see , where it can be shewed that any extremity of necessity was ever acknowledged a warrant sufficient for others to ordaine . So that in his judgement , where there is no Bishop , there can be no lawfull ordination , let it be in the case of extreamest necessity ; and where no ordination , no ministery , and so consequently no Word and Sacraments , and no Church : and how then in the judgement of these men is Episcopacy not required to the being of a Church ? And if not requiring it to the being of a Church , how then ? requiring it onely where it may be had : what a strange limitation is this ? where is it that Episcopacy may not , must not be had , if it be an ordinance of Christ ? where is it that the Churches of Christ may not have Word , Sacraments , Pastors and Bishops too , if they be his ordinance ? It is true indeed , some there are that cannot have Lord Bishops , pompous Bishops , and once a Canon provides that they should not be in little Villages , Ne vilesceret honos Episcopatus : but these himselfe acknowledgeth , are but the accessaries of Episcopacy by the donations of Magnificent Princes . But what is the meaning of this , where it may be had ? what doth he meane , where it may be had with the favour of the Prince ? then the Primitive Church had never had any . Or where it may be had with the willing subjection of the people ? then Episcopacy shall be an ordinance , if the people will have it so . Where it may be had ; what ? with quiet and conveniency ? then you make that which you call an ordinance of God subject to mans convenience . Or what ? with possibility ? requiring that where Episcopacy may be had possibly , it should ? what 's this lesse than a command ? yet saith the Remonstrant , here is no expresse law of God requiring it . Now we pray you review your worke , and see how well you have stated the question . To prove that Episcopacy was not a divine , but a humane institution ; we produced out of antiquity some places , that mention the occasion and authors of Episcopall imparity , which are not ( as the Remonstrant absurdly ) the onely countenance of our cause . Our first was , that knowne text of Hiereme in the 1. Titus , out of which we collected five things , which the Remonstrant summes up thus : First , that a Bishop and a Presbyter are originally one . Secondly , that the imparity was grounded upon Ecclesiasticall custome . That before this priority , the Church was governed by the common Councell of Presbyters , and that Bishops ought still so to governe . And lastly , that the occasion of this imparity was the division , which through the divels instinct fell among Christians : this the Remonstrant cals the summe of our collection . But if his Arithmeticke be no honester then thus , he shall summe no summes for us ; for he leaves out one Collection which is indeed principally considerable , That this was not Hieromes owne opinion , but the opinion of the scriptures . This would have stopt the mouth of his satis imperitè . Wel what saies the Remonstrant ? You look now that I should tell you the booke is of uncertaine credit . No indeed sir , we looked for no such matter ; because we know that booke is approved by men both of as great learning and of as little affection to Hieromes opinion as the Remonstrant is , though his lesser commentaries on the epistles be questioned . Or else you look , that I should tell you Hierome was a Presbyter , and not without some touch of envy to that higher dignity which he missed . Truely sir , this we looked for , and the rather because Doct. Hall in his Episcopacy by Divine right , part 2. page 122. saith , that as he was naturally a waspish , & a hot good man , so being now vexed with some crosse proceedings , as he thought , with Iohn of Ierusalem , he flew out , &c. but what a slender answer is this ; Hierome was a Presbyter , what then ? Hierome saith nothing here , but what he saith from Scripture ; and is Scripture the lesse Scripture because produced by a Presbyter ? Hierome was a Presbyter , and pleads for his owne order ; doth that make his argument the lesse creditable ? the author of Episcopacy by Divine right was a Bishop ; is it sufficient confutation of that booke to say hee was a Bishop that made it , he must plead for his own honour and order ? Or you looke , say you , that I should tell you that wiser men then your selves have censured him in this point of Arrianisme . No indeed , for feare you should thereby comfort us against the same censure past so often upon our selves . If Hierome suffer under the name of Aerian , no wonder we doe : but if wisermen than we have condemned him for Aerianisme , wiser men then the Remonstant have quitted him of that crime . But the Remonstrant thinkes to decline these common waies , and set Hierome to answer Hierome ; which yet is no more then Bellarmine did before him ; and and puts us in mind that the same father passes a satis imperitè upon the same opinion in the Bishop of Hierusalem ; but a satis imperitè doth not condemne the opinion , but the man ; for it may be truth which a man speakes , though he speakes it imperitè : yet to make sure worke the Remonstrant will set Hierome to answer himselfe : what saith Hierome ? at first saith he , Bishops and Presbyters had but one title : No , Hierome said not so , nor did we . Idem est ergo Presbyter qui Episcopus : How doth the Remonstrant construe this ? Is this in English , a Bishop and a Presbyter is the same : or is it , at first Bishops and Presbyters had but one title ? with what face can the Remonstrant charge us with infidelity in quotation and mis-englishing , who useth no more fidelity himselfe ? that which Hierome speakes of the office , he would restraine to the title ; that which Hierome speakes in the present tense , as true in all the moments and fluxes of time , he would remit to the time past ; They had but one title ; This the Remonstrant passeth from , and slips from their Identity to their imparity ; inquiring the time and occasion of that , and will needs force Hierome here to confesse Bishops in the Apostles daies : because then they began to say , I am of Paul , &c. but will take no notice at all of what our answer spake for the removing of this inference , unlesse it be to slight it , as a poore shift : nor will take notice of that which Hierome himselfe speakes . Haec propterea ut oftenderemus apud veteres eosdem fuisse Presbyteros quos & Episcopos : paulatim verò ut dissentionum plantaria evellerentur , ad unum omnem solicitudinem esse delatam : intimating that Episcopacy was not presently invented as a cure of schisme , but paulatim : so that should it be granted , that the schismes spoken of here were those in the Apostles daies , yet it doth not follow , that Episcopacy should be coaetaneous to these schismes , because Hierome saith , Paulatim ad unum omnem solicitudinem esse delatam . Let the Remonstrant now aske Hierome , not us ; why the remedy should be so late after the disease ? and here we desire the reader to observe that the Remonstrant doth meerely abuse him in telling him that Clemens in his Epistle to the Corinthians taxeth the continuance of the distractions raised in the Apostles daies : when it is apparent that Clement speakes of a new schisme different from that Paul speakes of , raised against ther Presbyters , and the former schisme mentioned in the Scripture was onely among the people . As for those Bishops whom Hierome names as made by the Apostles , at present we say no more , but this : Hierome , as a Divine saith , Bishops and Presbyters are the same ; and to prove this produceth Scripture : but Hierome speaking as an Historian , mentions Bishops made by the Apostles , and brings no Scripture for the proofe of that , but onely the testimony of Eusebius his history , who alone had writ before him of that subject : Now let the Christian Reader judge whether more credit be to be given to Hierome as an Historian quoting humane History , or to Hierome as a Divine quoting Scriptures . And yet what can be brought to prove that those Bishops were not the same with Presbyters ? For the diabolicall occasion of bringing in Episcopacy into the Church : if there be any fault in the phrase , it is Hieromes , not ours : therefore the weaknes and absurdity is slung in the face of that waspish , hot good man Hierome , not in ours . The institution of Episcopacy , Hierome saith , was rather by the custome of the Church then by the truth of the Lords disposition ; to avoyd the stroke of which , the Remonstrant would faine perswade Hierome to owne that , which in the judgement of Belarm . Spalato , and almost as many as have writ before the Remonstrant , never entered into his thoughts ; nor can be the proper meaning of his words ; That by the custome of the Church , the father meanes the Church Apostolique , and by the Lords disposition , Christs immediate institution . This were to make Hierome of their mind . How well this may be done , let their sworne friend Spalato give his verdict . Sunt qui Hieronymum in rect am sententiam vel invitum velint trahere ; one of these must this Remonstrant be . As for that passage of Hierome ad Euagrium , where he saies , this superiority of Bishops above Presbyters is by Apostolicall tradition , Hierome in that Epistle sharpens his reproofe against some Deacons , that would equallize themselves to Presbyters ; an opinion which the Remonstrant thinks more reasonable , then that Presbyters should be equall to Bishops : to make this reproofe the stronger he saith , Presbyteris ad est , Episcopis● and a little after , he doth out of the Scripture most manifestly prove eundem esse Presbyterum at que Episcopum : and carries this proofe by Paul , by Peter , and by Iohn the longest surviver of the Apostles : then adde , quod autem postea unus electus qui caeteris praeponeretur , in schismatis remedium factum . The reason why afterwards one was elected , and set over the rest was the cure of schisme . It is hard to conceive how this imparity can be properly called an Apostolicall tradition when Hierome having mentioned Iohn the last of the Apostles , saith it was postea afterwards that one was set over the rest , yet should we grant it an Apostolicall tradition in Hieromes sense , it would be no prejudice to our cause , seeing with him Apostolicall tradition and Ecclesiasticall custome are the same ; witnesse that instance of the observation of Lent , which he writing ad Marcellum saith , is Apostolica traditio ; yet writing adversus Luciferianos , faith it is Ecclesiae consuetudo ; whereby it fully appeares that Hierome by Apostolicall tradition meant not an Apostlicall institution , but an ecclesiasticall custome , and so much we granted Episcopacie to have . Hierome saith toto orbe decretum est , and it was decreed all the world over ( say you ) in the time of the first divisions . Hierome said not so ( say we ) but after these divisions , not in the time of these first divisions . Is this faithfull translating ? By what power , say you , besides Apostolicall could it be decreed so soone and so universally ? But how if it were decreed neither soone nor universally ? If we may believe Hierome , it was neither soone nor at once ; but paulatim by little and little , not by Apostolicall decree , but by the custome of the Church . Hierome saith , the Presbyters governed the Church by their Canon Councell . So they did , saith the Remonstrant , altogether till Episcopacy was setled , who dare deny it ? sure hee dares deny it , who in the 55. page of his defence , chargeth us with errour and fraud , for saying that though at first the name and office of a Bishop and Presbyter was the same , yet in processe of time some one was honoured with the name of Bishop ; and confidently defends that this time had no processe , but was the very 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the living Apostles : but how his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there without any processe of time , can stand with his donec here● , and with Hieromes paulatim , postquam , postea , let him see to that . Hierome saith they ought so to governe still : so ( saith the Remonstrant ) say we also , and so in some cases they do . Good sir , and why not in all cases ? Church government , you say , is Aristocraticall . True , when it is in the hands of the best men , then it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . But when the men in whose hands the government of the Church is , are bad ; then it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or Kakistocraticall . But our present Church government is not Aristocraticall , but Monarchicall : because not onely one Bishop Lords it over his Diocesse , but also one Primate appoints to all other Bishops . Besides , if it were Aristocraticall , then ought every Minister to be a member of that Aristocracy ; for certainely no man will account the Minister de plebe : in the judgement not onely of the ancient Fathers , but of reason it selfe , none can be accounted plebs but the Laicks ; seing every Minister is elected optimatim , and is as one of a thousand : Next you tell us there is no Bishop so absolute , as not to be subject to the judgement of a Synod . It is much he should not , when all the fixed members of our Synod are the Bishops meere dependants , & such packing used in the choice of the rest , as perhaps worse was not at the Councell of Trent . Thus all the art the Remonstrant hath cannot perswade Hierome to befriend our Bishops in his judgement ; and is it not strange boldnesse to perswade the Reader that Hierome should against his judgement befriend them in his history ? After the allegation , we produced some reasons to shew , that though it should be granted these were in the times of the Apostles ▪ yet the Invention of Bishops for the taking away of th●se schismes is not Apostolicall : our arguments the Remonstrant , according to his greatnesse cals poore negative arguments , which yet we entreat the Reader to view for his further satisfaction , and remember that in Sacrâ Spripturâ locus tenet ab authori●ate , negativè . And good sir , how doe we in them g●e about to Confute our owne Authors ? what doe these reasons conclude more , but that Bishops were neither of Divine , nor Apostolicall institution , and what doth Hierome say lesse ? Tell not us of striking our own friend , let him suffer as an Hieronymomastix , that when Hierome crosses his opinion , cals him a waspish hot , good man. In the next place you look'd for Ambrose : yet you might have taken notice that we spake but of the Cōmentaries that goe under the name of Ambrose ; which if you call a foyst , all your owne side are as guilty as our selves , that cite him as well as we , and some for Ambrose ; how ever this is much lesse then your selfe did in point of Liturgie . Where we desiring to see some Liturgies not Spurious , you produced the Liturgy of Iames , &c. For the persons that brought in this Imparity , we tell you , they were the Presbyters ; and prove this from Hierome ad Euagrium . The Presbyters of Alexandria did call him their Bishop , whom they had chosen from among themselves , and placed in a higher degree . This you call a faithlesse and a halved citation : Good sir , be not so harty , it s neither false , nor halved : not false , because it fully proves the thing for which wee brought it , which was , that the advancing of one to an eminency and superiority above the rest was not a divine , but a humane act ; it was not God , but man that was the authour of this imparity ; and doth not the place fully prove this ? Presbyteri unum ex se electum in excelsiori gradu collocatum Episcopum nominabant , and say we any more ? Nor is it halved , though hee saith this was done a Marco Evangelista , usque ad Heraclam : yet this concerned not the purpose for which the text was quoted , and therefore might warrantably be omitted , especially having proved before that , which the Remonstrant would perswade his reader we are shie of here , that Bishops were not in the Apostles times : and if the leaving out a few words in a quotation , not pertinent to the question , be the halving of it , how will the Remonstrant cleare himselfe of this sinne , who citing the Councell of Laodicea p. 15. makes bold to leave out a great deale more then we did here : where a most materiall passage was omitted , as before we have observed . Neither did we leave out a Marco Evangelista , for feare it should prove that there were Bishops as earlie as the Corinthian schisme . Nor did our hearts tell us that Marke died many yeeres within the Apostles time ; for Irenaeus tels us lib. 3. Contra Haeres . that hee writ his Gospell after Peter and Pauls death . That which wee quoted proves abundantly that the Presbyters both chose and placed one of the Presbytersin a higher degree , by their own authority , giving him both the degree and the name . Doe you ( who brought in A Marco Evangelistâ to trouble your reader and to slander us ) reconcile if you can , Authors about the time of his death . But the last place he bringeth out of Hierom , is a most rare place , and may well make any man wonder with what face we can say , Hiero me ever spake against Bishops : and why so ? because Hierome saith , Episcopacy is Gods owne worke : where is it ? in Isa. 60. 17. what are the words ? Hierome reading that text according to the 72 translation , saies : Ponam inquit , Principes tuos in pacem , & Episcopos tuos in justisiam , in quo , saith Hierome , Scripturae sanctae admir anda Majestas , quod Principes futuros Ecclesiae Episcopos nominavit , quorum omnes visitatio in pace est , &c. herein the majesty of the Scripture is to be admired , which hath named the future Princes of the Church , Bishops ; all whose visitations are in peace . Good reader , consider this mighty mouth-stopping argument . God hath promised the Princes of the Church shall be as Bishops . Ergo , Bishops in imparity are Gods owne worke : good sir , your * Baculus in angulo take to your selfe against you walke to finde texts againe in Hierome to prove Bishops to be of divine institution . The rest of your quotations out of Irenaeus , Tertullian , and Chrysostome , they are places have beene oft alleaged , and as oft answered : wee will be briefe with you . For if you had not lyen hid under the equivocation of the word Episcopi , you might have spared your selfe and us a labour . These Episcopi were Presbyteri , you your selfe grant that their names were common in the daies of Linus , Polycarpe , and Ignatius , which are the men you here cite for Bishops . And therefore unlesse you can shew that they had a superiority of power over Presbyters , such as ours have ; you doe b●t delude the Reader with a grosse Homonymie , whom we referre to a passage in learned Iunius . controv . 3. lib. 2. c 5. not . 18. In which he labours to remove the contradictions of Historians concerning the order of succession of the Romane Bishops , Linus , Clemens , Anacletus &c. And he saith , That these or some of these were Presbyters or Bishops of Rome at the same time , ruling the Church in common . But the following writers , fancying to themselves such Bishops as then had obtained in the Church , fell into these snares of tradition , because they supposed , according to the custome of their owne times , that there could be but one Bishop in one Church at the same time : which is quite crosse to the Apostolicall times . To that of Ambrose calling Iames Bishop of Ierusalem , we gave a sufficient answer in our former Booke page 51. out of Doct. Raynolds ; and shall ( God willing ) adde more in due place . Our slip as you tell us , talkes of a councell ; No more ours then yours , for your party can , when hee speakes for them , vouch him with much more confidence then we doe . But what saith this slip ? he talkes of a councell as false as himselfe . Why ? because the Nicene was the first generall Synod : but yet there were provinciall Councels before . And the Commentaries mentioned before doe not say it was done by a generall Councell , but onely by a Councell ; though you by subtle coupling this Councell and Hieromes toto or be decretum erat , would faine force him to this sence : which toto orbe decretum est implies no Apostolicall act , nor act of a generall Councell neither , as we have shewed before . And yet this we tell you , the Nicene was the first Councell , in which toto orbe decretum erat that there should be but one Bishop in a City . As for Saint Austin his phrase , that the originall of Episcopacy above Presbytery was onely secundum usum Ecclesiae , you say it was but a modest word , and it is a just wonder that we dare cite him . Well , let us put it to the triall ; Hierome having taken distate at Augustine , writes two sharpe Epistles to him , in both which Epistles be doth extoll Augustine ironically as a great man , because hee was in pontificali culmine Constitutus advanced to Episcopall dignity , and speakes of himselfe as a poore , contemptible underling : to which Augustine answering among other things saith thus : Rogo ut me fidenter corrigas , ubi mihi hoc opus esse perspexeris : quanquam enim secundum honorum vocabula quae Ecclesiae usus obtinuit , Episcopatus Presbyterio major est : tamen in multis Augustinus Hieronymo minor . This was Augustines modesty say you . Well , and had not Augustine beene as modest , if he had left out that phrase quae Ecclesiae usus obtinuit ? his modesty appeares in these words , tamen in multis Augustinus Hieronymo minor ; not in the former . In the diminution of his person , not of his calling . S. Paul knew how to speake humbly of himselfe , yet highly of his office , and so might Austin ; and if he had known that the majority of Bishops above Presbyters had beene of Divine , or Apostolicall institution , he might have said so much ; and not have beene the lesse modest , but the more ; nay hee would have said so much . Quis enim est humilitatis fructus ubi detrimentum est veritatis ? What profit is there in humility with the losse of truth . And he that could tell another non accipiet Deus mendacem humilitatem tuam , God will not accept of your lying humility , could tell himselfe as much . So then though it be in humilitate personae that he saith , Augustinus Hieronymo minor est , yet it is in veritate rei that hee saith Secundum honourm vocabula quae Ecclesiae usus obtinuit , Ep. scopatus Presbyterio Major est . Thus much for Augustines modesty . And as for the Herauldry in blazoning Aerius for an heretick falsely objected ad nauseam usque & usque , We referre to former answeres . The Remonstrant will put us and the Readers to more trouble in the next place , because he calles our fidelity into so deepe question about the quotation of Gregory Nazianzen , Orat. 28. Where the father is mustering up the armies of evils that might seeme to threaten him , shewing the invincible magnanimity of his Spirit more then conquering , contemning all : Among those evils he reckons his ejection out of his Episcopacy : which what ever others would esteeme , he counts as nothing , and held it a principall part of wisedome in that age to shunne it , and then wishes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 utinam nulla sit princeps dignitas , that there were no principall dignity ( to wit , in the Church ) of which he is speaking . Secondly , he wishes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that there were no dignity or tyrannicall prerogative of place , that they might be knowne onely by vertue : to which belongs that Dextrum & sinistrum , those challenges of places of which the Remonstrant speaks . All which he speaks upon supposall of the losse of his Episcopacy . And for that Dextrū & sinistrum , Balsamon saith it was the manner of their distinguishing of the place of Bishops , according to their seniority and this occasioned those competitions among Bishops of which he speakes . The Series of this discourse is long , we must not insert it all : but let the learned reader vouchsafe to view it at larg , and if it doe not appeare that wee have alledged the place according to the genuine sence of the Authour , let us in his thoughts lie under all the reproaches , which our virulent Remonstrant labours to cast upon us in his whole book . However the Remonstrant hath little cause to reproach Nazianzen with that scoffe of his Egyptian adversaries 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as if he had out of an ambitious humour changed his seat : when he that peruseth his life shall finde , it would be an easier matter to remove an English Bishop from one Bishopricke to another till hee come to Canturbury , then it was to remove Nazianzen from one place to another . And as little reason with open mouth to fall upon us , and bid us eate our words , for saying that if our Bishops will deduce their pedegree from the Apostles time in an uninterrupted line unto this day , they must draw the line of their pedigree through the loynes of Antichrist : we tell him againe , let him take it never so angerly : What ever Bishops have beene in other places besides Rome , if our Bishops will draw their pedegree from the Apostles , they must draw it through Antichrists loynes . SECT . VII , VIII . IN this seventh Section the Remonstrant hath cut us out little worke : so much of our answer as he is loth to meddle with , he balkes under the tearmes of idle words . The rest concerning the election of former Bishops , hee seemes to consent to in opinion and option : onely that the shortest Section may not be closed without more frumps then one , he tels us we are besides the Cushion . The objection was , that the Apostles Bishops , and ours were two in respect of mannaging their functions . The Remonstrant will give us leave ( we hope ) to forme our owne objection . He makes it indeed of the Apostles Bishops . We having proved no Bishops ( ut nuncupantur as they are now tearmed ) Apostolicall . Bring it downe to the Bishops of inferiour times . He ( as here he tels us ) spake onely of the difference betweene the one and the other in managing of their function . We intending to present the differences betweene ours and former Bishops fully to view ; instance not onely in the managing of their function , but in their election and accessories ; and is this to be beside the Cushion ? This first point of difference our Remonstrant grants , that our Bishops and former differ in their election . And he makes halfe from hence to follow us into the execution of their Episcopall office . We make as much haste to meet him , and make good what we formerly layed downe , that our Bishops and the Bishops of former times are two : First , in the sole jurisdiction they assume to themselves , which former Bishops never did , nor durst ; which jurisdiction ( being taken here in a large sense for the execution of all Episcopall power ) we distributed into the administration of orders and censures , which ( saith the Remonstrant ) * in all wise writers were wont to be contradistinguished . Distinguished they are we grant , and so did we distinguish them , page 24 , 25. of our answer , which the wisedome of the Remonstrant might have taken notice of and forborne this scorne . Yet not so contradistinguished , but that the power of ordination may be reckoned as a part of Episcopall jurisdiction ; taking that word jurisdiction ( which was unknowne to first antiquity ) for the whole execution of Episcopall power , as the Remonstrant here takes it . The first of these , the sole power of ordination ; and the sole exercise of that power , which was a stranger , and a monster to former times . This our Bishops assume to themselves , and herein differ from the former Bishops . The latter of these he grants , That Bishops of former times did not assume to themselves the sole exercise of ordination . Onely he cannot let us passe ; without his usuall curtesie . But the former he denies , the ordination is ( he saith ) the Bishops , but the sole in that sence we use it , is ours . Bishops did never challenge it nor practice it , we will wash off all this ; and shew first that our English Bishops have challenged to themselves this sole power , and have practised this power , and then make good our quotation : and when this is done , let it be tryed not who can blush , but who hath more reason to blush ; the Remonstrant , or his answerers . For the first : that Bishops challenge to themselves sole power of ordination . We did never thinke that in these knowing times we should have beene put to prove the Snow is white , or the Crow blacke . But seeing the Remonstrant will have it so , we will shew first out of Episcopacy by Divine right , part 2. Sect. 15. the title of which Section is this , power of ordination is ONELY in Bishops : and in the beginning of the Section he saith , This was one of the Acts that was APPROPRIATED to Bishops ALONE : and is not this to challenge sole power of ordination ? afterwards in the same Section , he saith , Ordination is one of the things so Intrinsecall to Episcopacy , that in the judgement of the Church , no extremity of Necessity was sufficient warrant to diffuse it into other hands . The same power of ordination doe Bishop Bilson , Andrewes , Davenant , Mountague , &c. challenge to Episcopacy . Now Reader judge , is the sole theirs by challenge or no ? And what they challenge , that they practise : we doubt not but the Remonstrants conscience can tell him , there are many instances in England to be produced of men ordained in England without the hands of any Presbyter . The Remonstrant is as unhappy as peremptory in his challenge he makes . I challenge them to shew any one instance in the Church of England . Sir , the instances are without number . Some of us are ocular witnesses of many scores at severall ordinations ordained by a Bishop in his private Chappell without the presence of any Presbyter , but his owne domesticke Chaplaine , and without any assistance from him save onely in reading prayers . But alasse what should we fall to instances ! Put case an Irish or Welsh Bishop ordaines one at London in his chamber , or some Chappell , and admits him which commends the person to him to joyne for fashion sake in the gesture of imposition of hands , be hee of what place or Diocesse he will : how little doth this differ from sole ordination , and how much from that Regular and ordinate ordination of former times ? Sir , these are poore toyes to mocke the Church withall , if not God himselfe too . Could such a Bishop say , as well as Cyprian , Ego & Collegae ? You tell us our Bishops may say no lesse then Cyprian did . But doth the stile of your Letters of orders speake any such thing ? Let the Reader judge by a copy , Tenore praesentium nos N. N. Providentiâ Divinâ Episc. notum facimus universis quod die mensis Anno in Capella . Nos praefatus Episcopus sacros ordines dei praesidio celebrantes , dilectum nobis &c. E. B. de vitâ sua laudabili , &c. a nobis examinat : & approbat . ad sacro sanct . Presbyt . ordinem ad misimus rite & Canonicè ordinavimus & promovimus . In cujus rei testimonium sigillum nostrum Episcopale praesentibus apponi fecimus . Construe you this , Ego & Collegae , brethren ? But you tell us , Cyprians phrase , Ego & Collegae , was in the case of Aurelius made a Lector , much to your advantage . If a Reader could not be ordained by a Bishop alone , doe we thinke a Presbyter could ? As for Cyprians 58. Epist. we produced it not as a proofe of ordination in the hands of Presbyters , much lesse for the concurrent act of the people , as the Remonstrant would intimate , but onely for the explication of the word Collegae . But it seemes the Remonstrant was resolved to picke some quarrell , and rather to play at small game then stand out . And if it be the order of the Church of England as well as of the Councell of Carthage , that when a Presbyter is ordained all the Presbyters that are present shall lay hands , &c. if there be such an order , the more blame worthy the Bishops , who being such severe censurers of the breach of Church orders in others , are themselves in the same crime , for though you set a stout face upon the businesse , and tell us that this order is perpetually and infallibly kept by you ; Yet the world knowes it is no such matter unlesse you meane that all the Presbyters present doe infallibly and perpetually lay on hands in ordination , because our ordinations are so carried , that for the most part there is but one , sometimes not one Presbyter there besides the Bishop . But why doe you take notice here of one Canon of the Councell of Carthage , and not of the other ? ut Episcopus sine , &c. that a Bishop should ordaine none of the Clergie without the Counsell of his Clergie , unlesse it be , because here is such a manifest deflexion in the practise of ours from former times , as all the wit and Rhetoricke the Remonstrant hath cannot cover . Your next evasion is a plaine leaving the question ; we are to prove that Bishops in ancient times did not ordaine without Presbyters . You challenge us to prove a Presbyters Regular ordaining without a Bishop ; which is not the point in question . Who doth here most abuse the Reader , let himselfe judge : but wee are accused not onely of abusing our Readers , but our Authours too . And the Remonstrant hopes he hath us here at such a vantage , as shall try what modesty is in us . Three foule scapes are laid to our charge . First , we abuse Firmilianus , in casting upon him an opinion of Presbyters ordaining , which he never held ; let us once againe view the place . Firmilianus speaking of the true Church , saith , ubi Praesident Majores natu , qui & Baptizandi & manum imponendi & ordinandi possident potestatem : the controversie is , who these Majores natu be ? Bishops saith he . Bishops and Elders say we . To prove it , we explicate Firmilian by Firmilian , calling a little before those whom here he cals Majores natu , Seniores & praepositi . Which are not so farre from that clause but that they may be brought without wire drawing or foysting ; and are not so remote from that place , as those words which himselfe produceth , which we desire the courteous Reader to consider , because we are charged by him , for foysting in and wyre drawing the words of the Authour : and also because the very words there cited by the Remonstrant speake of a power of remitting sinnes , which we hope he will not ingrosse to Bishops , excluding Presbyters . Pamelius himselfe is with us : who understands by Seniores & prepositi , the Presbyters and Bishops . Our next scape , is but grosse ignorance , in translating Ambroses Presbyteri consignant by Presbyters ordaining . Every Novice knowes consigning signifies confirmation , and not ordaining . Sir , we appeale from your Novices to judicious Readers , and intreat them to peruse the text : and wee doubt not but upon due consideration they will conclude for our sence : let us then plead the case , and tell you first , That your Desiderius Heraldus shewes both the word signare or consignare in the phrase of antiquity to be as much as consecrare , and so doth Cyprian Epist. 2. and therefore it is not incapable of such a sence as we have put upon it . 2. If the Reader please to view the place in Ambrose , he shall finde that Ambrose there is speaking of ordaining men to publique offices in the Church ; and not of confirmation . 3. Though it should be taken for confirmation , yet you gaine nothing ; for the same Canon , that put power of ordination into the hands of Bishops , places the power of confirmation also in their hands . And they among us that challenge the sole power of ordination , challenge also sole power of confirmation . If any man object that confirmation is not so appropriated to Bishops as ordination is , because ( as some of you say ) confirmation is onely reserved to them honoris gratiâ ordination they have necessitatis gratiâ this objection we have satisfied in our answer page 38. wherein we have shewed not onely from Loo , that the power of ordination was reserved to them onely authoritate canonum : but also that it was appropriated to them for their credit and authority . Augustine speakes almost in the same words : Nam & in Alexandria , & per totum Aegyptum , si desit Episcopus , consecrat Presbyter : that which in Ambrose is called consignat , is here called consecrat ; and albeit the authors of both these bookes be questioned , yet both of them are acknowledged ancient , yea Doctor Raynolds affirmes the last of them from the 44. question was written above 300. yeeres after Christ : this is enough to us , that in antiquity consignat is expounded by consecrat ; which cleares us of that imagined guilt of a solaecisme , that hee would fasten upon us : and this may satisfie ( if this man be satisfiable ) that bold challenge of the former page : shew us but one instance of a Presbyters regular and practized ordaining without a Bishop , and carry the cause . Our third charge is double , first of skill not too much : secondly , of lesse fidelity . Our want of skill is , in not distinguishing of Chorepiscopi ( whō we brought as instances of Presbyters ordaining without a Bishop ) some of whom ( saith the Remonstrant ) had the nature and power of Episcopacy to all purposes : and therefore might well , by the Bishops licence in his owne charge impose hands . Now , we may returne it to the Remonstrant , that he discovers not too much skill in saying that some Chorepiscopi had both the nature and power of Episcopacy to all purposes , and yet might not ordaine in his own charge without the Bishops license . For what needs a Bishops licence to inable a Chorepiscopus in his owne charge to doe that , for the doing of which hee had before the nature and power of Episcopacy to all purposes . This is just as our Bishops are wont to do , who give a full power to a Presbyter at his ordination to preach the Gospell , with a charge also to do it , and yet will not suffer him to preach , no not in his own Cure , without a licence . But how doth the Remonstrant make good his distinction of his two sorts of Chorepiscopi from antiquity ? Here we have ipse dixit and no more . The peremptorinesse of Pythagoras the master in affirming , & the silence of his schollars when he comes to prove . Bellarmine indeed tels us that some Chorepiscopi were ordained by more Bishops then one , and these had power to ordaine . Others were ordained by one Bishop , and those were meere Presbyters and might not ordaine . But with how much fidelity Bellarmine , and after him the Remonstrant doth thus distinguish , let the Councell of Antioch determine : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Let the Chorepiscopus be ordained by the Bishop of the City , to whom hee is subject . From which Councell wee gather that the Chorepiscopi were meere Presbyters , and that there were but one sort of them . First , because the Chorepiscopus was to be ordained by one Bishop , ab Episcopo , not ab Episcopis : whereas by the Canons a Bishop was to be ordained by many , or two at least . As for Bellarmine , his Chorepiscopus ordained by more Bishops then one ; wee leave it to him to make good : indeed we finde in the same Canon , the Chorepiscopi in the plurall number had the imposition of the hands of Bishops , but when Chorepiscopus in the singular number is mentioned , then onely one Bishop is said to ordaine him . 2. Because the Chorepiscopus was to be subject to the Bishop of the City , ab Episcopo civitatis cui subjicitur : now we read no where of the subjection of one Bishop and his charge to another : Cyprian pleads the freedome of Bishops : telling us that each of them hath a portion of Christs flocke assigned to him , for which he is to give account to God. 3. Because he could not , nay he durst not exercise the power of Ordination without the leave of the Bishop : the Councell of Antioch sayes , non audeat absque urbis Episcopo : Conc. Ancyr . sayes , non licere nisi cum literis ab Episcopo permissum fuerit . None of this would have beene said , if he had beene a Bishop , as we have in part shewed in our answer , page 36. We deny not , but that this power of ordaining was afterward taken away from the Chorepiscopi by the same authority of the Canons , and Ecclesiasticall rules , by which it was first appropriated to Bishops themselves , as Leo. ep . 88. witnesses , which to us is a 4th argument to prove that they once had it , and that they had it as Presbyters : for if they had it as Bishops , the taking of it away would have beene a degradation of them . 5. We might bring an argument ad hominem , to prove the Chorepiscopi to be but Presbyters , because they are sayd Conc. Naeocaesar . Can. 14. to be after the manner , or in imitation of the seventy : now according to the opinion of Hierarchicall men Bishops succeed the Apostles , not the seventy . To all that we have said in this point , we might ad that not onely Damasus in that Epistle which goes under his name , ep . 4. but also Leo ep . 88. proves them to be but meere Presbyters , to whose sentence conc . 2. Hispal . can . 7. subscribes . Now leaving the Chorepiscopi we will give the reader a hint to prove , that not onely the Presbyters of Alexandria , and the Chorepiscopi , but further , the Presbyters of the City with the Bishops leave might ordaine , which we prove from cenc . Ancyr . can . 13. named before : where it is said , It is not lawfull for Chorepiscopi to ordaine Presbyters or Deacons : nor for the Presbyters of the City without the Bishop his letters in an other parish : from which it appeares , that Presbyters of the City had the same power to ordaine which the rurall Bishops had . Because the restraint is layed equally upon both : this is not onely our construction of the Canon , Bishop Bilson , Doctor Downam . def . lib. 1. cap. 8. say the same , and Doctor Downam gathers from thence , that Presbyters in the City might doe more then rurall Presbyters . So doth Spalatensis , who endeavouring to elude the text hath no other way but by foisting in a passage , which is not in the Greeke text . And by this time we hope we have cleared our fidelity in quoting of the Councels of Antioch and Ancyra : both which the Remonstrant thought his bare word enough to blast . Now we appeale to equall judgements whether the labour of this section were meerely cast away or no. The Remonstrant grants sole ordination was in regard of the exercise not challenged by Bishops in the Primitive times , Though he would perswade the reader we cannot but confesse it out of Hierome and Chrysostome . Yet let the reader consult the 37. page of our answer which the Remonstrant leaves unanswered , and judge betweene us , how farre we are from such confession : his onely shift now is to say our Bishops neither challenge nor exercise any such power . We have evidently proved they doe both , manet ergo inconcussum , our Bishops and the Bishops of former times are two . SECT . IX . HEre saith the Remonstrant , we beat the aire . And yet not the aire , but the Remonstrant too into the confession of that which would not be confest heretofore by such of thē especially as have contended for such a Bishop as exercised spirituall jurisdiction out of his owne peculiarly demandated authority . If iurisdiction exercised from an authority peculiarly demandated , how not solely ? Well , now it is granted that this sole is cryed downe by store of antiquity . So then here we doe not falsifie , and it is granted that Presbyters have and ought to have and exercise a jurisdiction within their owne charge . But here the Remonstrant will distinguish againe , it is in foro conscientiae . But consider Reader , whether this be the jurisdiction here under dispute . Whether that store of antiquity which he confesseth to cry downe sole jurisdiction , speake of a jurisdiction in foro conscientiae , as his false Margent saith , Clem Alexan. ( whom we cited ) doth . But indeed this distinction of the Remonstrant of a jurisdiction in foro interno and in foro externo , is like that distinction of Reflexivè and Archipodialiter . For all humane jurisdiction is in foro externo . If preaching the word ( which is especially aim'd at by the Remonstrant , be an exercise of jurisdiction , Then he that hath the Bishops licence to preach in the Diocesse , hath power to exercise jurisdiction through the Diocesse , and an University preacher throughout the whole Kingdome . Away with these toyes . He grants againe , that Presbyters ought to be consulted with in the great affaires of the Church , but doe our quotations prove no more ? Bishops had their Ecclesiasticall Councell of Presbyters , with whom they did consult in the greatest matters : and was it onely in the greatest matters ? Is this all that Cyprian saith ? All that the Councell of Carthage saith when it determines ut Episcopus nullius causam audiat absque praesentia Clericorum ; alioquin irrita erit sententia Episcopi , nisi Clericorum praesentia confirmetur . Doth this speak onely of great matters ; when it saith Nullius causam audiat ? Is this onely of a jurisdiction the Presbyters had in foro conscientiae ? Were Bishops with their Consistory wont to sit to heare ▪ and judge causes in foro conscientiae ? good Reader judge of this mans truth and ingenuity , who not being able to divert the stroke of that Antiquity we brought to manifest a difference betweene ours and the former Bishops in the exercise of their jurisdiction , would cast a mist before his Readers eyes , and perswade him he grants the whole section , when indeed hee grants nothing , onely seekes to slide away in the darke . But our Bishops have their Deanes and Chapters ( say you ) and the lawes of our Church frequently make that use of them . Yes you have Deanes and Chapters , but who knowes not that they have a jurisdiction distinct from the Bishops , in which the Bishop hath nothing to doe with theirs , nor they with his . And the Bishops also derive the exercise of jurisdiction to others ( we know it too well ) to Chancellours , Commissaries , Officials , and other of their underlings , even to the commanding of Christs Ministers to denounce their censures without any discerning what equity is in the cause . And what advise or assistance of Ministers is required , appeares by the very stile of your excommunications . G. R. Doctor of Law , Commissary , &c. to all Rectors , &c. For as much as we proceeding rightly , &c. have adjudged all and every one whose names are under-written to be excommunicated . We doe therefore commit to you , &c. to denounce openly under paine and perill , &c. Given under our Seale such a day , &c. Let any footsteps of such a power be shewed in antiquity . Presbyters he grants had their votes in Provinciall synods : we from good authority say more , they had their votes in all ordinary Iudicatures . But after all these grants , which are as good as nothing ; now he comes to plead his owne . We justly say that the superiority of jurisdiction is so in the Bishop , as that Presbyters neither may , nor did exercise it without him ? to what purpose is this ? if the Remonstrant speake of Scripture times : We have proved there was no superiority in them : if of latter times , it is not to the question : wee are proving Bishops never exercised jurisdiction without their Presbyters , as ours doe . He puts us to prove Presbyters exercised jurisdiction without Bishops , quam iniquè ? But the exercise of externall jurisdiction is derived from , by , and under the Bishop : No , neither from , by , nor under the Bishop , but from God , who hath made them overseers and rulers , and by the same Ecclesiasticall authority that hath made you Bishops : and under Bishops not in respect of divine power , but ( if at all ) in respect of Ecclesiasticall Canons onely . Your Timothy and Titus we shall meet in due place . Your Ignatius and the rest of your testimonies you could produce would ( as you say truely ) but surfeit the readers eyes , unlesse you could bring them to prove , that Bishops did and might exercise sole jurisdiction . Onely because you so triumph in our supposed scapes ; let us intreat you , or the reader for you to looke upon your cited Councell of Antioch 24 , 25 , Canon ; where you say the Bishop hath power of those things that belong to the Church , and see whether that speakes one word of jurisdiction : or be not wholy to be understood , of the distribution of the goods of the Church , as both the instance given in the Canon , and Zonaras on that place manifest . One shift yet the Remonstrant hath more : and that is to tell us , that this joynt government was but occasionall and temporary in times of persecution . But when a generall peace had blessed them , and they had a concurrence of soveraigne and subordinate authority with them , they began so much to ●emit this care of conjoyning their forces , as they supposed to finde lesse need of it . Doctor Downham to whom hee referres in the page before , assignes other reasons . Namely Presbyters desiring their ease and Scholasticall quietnesse ( which he saith and proves not ) and also the Bishops desiring to rule alone : which we finde to be the true cause by experience . For if the Bishops be of the Remonstrants mind , perswaded that the more frequent communicating of all the important businesse of the Church , whether censures or determinations with those grave assistants , which in the eye of the Law are designed to this purpose , were a thing not onely unprejudiciall to the honour of Episcopacy , but behovefull to the Church . Why should not the Bishops doe it ? save onely , that their ambitious desires of ruling alone swayes them against their owne judgement , and the determinations of the law . But indeed if this communicating of all the important businesse of the Church with those grave assistants you speake of or with the Presbyters of the whole Diocesse , if you will , be onely an assuming them into the fellowship of consulting and deliberating without any decisive suffrage , leaving the Bishop to follow or not to follow their advise ; this is but a meere cosenage of the reader , and doth not hinder the sole power of Episcopall jurisdiction . And this is all that Downam grants lib. 1. c. 7. p. 161. where he saith that Bishops doe assume Presbyters for advise and direction , as a Prince doth his Counsellors , not as a Consull doth his Senators who are cojudges with the Consul . And this we perceive the Remonstrant well likes of , as that which makes much for the honour of their function . And now sir , you see that we have not fished all night , and caught nothing : wee have caught your sole jurisdiction : and might have caught your selfe , were you not such a Proteus , such a Polypus to shift your selfe into all formes and Colours . Having proved that Bishops in all times , succeeding the Apostles , had Presbyters joyned with them in the exercise of their jurisdiction ; and that our Bishops have none , is more evident then that it needs proofe . This is more to you then Baculus in Angulo : it cannot but be Spina in oculis , & Sagittain visceribus , a thorne in your eye , and an arrow in your heart , convincing you to your griefe , that the Bishops you plead for , and the Bishops of former times are two . SECT . X. OUr next Section the Remonstrant saith , runs yet wilder ; it is then because we prosecute a practice of the Bishops more extravagant then the former : And that is the delegation of the power of their jurisdictiō to others ; which the Remonstrant would first excuse , as an accidentall errour of some particular man , not to be fastned upon all . But we desire to know the man , the Bishop in all England who hath not given power to Chancellors , Commissaries , Officials to suspend , excommunicate , absolve , execute all censures , but one : and doth the Remonstrant thinke now to stoppe our mouthes with saying , it is a particular error of some men ? whereas it is evident enough that our English Episcopacy cannot possibly be exercised without delegating of their power to a multitude of inferiour instruments . Can one Bishop having 500. or a 1000. Parishes under him , discharge all businesses belonging to testamentary and decimall causes and suites , to preach Word , and administer the Sacraments , &c. to take a due oversight also of all Ministers and people without the helpe of others . Nor will that other excuse doe it , That it is but an accidentall error , and though granted , concludes not , that our Bishops challenge to themselves any other spirituall power , then was delegated to Timothy and Titus , Sir we abhorre it , as an unworthy thing , to compare our Bishops with Timothy or Titus ; the comparison is betweene our Bishops and Bishops of former times . But to please you this once , we will admit the comparison and shew howeven in this particular that you count so monstrous , our Bishops challenge a power never delegated to Timothy nor Titus . And we prove it thus : Timothy and Titus never had a power delegated to them to devolve that power of governing the Church , which God had intrusted into their hands upon persons incapable of it by Gods ordinance . But our Bishops doe so . Ergo. The Remonstrant thinkes by impleading other reformed Churches , as guilty of the same crime ; to force us either to condemne them , or to acquit him . But the reformed Churches , if they doe practise any such thing , are of age to answer for themselves . Our businesse is with the Remonstrant and the persons and practices which he hath taken the tuition of . Whom we charging as in a generality with wholy intrusting the power of spirituall jurisdiction to their Chancellors , and their Commissaries : their good friend tels us we foulely overreach . The assistance of these creatures they use indeed , but they neither negligently or wilfully devest themselves of that , and wholy put it into Laicke hands . This is a meere slander : that Bishops devest themselves of their power we never said . That they doe either negligently or wilfully decline that office which they call theirs , we need not say , it is so apparent . And as apparent it is , that they doe intrust the power of jurisdiction wholly into Laicke hands : for their Chancellors ; and Commissaries having power of jurisdiction by patent setled upon them , and exercising that jurisdiction in all the parts of it , conventing , admonishing , suspending , excommunicating , absolving without the presence or assistance of a Bishop or recourse to him : we thinke impartiall Judges will say wee are neither slanderers nor over-reachers . In our former answer we fully cleared from Cyprian , how farre hee was from delegating his power to a Chancellour , &c. This he sleights as a negative authority , yet it is sufficient to condemne a practice that never had being in the thoughts of primitive times . And we beleeve it satisfies all others , because the Remonstrant saith it is very like it was so : Though according to his old way of diversion he tels us , as Cyprian did not referre to a Chancellor , so neither to the bench of a Laicke Presbytery : yet he that is but meanly versed in Cyprian , may easily see that it is no unusuall thing in that holy martyr , to referre the determinations of causes ad Clerum & Plebe● . But the Remonstrant thinkes to patronize the practice of our present Bishops by Silvanus the good Bishop of Troas . And what did Silvanus to the countenancing of this practice ? perceiving that some of his Clergie did corruptly make gaine of causes ( civill causes , causes of difference betweene party and party , or as you phrase it , page 91. unkind quarrels of dissenting neighbours ) he would no more appoint any of his Clergy to be Judge , but made choice of some faithfull man of the Laity . Now this is as much to the purpose ( good sir ) as Posthumus his pleading in Martiall . We are confuting the practice of our Bishops in making over their spirituall jurisdiction to Laymen , and he brings in a story of a good Bishop , that having a bad Clergy , intrusted honest men with civill judicature rather then them . As full to the purpose is that of Ecclesiae ecdici , or Episcoporum Ecdici , to prove the Antiquity of Chancellors and Commissaries . For their Ecdici were men appointed to be the advocates of the Church , to plead the Churches cause before the Emperours against the tyranny of their potent adversaries . But we never read that the Bishops did put over the government of the Church to them : we could with all our hearts give this honour to Civilians to be the Churches advocates , but not the Churches Judges , which the Bishops give them leave to be : to defend the Church against the tyranny of others , but not to tyrannize over the Church : Doctor Downeham was more ingenuous in this , then this Remonstrant ; who grants that till about 400 yeeres after Christ , Bishops had no ordinary Vicars that were not Clergy men ; No , say we , nor Clergy men neither : the office was not knowne in those times : neither can they produce any instance of any , either of Laity or Clergy that ever those times saw in that office . This saith the Remonstrant , is a poore brave . But till he can produce such instances , our challenge will stand strong enough notwithstanding his great words . But his put off is poorer ; to fly from officers intrusted with spirituall jurisdiction unto such inferiour instruments , ( Secretaries and Atturneys ) as are of necessary service in all Courts of judicature , whether Civill or Ecclesiasticall . To make all sure , the Remonstrant referres his Reader to Sir Thomas Ridley ( whose Treatise he stumbled upon in an ill houre for the maine of his cause : for he tels us page 116. that Chancellors are equall , or neere equall in time to Bishops ; as both the Law it selfe and stories shew . So that while the Remonstrant is over studious to prove the Antiquity of Chancellors , he overthrowes the Antiquity of Bishops : incidit in Scyllam , &c. As for that he spake of the Ecclesiae Ecdici , that they were the same in former times that our Chancellors are now : If there be more credit to be given to his Papias and Gothofred , then to the originall Canons themselves ( where they are called not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) we yeeld the cause . SECT . XI . HAving entered upon the differences betweene ours and former Bishops in point of jurisdiction : we descended into a discovery of this in three particulars . First , in the sole jurisdiction ours assume . Secondly , In that delegation they make of this power . Thirdly , in their execution of that jurisdiction : and here wee fall upon that unchristian and unnaturall proceeding of theirs , by oathes Ex officio ; which the Remonstrant is very angry at , and that hee may still approve himselfe the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or advocate of the worst causes , engages all his strength and wit for the maintaining of that , which hath beene the ruine of so many persons , the racke of so many consciences , the worst part of the Spanish Inquisition — quo siculi non invenere Tyranni Torm●ntum majus . To defend this , he cares not how he abuseth us , Mr. Calume , the Lawyes , the Scriptures ; So that he may but uphold this oath , that is now sinking under the weight of its owne guilt . First , he abuses Scriptures in producing , Exod. 22. 10 , 11. Num. 5. 19. as presidents for the oath . Truly sir , the onely text that would best have fitted your purpose , is that of Caiphas the High Priest adjudging our Lord in the name of the living God. Which how tyrannous an adjuration it was will easily appeare to any that consults interpreters upon that place . Your alledged texts helpe you not a whit ; that of Exod. 22. 10 , 11. speakes to this purpose : A man commits goods to his neighbour , they miscarry under his hand ; it is knowne he had them , how they miscarried it is not knowne ; in this case the man is to cleare his innocencie upon his oath : what is this to the compelling of a man in cases criminall to betray himselfe by an oath ? The other text Numb . 5. 19. availes you lesse , for if such an oath were now lawfull , then oathes Ex officio might be ministred in causes of death . It is knowne , Adultery was death by Moses his law ; and it is as well knowne that this Law of the water of jelousie was not morall , but judiciall , peculiar to the policie of the Jewes , and that upon particular causes , to wit , the invate jealousie of that Nation which could no otherwise be appeased . As for your instance out of Master Calvins Epistle , wherein you would make your reader beleeve that the Consistory of Geneva did give such an oath to Camperell whereby he and the rest should be tied to discover their purposes and intentions ; No such thing appeares in the Epistle . We finde indeed that two of that company having confes●ed the wickednesse wherewith they were charged , and the rest impudently denying it , Calvin thought it fit to make them confesse the truth upon oath . Corneus , who had confessed all before , pressing them not to forsweare themselves , prevailed so , as that they confessed all ; and the dancing also above what was charged upon them . All that we can collect is , that an oath was thought meet to be given , to make them confesse to Gods glory , what was proved by two witnesses , but that they were bound to confesse their intentions here is no syllable of it in the epistle . And therefore to what purpose you bring in this to warrant your oath Ex officio , unlesse it be for want of better instances , we know not . The Acts of Dioclesian Maxim. ( Let them be blamed that called him Maximilian : poore men cannot have their Presse wayted on , as your greatnesse may : ) You doe as good as passe by , so doe you the practice of the ancient times , and which is a greater jeofailer then our Maximillian ; and think it is enough to tell us , this hinders not but in case of a justly grounded suspition and complaint of a halfe approved offence , a man should manifest his innocency by oath . When as we produced these testimonies to shew that of old no party was put to his oath upon halfe proofe , nor proceeded against , but upon apparent testimonies of more witnesses then one , which might be conceived to be impartiall . Whereby it is manifest that the proceedings in judicature , for which you contend herein , differ from them of old . So hot is the man in the quarrell of his oath , that he strikes his own friends , to reach a blow at us ; charging his good friend Gregory with a plain contradiction ( for the words are his not ours ) in which he saith we contradict our selves . This is the poore all hee hath said in defence of the oath Ex Officio ; and could he have said more , it is like we should have heard it . If the reader desire to see further how abominable this oath is , how cryed downe by learned men , how contrary to the Word of God , the law of nature , to the civill and and Canon lawes , and to the statutes of our kingdome , he may finde it in that proud braying schismatick Master Parker ; * for so he is called in print . For our parts , we shall need to say no more about this oath , God in mercy to his afflicted having put into the hearts of our Worthies to condemne it to hell from whence it came . SECT . XII . OUr next Section the Remonstrant tels us , he is resolved to neglect : we should have as soone beleeved him , if he had said so of all the rest : we beleeve the neglect springs neither from a desire to ease us , nor to anger us ; but because he knowes not what to say against it . If he did intend to anger us he is much mistaken , for it pleaseth us well to heare him give so full a testimony , that secular imployments are unsuitable to the Ministers of the Gospell . Vnlesse in those two excepted cases of the extraordinary occasions and services of a Prince or State. And the composing of unkind quarrels of dissenting neighbours . We take what he grants us here so kindly , that we pardon his unfit comparison betweene S. Pauls Tent-making to supply his owne necessities , that he might not be burthensome to the Church , & the State imployment of our Bishops . And should in this Section fully have joyned hands with him , but that we must needs tell him at the parting , that had our Bishops never ingaged themselves in secular affaires ; but ex officio generali Charitatis and had beene so free from ambition as he would make the world beleeve they are ( neither should wee have beene so large in this Section , nor so aboundant in our processe , nor would the Parliament have made that provision against the secular imployment of Clergy men as they have lately done . SECT . XIII . THe best Charter pleaded for Episcopacy in former times was Ecclesiasticall constitution , and the favour of Princes . But our latter Bishops suspecting this would prove too weake and sandie a foundation to support a building of that transcending loftinesse , that they have studied to advance the Babell of Episcopacy unto , have indeavoured to under-pinne it with some texts of Scripture , that they might plead a Ius divinum for it : that the consciences of all might be tyed up from attempting to pull down their proud Fabricke ; but none of them is more confident in this plea then this Remonstrant , who is content that Bishops should for ever be hooted out of the Church , and be disclaimed as usurpers , if they claime any other power then what the Scripture gives them , especially bearing his cause upon Timothy , and Titus , and the Angels of the 7. Churches . Now because one grain of Scripture is of more efficacy & esteeme to faith , then whole volumes of humane testimonies ; we indeavoured to shew the impertinency of his allegations especially in those two instances . And concerning Timothy and Titus , we undertooke two things : First , that they were not Bishops ( in his sence ) but Evangelists , the companions of the Apostles in founding of Churches , or sent by them from place to place , but never setled in any fixed pastorall charge , and this wee shewed out of the story of the Acts , and the Epistles . The other was , that granting ex abundanti they had beene Bishops , yet they never exercised any such jurisdiction as ours doe . But because the great hinge of the controversie depends upon the instances of Timothy and Titus , before we come to answer our Remonstrant , we will promise these few propositions granted by most of the patrons of Episcopacy . First , Evangelists properly so called , were men extraordinarily imployed in preaching the Gospell without a setled residence upon any one charge . They were Comites , & Vicarii Apostolorum , Vice-Apostles , who had Curam Vicariam omnium Ecclesiarum , as the Apostles had Curam principalem . And did ( as Ambrose speakes ) Evangelizare sine Cathedra . Secondly , It is granted by our Remonstrant , and his appendant Scultetus , and many others . That Timothy was properly an Evangelist , while he travelled up and downe with the Apostles . Thirdly , It is expressely granted , that Timothy and Titus were no Bishops till after Pauls first being at Rome . That is after the end of the Histories of the Acts of the Apostles . Fourthly , The first Epistle to Timothy , and the Epistle to Titus , from whence all their grounds for Episcopacy are fetcht , were written by Paul before his first going to Rome . And this is acknowledged by all interpreters and Chronologers , that we have consulted with upon this point , Baronius himselfe affirming it . And the Remonstrants owne grounds will force him to acknowledge that the second Epistle to Timothy was also written at Pauls first being at Rome . For that second Epistle orders him to bring Marke alone with him , who by the Remonstrants account died five or six yeeres before Paul. Which could not have beene , if this Epistle were written at Pauls second comming to Rome . Estius also following Baronius gives good reason that the second Epistle to Timothy was written at Pauls first being at Rome . Fiftly , If Timothy and Titus were not Bishops when these Epistles were written unto them , then the maine grounds of Episcopacy by divine right sinke by their owne confession . Bishop Hall , in his Episcopacy by divine right , part 2. sect . 4. concludes thus peremptorily . That that if the especiall power of ordination and power of ruling and censuring Presbyters be not cleare in the Apostles charge to these two Bishops , the one of Creete , the other of Ephesus , I shall yeeld the cause , and confesse to want my sences . And it must needs be so ; for if Timothy were not then a Bishop , the Bishops power of charging Presbyters , of proving and examining Deacons , of rebuking Elders , and ruling over them , and his imposition of hands to ordaine Presbyters , &c. doe all faile . And Bishops in these can plead no succession to Timothy and Titus by these Scriptures more then other Presbyters may . For if they were not Bishops , then all these were done by them as extraordinary Officers , to which there were no successors . Sixtly , By the confession of the patrons of Episcopacy . It is not onely incongruous , but sacrilegious for a Minister to descend from a superiour order to an inferiour , according to the great Counsell of Chalcedon . Seventhly , In all that space of time from the end of the Acts of the Apostles untill the middle of Trajans raigne there is nothing certaine to be drawne out of Ecclesiasticall Authours about the affaires of the Church , thus writeth Iosephus Scaliger . Thus Tilenus when he was most Episcopall , and Eusebius long before them both saith , It cannot be easily shewed who were the true followers of the Apostles , no further then it can be gathered out of the Epistles of Paul. If the intelligent Reader weigh and consider these granted propositions , he may with ease see how the life-blood of Episcopacy from Timothy and Titus is drayn'd out : for if they were not Bishops till after Pauls first being at Rome , then not when the Epistles were written to them according to the fourth proposition , and then their cause failes : if any shall say they were Bishops before Pauls first being at Rome , contrary to the third proposition , then they make them Bishops , while by the story its apparent they were Evangelists , and did Evangelizare sine cathedra , and so clash against the second . In a word , the office of an Evangelist being a higher degree of Ministery then that of Bishops , make them Bishops when you please , you degrade them contrary to our sixt proposition : whiles the Remonstrant tryes to reconcile these things , we shall make further use of them in our scanning his allegations in this section , to which we now proceed . Where first the Reader may please to observe that the Remonstrant slideth by our marginall wherein we shewed the delineation that Eusebius makes of an Evangelist , and desired the Reader to judge thereby whether Timothy and Titus were not Evangelists . Onely he chargeth us with boldnesse for calling them so , though himselfe afterward confesseth it , page 98 : p. 100. But why must this be boldnesse ? Forsooth , because though Timothy be expressely called an Evangelist , yet there is no text , no not the least intimation , no not so much as the least ground of a conjecture , that Titus was an Evangelist . And if so , why doe you afterwards grant it ? But whether you doe or no , that it was so we have proved sufficiently in our answer . But let any indifferent man here consider the iniquity of the Remonstrant that challengeth us for calling Titus an Evangelist without a text for his name ; and yet thinks himselfe much wronged if wee grant him not , that Timothy and Titus and the Angels of the Church were Bishops , though he hath no text for the name , nor for the office ? Secondly , To our text , 2. Tim. 4. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , doe the worke of an Evangelist , saith he , rather intimates he was no Evangelist , then that he was : as if it were no more , then for the Remonstrant to desire his friend to doe the worke of a Secretary or Sollicitor for him , this implies he is neither . A very cleare glosse . Paul doth not here intreat , as we conceive , but charge . He speakes Imperative , not Impetrative . Compare this , not with the phrases of the Remonstrant , but with the phrases of the sam Apostle : and then judge . In the same Epistle 2 Chapt. 3. The same Apostle saith to the same person , endure hardnesse as a good souldier of Christ : doth that imply Timothy was no souldier of Christ , but onely so imployed for the time ? So againe , in the 15. verse of the same Chapter , when the Apostle saith , study to approve thy selfe a workman that needs not to be ashamed : doth this prove that Timothy was not a workeman but onely for the time ? When Paul saith , 1 Cor. 16. 13. quite your selves like men , doth that shew they were not men ? but onely so imployed for the time . How would the Remonstrant have triumphed over such a high peece of ridiculous learning in our answer ? had we turned off all these texts which use to be produced as proofes of Episcopall authority in Timothy and Titus with such a shift as this ? this doth not shew it was their worke , but onely they were so imployed for the time . Wee adde further , That when you acknowledge Timothy was to doe the office of an Evangelist ( for so your comparison of your friends doings the office of a Secretary warrants us to interpret you ) you must necessarily meane the extraordinary Evangelist ( for you scoffe page 94. at an ordinary Evangelist , as a new fiction ) which if so , then consider how absurd a thing it is to bid the inferior doe the worke of a superior . Superiours may be intreated to doe the worke of inferiours , because they come within the spheare of their activity , and comprehend either virtually or formally what the inferiours are to doe . As Apostles have power to doe all that Evangelists , Presbyters and Deacons can doe ; and Evangelists all that Presbyters , &c. but not è converso . Would it not be absurd to bid a Curate doe the office of a Bishop ? Or a Presbyter the office of an Apostle ? From all this we conclude , That when Paul bids Timothy , Doe the worke of an Evangelist : he bids him goe on with speed to execute his Vice-Apostolicall office in watering the severall Churches in Asia , &c. But saith he , if he were an Evangelist , he may be that , and a Bishop too . For wee doe but dreame when we distinguish of Evangelists . Truely sir , this dreame was the fruit of our reading , the fancy of the Authour of Episcopacies divine right , and there we finde our ordinary guifted Evangelist , under which name indeed we comprise all preachers . The other branch of that distinction ; Evangelists of extraordinary guifts and employments we finde in Scripture : and in this defence too , Truth is , their ordinary Evangelists are a new fiction . True , if we speake of the office of the Evangelists , but to give the title of Evangelist , according to the naturall signification of the word to ordinary preachers of the Gospell , is neither new nor fiction . Well , our argument we raise upon this ground is slight . Paul besought Timothy to abide still at Ephesus , 1. Tim. 1. 3. which had beene a needlesse importunity , if he had had the Episcopal charge of Ephesus , for then necessarily he must have resided there . But what 's his answer to this argument ? Nothing , onely saith it is slight . And that other argument brought from Timothies perpetuall moving from place to place , to prove that he was never fixed in an Episcopall station , is of as little force with him . The necessities of those times were such , as made even the most fixed Starres planetary , calling them frequently , from the places of their abode to those Services that were of most use for the successe of that great worke : yet so that after their err●nds fully dome they returned to their owne charge . Let us once professe as much confidence in our cause as the Remonstrant doth in his : We challenge him to shew in all the new Testament , any one that was appointed overseer of a particular Church , whose motion was as planetary as wee have shewed that of Timothy and Titus to have beene . Or if that faile , let him but shew that after Timothy or Titus went abroad upon the Service of the Churches , they did constantly or ordinarily returne either to Ephesus or Creet , and not to the places either of the Apostles present abode or appointment . And let them take Timothy and Titus as theirs , the patrons and presidents of Episcopacy . But till they can shew this , we must beleeve and affirme Timothy and Titus are Evangelists and no Bishops . Our next argument , from Act. 20. is but a Reed . Happy Remonstrant that deales with such impotent adversaries ; our first argument is slight , our second is of no force , our third is but a reed . Yet let us tell you , Haeret Lateri Lethalis Arundo . We affirmed , & upon certaine grounds , Acts 20. 4 : ( though the Remonstrant know it not ) that Timothy was with Paul at the meeting at Miletum , and from thence argued that had Timothy been B. of Ephesus , Paul would have given him a charge of feeding the flocke , and not the Elders , but would have given them direction for their carriage , at least , would not so have forgot himselfe as to call the Elders Bishops , before their Bishops face . In all which the Remonstrant saith , we goe upon a wrong ground : But sure sir , you are not so ignorant of our meaning , as by your questions you would seeme to be . We grant that these assembled persons , were Presbyters or Bishops in a parity , but neither in imparity , neither under Timothy nor any other Bishop . And to this purpose is our argument , from the want of directions to them as inferiour : yet notwithstanding the Remonstrant would be glad to picke what holes he can in our argument ; yet in part he grants what wee conclude : That they were all Bishops , onely with this addition , they were not meere Presbyters : but upon what ground ? The word it selfe imports they were Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And doth not the other word ▪ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 import as strongly they were Presbyters ? And the truth is they were Presbyters , whom the holy Ghost had made Bishops . Foreseeing how his owne words would snarle him , if he should grant them all Bishops , he must grant there were more Bishops then one in Ephesus ; he puts by that blow telling us that though they were sent for from Ephesus , yet they were not said to be all of Ephesus Thither they were called from divers parts , which seems to be implyed in these words ye all amongst whom , &c. This is but a poore evasion : For first the holy Ghost tels us , that Paul did now study expedition , and did decline Ephesus of purpose because he would not spend time in Assia : Now if Paul comming to Miletum had sent from thence to Ephesus , for the Elders of that Church , and they had sent for the rest of the Asian Churches , & Paul had stayed at Miletum till they could assemble to him , this would have beene such an expence of time , as Pauls haste to Ierusalem could not admit . Secondly , these Elders were all of one Church made by God , Bishops over one flocke ; and therefore may with most probability be affirmed to be the Elders of the Church of Ephesus . For the Apostles were alwaies exact in distinguishing Churches ; that of a City , they alwaies called a Church ; those of a Province , Churches ; Churches of Galatia , Churches of Macedonia , Churches of Iudea , &c. And that evasion which you use , page 12● ▪ that they might be all called one Church because united under one government , makes your cause farre worse . Because notwithstanding this union you speake of S. Iohn joyning them all together in one Epistle , 〈◊〉 1. calls them the Churches of Asia , and now here the Church ▪ Besides this , the Syriack translation ( thought by some to be almost as ancient as the Church of Antioch ) reads it , the Elders of the Church of Ephesus , not onely the Elders of the Church . Thirdly , you say they were Bishops or Superintendents of other Churches as well as Ephesus . But your selfe grants in this very page , that Timothy was not yet Bishop of Ephesus , and yet you all say that he was the first Bishop that ever Ephesus had . And that Ephesus was the Metropolis of all Asia . How then came the Daughter Churches to have Bishops before their mother as you call it . Lastly , that we may cut asunder the sinewes ( as your phrase is ) of your far-fetched answer , borrowed from Bishop Barlow and Andrewes . Whereas you lay the weight of it upon those words , Ye all among whom I have gone preaching the Kingdome of God. Collecting from thence , that there must be some Superintendents present from all those places , where he had travelled preaching ; Your selfe would quickly see the weakenesse of it , were you not pleading your owne cause . Should any man speaking with three or foure of the members of the late convocation , say , you all who had your hand in the late oath and Canons are in danger , &c. would it imply a presence of all the members of the Convocation because the speech concerned them all ? you know it would not . But if this doe not suffice , then tell us , Why must his ( All ) be meant as such superintendents as you plead for , except because they were called Bishops , and so you would raise an argument from the name to the thing ; which kind of argument if it may prevaile , you know your cause is lost . But the Acumen of this answer by which he makes account to cut asunder the sinewes of all our proofes , is this ; That it is more then probable , that Timothy and Titus were made Bishops after , Pauls first being at Rome . Truely sir , here you desert your old friend , Episc. by Div. right , ( out of whom you have hitherto borrowed a great part both of your matter and words . He saith , Timothy was at this time a Bishop and present , and Pauls assessor . You it seemes thinke otherwise . Agree as well as you can ; we will not set you at variance . We thinke hee was as much bishop before as after ; onely we desire to learne when , where , and by whom Timothy received his ordination to Episcopacy : The first Epistle to Timothy tels us of an ordination which he had received to another office . And Chronologers tell us , that that Epistle was writ many yeeres before Timothy was made Bishop of Ephesus , according to your computation : and we leave to you to tell us when , and where he received ordination to your Episcopall office : we have perused the Chronologicall tables of Lud●vicus Capellus , whom you call Iacob Cappellus , and have compared him with Ba oniu● , & from thence have learned that the Epistle was writ to him before Pauls going to Rome , but cannot learne from their Chronologie that ever he was made Bishops afterwards . The same answer ( say you ) may serve you for Titus ; and the same reply serves us : onely whereas you accuse us of guilt for our translating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( every variation from the ordinary translation must be guilty ) know that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will be translated things that remaine , when you and we are dead and rotten ▪ And if our translators did not render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so , yet so they render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Revil . 3. 2. Your second quarrell is to these words ( for a while ) to which because our margent allots the space of betweene five or six yeeres , you thinke you have us at a great advantage . If wee had said he tarried there but a little while , you might have had some what whereon to fasten ; but we spake of a while , not in respect of the shortnesse of his residence at Creet , but as it stands in opposition to residence for terme of life . He was left there but for a while . Ergo not fixed there during life . The end why the Apostle left Titus at Creet was to ordaine Elders or Bishops in every City , and not to be Bishop there himselfe . For as Chrysostome saith , Paul would not commit the whole Iland to one man , but would have every man appointed to his charge and Cure. For so he knew his labour would be the lighter , and the people that were under him would be governed with the greater diligence . For the Teacher should not be troubled with the government of many Churches , but onely intend one , and study for to adorne that . Therefore this was Titus his worke , not to be Bishop in Creet himselfe , but to ordaine Elders in every City , which was an office above that of a Bishop . For Creet was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; Now you know sir , that i● is above the worke of an ordinary Bishop to plant and erect Churches to their due frame , in an hundred Citties . Bishops are given to particular Churches when they are framed to keepe them in the Apostolicall truth , not to lay foundations , or to exaessifie some imperfect beginnings . This service Titus did in Creet , ( the same worke which the Apostle did when he visited the Churches of Asia , Acts 14. 23. ) which being finished , the same Apostolicall power which sent him thither , removed him thence againe for the service of other Churches , as we have formerly shewed from Scripture . And though the Remonstrant tels us this calling away could no whit have impeached the truth of his Episcopacy ; We must crave leave to tell him , that though it may be one journey upon some extraordinary Church service might consist with such a fixed station as Episcopacy is . Yet an ordinary frequent course of jornying , such as Titus his was cannot ; unlesse he will grant that Timothy might be a Bishop and an Evangelist at the same time . But this is contrary to the Remonstrants one definition of an Evangelist , page 94. And therefore he chus●th rather to say Timothy was first an Evangelist when he travelled abroad , and afterward a Bishop when he setled at home . This is more absurd then the former . For if ever Titus were a Bishop ; it was then when Paul left him in Creet to ordaine Elders in every City : And after that time was the greatest part of his travels , as we have shewed in our answer . All these journeys did Titus make after he was left in Creet , nor doe we finde any where record of his returne thither : Therefore according to this rule , Titus should be first a Bishop , and afterwards an Evangelist . Or if the greatest part of Titus his travels had beene before his delegation to Creet , yet it had beene no lesse absurd to say that afterwards he did descend from the degree of an Evangelist to the station of Episcopacy . We hope the Remonstrant will not deny but an Evangelist was as farre above a Bishop as any Bishop can fancy himselfe to be above a Presbyter . And if for a Bishop to quit his Episcopacy and suffer himselfe to be reduced to the ranke of a meere Presbyter , be a crime so hainous , so odious , that it had beene much better to have beene unborne then to live to give so hainous a scandall to Gods Church , and so deepe a wound to his holy truth and ordinances , a river , an ocean can neither drowne nor wash off the offence . What is it to reduce an Evangelist to the forme of a Bishop ? We had granted that some Fathers call Timothy and Titus Bishops ; the Remonstrant replies , some , nay all , Be it so , as long as himselfe hath granted the Fathers did use the titles of Bishops and Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , But there is a Cloud of witnesses of much antiquity which avers Timothy and Titus to have liv●d and died Bishop of Ephesus & Creet . But this cloud will soone blow over . The Magdeburgenses tell us , That there is nothing expressely or certainely delivered by any approved writer to shew how , or how long Timothy was Doctour or Governour of the Church of Ephesus . Therefore we cannot certainely affirme that he suffered martyrdome at Ephesus , being stoned to death for reproving the idolatry of the Ephesians at the porch of Dian●s Temple , which yet the most have reported . Let the Reader further know that his cloud of witnesses , who averre Timothy and Titus to be Bishops , have borrowed their testimonies from Eusebius , of whom Scaliger saith , and Doctor Raynolds approves of it . That he read ancient Histories parum attente , which they prove by many instances . And all that Eusebius saith , is onely sic scribitur . It is so reported . But from whence had he this History ? even from Clemens fabulous , and Hegesippus not exstant . And therefore that which is answered by our learned Divines concerning Peters being at Rome and dying there ( which is also recorded by Eusebius ) That because Eusebiu● had it from Papias an Author of little esteeme : hence they thinke it a sufficient argument to deny the truth of the History , though asserted by never so many Authours relying upon one of so little credit . The same answer will fully serve to all the authorities produced for Timothies and Titus being Bishops from antiquity . And that which Thucidides saith of the ancient Greeke Historia●s , may as truely be said of Eusebius Irenaeus and others : Quae a majoribus acceperant Posteri , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 securi examinis suis item posteris tradiderunt . We further shewed how the Fathers called Timothy and Titus Bishops viz. in the same sence which learned D. Raynolds saies , they also used to call the Apostles Bishops , even in a generall signification , because they did attend that Chu●ch for a time . &c. This the Remonstrant will not give us leave to doe , but without his leave we shall make it good . We say therefore further : That when the Apostles or Evangelists ( perhaps Iames at Hierusalem , Timothy at Ephesus , Titus at Creet ) did stay longer at one Church , and exercised such a power , as the Bishops in succeeding ages did aspire unto : when the Fathers would set forth this power of an Apostle or Evangelists long residing in one Church , they ( labouring to doe it in a famil●ar way ) did similitudinarily call them Bishops , and sometimes Archbishops or Patriarcks , which all confesse were offices not heard of in the Apostles times ; not meaning they were so formally , but eminently : neither could they call them so properly , for the power they exercised was in them formally Apostolicall or Evangelicall , reaching not only to the Church where then they resided , but to all neighbouring and bordering Churches , as farre as was possible for them to oversee , or the occasions of the Church did require ; they having no bounded Diocesses , but had the care of all the Churches . In this sence they might call them so , but for either an Apostle or Evangelist to be ordained a Bishop or Presbyter had beene both unnecessary and absurd : unnecessary , because the higher degree includes the inferiour eminently , though not formally ; and absurd to descend lower , that after they had been Apostolically or Evangelically employed in taking care of all the Churches , they should be ordained to a worke which should so limit them , as to make them lesse usefull to the Church of God. But , saith he , all this discourse is needlesse , whether Timothy or Titus were Evangelists or no ; sure we are , here they stand for persons charged with those offices and cares which are delivered to the ordinary Church-governours in all succeeding generations : Here first you give us no ground of your surenesse , nor can give us any other then what may be said of the Apostles , for they also stand as persons charged , &c. Secondly , it is true the substance of those cares and offices , which belong to Apostles and Evangelists is transmitted to the ordinary Church-governours , as farre as is necessary for the edification of the Church , else the Lord had not sufficiently provided for his Church : all the question is , whether these Church-governours are by way of Aristocracy the common Councell of Presbyters , or by way of Monarchy Diocesan Bishops ? Now unlesse you prove that Timothy and Titus were ordinary officers ( or as Doctor Hall cals them , Diocesan Bishops ) to whom as to individuall persons such care and offices were individually intrusted , you will never out of Timothy and Titus defend Diocesan Bishops . Thirdly , though the substance of these cares and offices were to be transmitted to ordinary Church-governours , yet they are not transmitted in that eminency or personall height , in which they were in the Apostles and Evangelists : an Apostle where ever he lived might governe and command all Evangelists , all Presbyters &c. an Evangelist might governe all Presbyters , &c. but no Presbyter or Bishop might command others , onely the common Councel of Presbyters may charge any or many Presbyters , as occasion shall require . In a word , these ordinary Church-governours succeed the extraordinary officers , not in the same line and degree , as one brother dying , another succeeds him in the inheritance ; but as men of an other order , and in a different line . Let the Remonstrant therefore take Timothy and Titus as he findes them , that is , Evangelists , men of extraordinary dignity and authority in the Church of Christ : Let him with his first confidence maintaine that our Bishops challenge no other spirituall power then was delegated to them . We shall upon better grounds maintaine with better confidence , that if they chalenge the same , they ought to be disclaimed for usurpers . But much more challenging such a power as was never exercised by Timothy and Titus , as we demonstrated in our former answer in severall instances ; which are so commonly knowne as our Remonstrant is ashamed to deny them : onely plaies them off , partly with his old shift , the abuse of the person , not of the Calling . But we beseech you sir , tell us whether these persons doe not perpetrate these abuses ( though by their owne vice , yet ) by vertue of their place and Callings . Partly by retorting questions upon us ; when , or where did our Bishops challenge to ordaine alone ; or to governe alone ? we have shewed you when and where already , when or where did our Bishops challenge power to passe a rough and unbeseeming rebuke upon an Elder ? Sure your owne conscience can tell that hath taught you to apply that to an Elder in office which we onely spake ( in Scripture phrase ) of an Elder in generall . It was your guilt , not our ignorance that turned it to an Elder in office . Where did , say you , our Bishops give Commission to Chancellors , Commissaries , &c. to rayle upon Presbyters ; to accuse them without just ground , &c. where have not Chancellors done so ? and what power have they but by Bishops Commission to meddle with any thing in Church affaires ? And where is the Bishop that hath forbid it them ? Qui non prohibet facit . Onely there is one practice of our Bishops he is something more laborious to justifie : That is , their casting out unconforming brethren , commonly knowne in their Court language by the name of schismatickes and heretickes , which Timothy and Titus never did , nor had any such power delegated to them ; heretickes indeed the Apostles gave them power to reject : but wee had hoped the refusall of the use of a ceremony should never have beene equalized in the punishment either to heresie or schisme . But the Remonstrant hath found Scripture for it . Loth not the Apostle wish that they were cut off that trouble you ? but sure it is one thing to wish men cut off by God , and another thing to cut them off by the censure of the Church . Besides this was written to the Galatians ; and they that troubled them , were such as maintained doctrines against the foundation , i. Justification by workes of the Law , &c. which we thinke are very neere of kinne to heretickes . I am sure farre above the crime of the Remonstrants unconforming brethren , who are unsetled in points of a meane difference , ( which their usuall language knowes by no better termes then of schismatickes and factious ) yet even such have fallen under the heaviest censures of suspension , excommunication , deprivation , &c. which the Remonstrant unable to deny would justifie , which when he shall be able to doe , he may do something towards the patronizing of Bishops . But in the meane time let him not say they are our owne ill raised suggestions , but their owne ill assumed and worse mannaged authority , that makes them feare to be disclaimed as usurpers . The second Scripture ground which the Remonstrant is ambitious to draw in for the support of his Episcopall cause , is the instance of the Angels of the seven Churches , which because it is locus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and cried up as argumentum verè Achilleum , we did on purpose inlarge our selves about it . And for our paines the Remonstrant , as if all learning and acutenesse were lockt up in his breast ( Narcissus like in love with his owne shadow ) professeth that this peece of the taske fell unhappily upon some dull and tedious hand , &c. Which if it be so , it will redound the more to the Remonstrants discredit , when it shall appeare that he is so shamefully foiled and wounded by so dull an adversary . He objects Colemorts oft sod , when he cannot but know that the whole substance of his owne booke is borrowed from Bishop Bilson and Doctor Downham . And that there is nothing in this discourse about the Angels , but either it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . But before we come to answer our Remonstrants particulars , we will premise something in generall about these Asian Angels . It may seeme strange that the defenders of Episcopacy lay so much weight of argument upon the word or appellation of Angell ; which themselves know to be a title not impropriated to the chiefe Ministers of the Church , but common to all that bring the glad tidings of the Gospell ; yea to all the messengers of the Lord of Hosts . We conceive there are 2. maine reasons that induce them to insist so much on this : First they finde it the most easie way of avoyding the dint of all the Arguments brought against them out of the History of the Acts and Epistles , by placing one above the rest of the Presbyters in the period of the Apostles times . And so finding in the Revelation ( which was written the last of all the parts of the Scripture , except peradventure the Gospell written by the same penne ) an expression which may seeme to favour their cause , they improve it to the utmost . Partly because hereby they evade all our arguments which we bring out of the Scripture . Doe we prove out of the 20. of Acts , Presbyters and Bishops to be all one ? Doe we prove the Bishops described in Timothy and Titus to be one and the same in name and office with a Presbyter ? Doe we prove that their Churches were all governed Communi Consilio Presbyterorum ? All shall be granted us , and yet the Divine right of Episcopacy be still held up by this sleight , by telling us , that before the Apostles left the earth they made over their authority to some prime men . Demand where this is extant ? The Angels of the seven Churches are pleaded presently . And partly because we have no other Scripture of latter inspiration and edition , whereby to prove the contrary . Another inducement is , because the writers neere the Apostles times make frequent mention of a Bishop , and as they would have us beleeve , some waies distinguished from a Presbyter . Some of them mentioning the very men that were the Angels of these Churches ; as Polycarpus of Smyrna & Ignatius ( who is said to have beene martyred within twelve yeeres after the Revelation was written , ) wrote letters to the severall Churches , wherein he mentioneth their Bishops distinct from their Presbyters . Now ( saith the author of Episcopacy by divine right ) the Apostles immediate successors could best tell what they next before them did . Who can better tell a mans pace then he that followes him close at heeles ? And this hath so plausib●e a shew , that all are condemned as blind , or wilfull , who will either doubt that Episcopacy was of Apostolicall institution , or thinke that the Church of Christ , should in so short a time deviate from the institution of the Apostles . But now how insufficient a ground this is for the raising up of so mighty a Fabricke as Episcopacy by Divine right , or Apostolicall institution wee desire the Reader to judge by that that followes . First , the thing they lay as their foundation is a meere metaphoricall word , and such as is ordinarily applied to Presbyters in common . Secondly , the Penman of those seven Epistles did never in them nor in any of his other writings so much as use the name of Bishop , he names Presbyters frequently ; especially in this booke , yea where he would set out the office of those that are neerest to the throne of Christ in his Church , Revel . 4. And whereas in Saint Iohns daies some new expressions were used in the Christian Church , which were not in Scripture : As the Christian Sabbath began to be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Christ himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Now both these are found in the writings of S. Iohn ; and it is strange to us that the Apostle should mention a new phrase , and not mention a new office erected in the Church , as you would make us beleeve . Neither thirdly , in any of his writings the least intimation of superiority of one Presbyter over another , save onely where he names Diotrephes as one ambitiously affecting such a Primacy . Nor is there any one word in these Epistles whence an Episcopall authority may be collected . So that did not the testimonies that lived soone after make the argument plausible , it would appeare ridiculous . But alas the suffrage of all the writers in the world is infinitely unable to command an Act of Divine faith without which divine right cannot be apprehended . Suppose we were as verily perswaded that Ignatius wrote the Epistles which goe under his name ( which yet we have just cause to doubt of , as knowing that many learned men reject a great part of them , and some all ) as we can be perswaded that Tully wrote his : All this can perswade no further that the Apostles ordained and appointed Bishops as their successors , but onely by a humane faith : but neither is that so . The most immediate and unquestionable successors of the Apostles give cleare evidence to the contrary . It is granted on all sides that there is no peece of antiquity that deserves more esteeme then the Epistle of Clement , lately brought to light by the industry and labour of that learned Gentleman Master Patricke Young. And in that Epistle Bishops and Presbyters are all one , as appeares by what followes : The occasion of that Epistle seemes to be a new sedition raysed by the Corinthians against their Presbyters , page 57. 58. ( not as Bishop Hall saies , the continuation of the schismes amongst them in the Apostles daies : ) Clemens to remove their present sedition tels them how God hath alwaies appointed severall orders in his Church , which must not be confounded ; first , telling them how it was in the Jewish Church ; then for the times of the Gospell , tels them , that Christ sent his Apostles through Countries and Cities , in which they constituted the first fruits ( or the chiefe of them ) unto Bishops and Deacons , for them who should beleeve afterward , p. 54. 55. Those whom hee calls there Bishops afterwards throughout the Epistle he cals Presbyters , pa. 58 , 62 , 69. All which places doe evidently convince that in Clement his judgement , the Apostle appointed but two officers ( that is Bishops and Deacons ) to bring men to beleeve : Because when he had reckoned up three orders appointed by God among the Jewes , High-priests , Priests , and Levites , comming to recite orders appointed by the Apostles under the Gospell , hee doth mention onely Bishops and Deacons : and those Bishops which at first he opposeth to Deacons , ever after he cals Presbyters . And here we cannot but wonder at the strange boldnesse of the author of Epis. by divine right , who hath endevoured to wire-draw this Author ( so much magnified by him ) to maintaine his Prelaticall Episcopacy : and that both by foysting in the word withall into this translation which is not in the Text , that the Reader might be seduced to beleeve that the offices of Episcopacy and Presbytery were two different offices . And also by willingly misunderstanding Clement his phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : for by the word ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) he would have us understand Episcopacy as distinct from Presbyterie : whereas the whole series of the Epistle evidently proves that the word Episcopus & Presbyter are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : And so also by the word ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) hee would have us to understand that the contention then in Corinth was only about the name : whereas it appeares by the Epistle it selfe , that the controversie was not about the name , but dignity of Episcopacy : for it was about the deposition of their godly Presbyters , p. 57 , 58. And the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is thus interpreted by Beza Eph. 1. 21. Phil. 2. 9. & Heb. 1. 4. and Mead in Apoc. 11. p. 156. In which places 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rendred by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , so here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . By all this we see that the most genuine and neerest successor of the Apostles knew no such difference . Lastly , it is worth our observation , that the same writers who ( as they say ) testifie that these 7. Angels were in a superiour degree to Presbyters , do likewise affirm that the Apostle Iohn sate many yeeres B. of Ephesus , and was the Metropolitan of all Asia , in which we suppose the Remonstrant will allow his readers a liberty of beleeving him , and allow us a liberty to tell him that D Whitakers saith , Patres cum Iacobum Episcopum vocant aut etiam Petrum , non propriè sumunt Episcopi nomen , sed vocant eos Episcopos illarum Ecclesiarum in quibus aliquamdin commorati sunt . And in the same place , Et si propriè de Episcopo loquatur , absurdum est Apostolos suisse Episcopos . Nam qui propriè Episcopus est , is Apostolous non potest esse ▪ quia Episcopus est unius tantum Ecclesiae . At Apostoli plurium Ecclesiarum fundatores & inspectores erant . And againe , Hoc enim non mul●um distat ab insaniâ , dicere Petrum fuisse propriè Episcopum , out reliquos Apostolos . Now we returne to our Remonstrant . Our answer to his objection from the Angels was : That the word Angell ▪ is to be taken collectively , not individually , which he cals , pro more suo , a shift and a conceit which no wise man can ever beleeve . And yet he could not but take notice that we alleaged Austin , Gregory , Fulke , Perkins , Fox , Brightman , Mede , and divers others for this interpretation : which will make the world to accuse him for want of wisdome , for calling the wisedome of such men into question . Before he addresseth himself to answer our reasons , he propounds two queres . 1. If the interest be common and equally appertaining to all , why should one be singled out above the rest ? A very dull question , which is indeed a very begging of the cause . For the question in agitation is , whether when Christ writes to the 7. Angels , he meant to single out 7. individuall persons above the rest , or else writes to the 7. Angels collectively meaning all the Angels that were in all the Churches . The second question is as dull as the first . If you will yeeld the person to be such as had more then others , a right in the administration of all , it is that weseeke for . But he knew we would not yield it . And therefore we may justly use his owne words , that those questions are tedious and might well have beene spared . And so also the instances of a letter indorsed from the Lords of the Councell to the Bishop of Durham , concerning some affaires of the whole Clergy of his Diocesse : No man will deny but that the Bishop of Durham is an individuall Bishop . This example supposeth the Angell about whom we dispute to be meant individually , which you know is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 betweene you and us . Quid haec ad Rhombum ? We will give you instances more suitable to the purpose . Suppose one in Christs time , or his Apostles had indorsed a letter to the Chiefe-priest concerning the affaires of the Sanhedrim , and another letter to the chiefe Ruler of the Synagogue concerning the affaires of the Synagogue , and another letter to the Captaine of the Temple , concerning the businesse of the Temple ; could any man imagine but that these indorsments must necessarily be understood collectively ? considering there were more Chiefe-priests then one in Ierusalem , Luke 22. 4. and more chiefe Rulers of the Synagogue then one , Math. 19. 18. compared with Acts 18. 8. 17. And more Captaines of the Temple then one , Acts 4 ▪ 1. compared with Luke the ●2 . 4. and so also semblably more Angels and Ministers in the seven Churches then seven . But stay sir , we hope you are not of opinion , that any of your Asian Bishops had as much spirituall and temporall power as the Lord Bishop of Salisbury , and the Lord Bishop and Palatine of Durham , Cave dixeris . At last you come to our proofes , which you scoffingly call invincible . You should have done better to have called them irrefragable , like your good friends irrefragable propositions . Our first argument is drawne from the Epistle to Thyatira , Revel . 2. 24. But I say unto you ( in the plurall number , not unto thee in the singular ) and unto the rest in Thyatira . Here is a plaine distinction betweene the Governours , and the governed . And the Governours in the plurall number ; which apparently proves that the Angell is collective . The Remonstrant hath no way to put this off , but by a pittifull shift to use his owne words . He tels us he hath found a better coppy ; which is a very unhappy and unbecoming expression , apt to make ignorant people doubt of the originall text , and so in time rather to deny the Divinity of the Scriptures , then of Episcopacy . But this better coppy is but lately searcht into , for we finde that Bishop Hall , in his Episcopacy by Divine right , reads it as we doe . But I say unto you , and the rest in Thyatira . But what is this better Coppy ? It is a Manuscript written by the hand of Teela ; which if it be no truer then Itinerarium Pauli & Teclae , it will have little credit among the Learned . But that which makes you to magnifie it the more , is that doughty argument which it helped you to against us , concerning the same Church of ●hyatira , in which the Angell is charged for suffering that woman Iezabel . And now you say , in that memorable copy of Tecla , it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which you interpret , thy wife Iczebel . And just as Archimedes , you come with an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , And call upon us to blush for shame . What say you in a different character , shall we thinke she was wife to the whole company or to one Bishop alone ? But for our part we doe thinke you have more cause to blush for making such a Translation , and rather then you will not prove the Angell of Thyatira to be an individuall Bishop , you will un-Angell him , and make him an other Ahab , to marry a cursed Iezebel . We wonder that never any protestant writer had the wit to bring this text against the papists to prove the lawfulnesse of Priests marriages ; no not Doctor Hall himselfe in his defence of the married Clergy . Give us leave here to use your owne words , page 108. Forbeare Reader if you can , to smile at this curious subtilty , what Cabalisme have we here ? judge Reader what to expect of so deepe speculations . And also to repeate what you say , page 110. If you please your selfe with this new subtilty it is well from us you have no cause to expect an answer : it can neither draw our assent , nor merit our confutation . We beleeve it to be as true that Iezebel was the wife of the Bishop of Thyatira , as that Tecla was the wife of Paul. But to returne to the former text : Let any judicious reader survey the latter part of the 23. verse ( which is the verse before that out of which we bring our reason ) there he shall finde Christ speaking to the Church of Thyatira , saith : And I will give to every one of you ( in the plurall number . ) And then followes , But I say unto you and the rest in Thyatira . And he will not onely con●esse that though the 24. verse should faile , yet the 23. would prove the same thing , as effectually as the 24. but also will grant that from the co●●erence it is evident that the old copies are better then that which this Remonstrant cals the better coppy of Tecla . But besides this text , let the Reader cast his eye upon what Christ saith to the Angell of the Church of Smyrna , Revel . 2. 10. feare none of those things which thou shalt suffer , behold the divell shall cast some of you into prison , ( of you in the plurall number : ) that yee may be tryed ( yee in the plurall number ) and you ( in the plurall againe ) shall have tribulation ten daies ; be thou faithfull unto the death , and I will give thee a Crowne of life . Observe here how our Saviour Christ changeth the number . Be thou faithfull . And the divell shall cast some of you , &c. to shew unto us , that the Angell is not meant of one singular person , but of all the whole company of Presbyters that were in Smyrna . So also Christ writing to the Angell of the Church of Pergamus saith , verse 13. in the beginning of the verse , I know thy workes , in the singular number ; but in the latter end , who was slaine among you , in the plurall number . We expect that the Remonstrant will when best at leasure bring tidings of another better coppy , to avoyd the dint of these texts that doe as we thinke demonstratively prove the thing in question . Our second argument is drawne from the like phrases even in this very booke of the Revelation , where it is usuall to expresse a company under one singular person ; as the civill state of Rome , as opposite to Christ , is called a beast with ten hornes : and the Ecclesiasticall state Antichristian , is called , the whore of Babylon . To which you answer . 1. That if it be thus in visions and Emblematicall representations , must it needs be so in plaine narrations ? But good sir consider , this very thing we are about was seene by Saint Iohn in a vision : and you your selfe confesse in the next page , that the word Angell is metaphoricall . How then is it a plaine narration ? Secondly , you say because it is so in one phrase of speech , must it be so in all ? We answer , that this argument was not brought to prove that the word Angell must needs be taken collectively , but onely that it might be so taken , and that it was the likeliest interpretation , especially considering what was added out of Master Mede ( who was better skilled in the meaning of the Revelation then your selfe ) that the word Angell is commonly ( if not alwaies ) in the Revelation taken collectively . Thus the seven Angels that blew the seven trumpets , and the seven Angels that poured out the seven vials , are not literally to be taken , but Synecdochically , you reply . Perhaps so , but then the Synecdoche lies in the seven , not in the Angels , and so you grant the word Angell to be metaphoricall , but we are never a whit the neerer to our imagined Synecdoche . But this is but a meere fallacy . Let but the reader expect , till we make good our fourth reason , and then we shall see our imagined Synecdoche made reall . For the present it is sufficient , that it is the ordinary custome of the holy Ghost in the Revelation , by Angell to meane Angels ; by seven Angels , not seven individually , but collectively . But whether the Synecdoche be in the word seven , or in the word Angel , that is nothing to the purpose in hand . Our third argument , is drawne from the word Angell , which is a common name to all the Ministers and messengers , &c. And surely had Christ intended to point out some one individuall person by the Angell , he would have used some distinguishing name to set him out by : he would have called him Rector , or President , or Superintendent ; but calling him by a name common to all Ministers , why should we thinke that there should be any thing spoken to him that doth not asmuch concerne all the rest who are Angels as well as he ? All that you answer is , that Christ knew this well enough , and if he had meant it , had it not beene as easie to have mentioned many as one ? But here wee humbly desire the Reader to consider two things . 1. The unreasonablenesse of this answer : we brought three reasons why Christ when he meant divers Angels , spake in the singular number Angell , not Angels . These reasons the Remonstrant passeth over with a scorne , ( the commonest , safest , surest way of answering , the Remonstrant hath : ) and yet he demands page 104. why should one be singled ou● above all , if the interest be common ? And here , why doth not Christ say to the Angels ? But let ●im first answer our Therefores , and wee will quickly answer his Wherefores . Secondly , how justly we may retort this answer upon the Remonstrant and say , If Christ had meant by the seven Angels seven Bishops , how easie had it beene for him to have written to the Bishop of Ephesus ( as he was lately called at the Spittle by a Bishop ) to the Bish. of Smyrna , instead of the Angell of Ephesus , and the Angell of Smyrna . But this Christ doth not doe , and not onely so , but Saint Iohn also in all his bookes makes not any mention of the name Bishop . And therefore it seemeth strange to us that Episcopacy by divine right should be fetched out of his writings . I but saith the Remonstrant , it is written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And therefore the denoted person must needs be singular . For surely you cannot say that all the Presbyters at Eph●sus were one Angell . Yes sir , wee can say they were all one Angell collectively , though not individually And we can shew you where Christ speaketh in the singular number , and joyneth the Article with it also , and yet meaneth Synecdochically more , for one , as Iohn 4. 37. Iohn 10. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which must be all meant indefinitely , not individually . You suppose againe , that if that Christ had said , To the Starre of Ephesus , no body would have construed it but of one eminent person . But herein also you are much mistaken , for the word Starre is as common a name to all Ministers as the word Angell , as we have shewed in our answer . The fourth argument you account ridiculous , and in a proud scorne passe it over with a jeere . But you will see in the conclusion you your selfe to be the ridiculum caput , not we . Our argument stands thus : Our Saviour saith , The seven Candlestickes which thou sawest are the seven Churches : but he doth not say , the seven starres are the seven Angels of the same Churches . But the Angels of the seven Churches omitting not without mystery the number of the Angels , least wee should understand by Angell one Minister alone , and not a company . To omit your scoffes , you answer it is plaine that every Church hath his Angell mentioned , and there being seven Chruches , how many Angels ( I beseech you ) are there ? This answer is as easily blowne away , as the wind blowes away chaffe . It is true , every Church hath his Angell mentioned , but whether Angell individually or Angell collectively , that is still the question , and therefore for ought you say , though there were but seven Churches , there might be seven , and seven times seven Angels in those Churches . But you intimate that Christ saith , the 7. starres , though he doth not say the seven Angels . Now here give us leave to put our Remonstrant in mind of the imagined Syneedoche . For we justly conceive that these words , The seven Starres are the Angels , are figurative , and that there are two figures in them , a metaphor in the word Starre and Angell , and a Synecdoche in the word seven . For we doe not thinke that the seven Starres signifie seven individuall Angels , for then indeed the reader might have justly smiled at our curious speculation , but we thinke them to be taken collectively . Thus Revil . 8. 2. Iohn saw seven Angels which stood before God , by which seven Angels Doctor Reynolds doth not understand seven individuall Angels , but by a Synecdoche all the Angels . For there are no seven particular Angels that doe stand before God , but all doe so , Dan. 7. The words of Doctor Reynolds are these , Quare cum commune sit omnibus electis Angelis Dei stare coram throno , videtur nomine septem Angelorum significari universos Angelos Dei Item , Ita numero septenario saepe significari omnes , numeruni saltem infinitum numero finito docent , septem columnae Pro. 9. septem pastores Math. 5. septem oculi Zach. 3. sed imprimis in istis mysteriis Apocalypseos , septem Candelabra , septem lampades , septem phyaelae , septem plagae . And now let the Reader judge whether this argument be so ridiculous as the mocking Remonstrant would make it . But that you may see how dull the answerer himselfe , is whilst he accuseth others of dulnesse let us a little consider what pittifull shifts he useth in his answer to our last reason . Our last argument is ; Though but one Angell be mentioned in the forefront , yet it is evident the Epistles themselves are dedicated to all the Angels and Ministers in every Church , and to the Churches themselves : and if unto the whole Church , much more unto the Presbyters of that Church . To this you answer . 1. By granting the argument which is to grant the cause , as will appeare to any judicious Reader : For the reason doth not onely say that the whole Church is concerned in the Epistles , and spoken unto in them , but that they are dedicated to all the Ministers as well as one , & to all the Churches as well as to the Angels , as appeares Reuel . 1. 11. send it to the seven Churches : and also by the Epiphonema of every Epistle , he that hath an eare to heare , let him heare what the Spirit saith to the Churches , not onely concerning the Churches , but to the Churches . But then you argue secondly , if every Epistle be written to all the Churches , then we must say that every of these seven Angels must be the whole company of all the seven Churches , which were a foule nonsence . But you must understand that though every Epistle be written to all the Churches , yet not eodem modo . As for example ; the Epistle to Ephesus was written primariò , proprie & formaliter to the Church of Ephesus , but to the other Churches onely , reflèxive & per modum exempli . And therefore we returne your nonsence upon your selfe . For we doe not confound the Angels and the Churches ( we know there is a distinction betweene the Starres and the Candlestickes ) but we affirme that the Epistles are written to the Churches as well as to the Angels , and to all the Angels as well as to any one . Thirdly , you say we might have saved the labour both of Ausbertus and the rest of our Authours , and our owne . But surely unlesse you meant to yeeld the cause , you would never say so . For we proved out of Ausbertus , that according to his judgement , by Angell is meant the whole Church . And out of Perkins , Brightman , Fulke , Fox , Austin , Gregory , Primasius , Hamo , Beda , Richard , Thomas , &c. That the word Angell is to be taken not individually , but collectively . And further we shewed that in these seven Epistles where one person is singled out and spoken unto in particular , either by way of praise or dispraise ; that such places are not to be understood of one individuall person , but of the whole company of the Ministers in all things equall with that our Angell : which are proved by such reasons , which because you knew not how to answer , you say we might have saved our labour ; and in that indeed we should have saved your credit , but have done the cause much prejudice . Lastly , you say satis Magisterialiter ( for you prove it not ) That there are such particularities both of commendations and exceptions in the body of the severall Epistles as cannot but have relation to those severall overseers to whom they were indorsed , as you have elsewhere specified . But whom you are , and where this is specified you refuse to tell us . Onely you put us to answer : Had all the Presbyters of Ephesus lost their first love ? Had each of them tried the false Apostles ? Had all those of Sardis a name to live and were dead ? Were all the Laodicean Ministers of one temper ? You say , no doubt it was otherwise . But this is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . We say , No doubt that not onely the Presbyters of Ephesus , Sardis , Laodicea , but that the whole Church had lost their first love , and were become lukewarme , and had a name to live and were dead , ( wee say all that is genera singulorum , not singula generum ) and this wee prove . Because the punishment threatned by Christ is threatned not onely against that one Angell , but against all the Church , Reuel . 2. 5. I will remove thy Candlesticke . Revel . 2. 16. 24. Now we have no warrant in the word of God to thinke that God would remove his Gospell from a Church , because one Angell in that Church hath lost his first love , when all the other , and the whole Church also are ●ervent and zealous in their love to Christ. Or that God would spue out a whole Church out of his mouth , for the lukewarmenesse of one man , when the Church it selfe and all the other Ministers are zealous . This is the reason that makes us beleeve that though one Angell be sometimes spoken unto in particular , yet it must necessarily be understood in a collective sence , not in an individuall sence , which we hinted in our answer . But the Remonstrant comes with his Index expurgatorius , and answereth us onely with a Deleatur . And thus he serves us also in the following reasons , why Christ did not write To the Angels in the plurall number ; but To the Angell in the singular . And this he doth throughout the whole booke , passing by unanswered those things which are most materiall . Vas vitreum lambens , pultem non attingens . As for that tedious discourse that followeth in foure leaves ( about our overliberall concession , that , suppose the word Angell be meant Individually , yet it made nothing for the upholding of a Dioce san Bishop with sole power of ordination , and jurisdiction , as a distinct order superiour to Presbyters ) we will be very briefe in our answer to it , to prevent surfet , and because it is more then we need have yeelded , and also because so little is said of it to the purpose by this Remonstrant . And here let the Reader observe : 1. That of the foure Authors cited in the upholding of the individuall Angel , Doctor Fulke is falsely alleged , and the other three , Master Beza , Doctor Raynolds and Pareus , though they interpret the word Angell 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , for one singular person , yet we are sure none of them held Episcopacy by divine right . For D. Raynolds his letters to S. Francis Knowles now in print will witnesse : and for Beza and Pareus , it is well knowne that they were Presbyterians . We expected many of the ancient Fathers to make good this interpretation ; but we see he is beholding to those for it who are none of the lest enemies to the Hierarchall preeminency , and therefore we may be the more secure that no great prejudice can come to our cause by this interpretation , if taken in the sence of these Authors . 2. That the great question is : what makes this interpretation for a Diocesan Bishop , with sole power of ordination and jurisdiction , as a distinct order above Presbyters ? But the Remonstrant cunningly conceales halfe the question , and answers , much every way . And why so ? Because if there were many Angels in each Church , and yet but one singled out and called The Angel of that Church , it must needs follow that there was a superiority , and inequality . But what is this to the question in hand ? The thing to be proved is , not onely that this Angell had a superiority , but a superiority of jurisdiction over his fellow Angels ; but of this altum silentium . Doctor Reynolds will tell you that this was onely a superiority of order ; and that all jurisdiction was exercised in common . Beza will tell you , that this Angell was onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and that he was Angelus Praeses , not Angelus Princeps . And that he was Praeses mutabilis , and ambulatorius , just as a Moderator in an assembly , or as the Speaker in the House of Commons , which is onely during the Parliament . Both which interpretations may well stand with the superiority and inequality you speake of . Our first argument to prove that though the word Angel be taken individually , that yet nothing will hence follow to uphold a Diocesan Bishop with sole power of jurisdiction as a distinct order Superior to Presbyters was , because it was never yet , nor never will be proved that these Angels were Diocesan Bishops ; considering that parishes were not so numerous as to be divided into Diocesses in Saint Iohns daies . And the seven Starres are sayd to be fixed in their seven Candlestickes , not one Star over divers Candlesticks . And Tindall together with the old translation calls them seven congregations . And because we read that at Ephesus , that was one of those Candlestickes , there was but one flock , for the answer of all which we expected a learned discourse to prove that the seven Churches were Diocesan , and so consequently the Angels Diocesan Angels . But the Remonstrant baulkes his worke as too great for his shoulders , and instead of solid Divinity turnes criticke , and playes upon words and syllables Domitian like , catching at flies , when he should have beene busied about greater matters . First , he tels , us , That if Parishes were not united into Diocesses ( or were not so many as to be divided into Diocesses which we thinke all one notwithstanding your parenthesis ) in Saint Iohns daies , and therefore no Diocesan Bishop ; by the same reason we may as well argue , that there were no parochiall Bishops neither , since that then no parishes were as yet distinguished . Which we grant to be very true . But if there were no Parochiall Bishops in the Apostles daies , much lesse Diocesan . The Apostolicall Bishops were Bishops of one Church , and not of one parish ( as we meane by parish ) till many yeeres after . But not to quarrell at the word parish , or diocesse ; let but the Remonstrant shewe us that these Angels were Bishops over divers setled Churches , or divers fixed congregations , & nobis erit alter Apollo . For our parts we are sure that at first the number of beleevers , even in the greatest Cities , were so few , as that they might well meete 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in one and the same place ; and these were called the Church of the City , and therefore to ordaine Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , are all one in Scripture . And it cannot be demonstratively proved that they became so numerous in the Apostles daies in any great City , so as that they could not meet in one and the same place . But yet we confesse that it is very probable that it was so in Ierusalem , if you compare Acts 2. 41. 4. 4. 5. 14. And whether it was so also in these severall Asian Churches we know not ; but however , this is agreed upon on all parts . That beleevers in great Cities were not divided into set and fixed congregations or parishes till long after the Apostles daies . And that therefore if when they multiplied , they had divers meeting places , that yet notwithstanding these meeting places were frequented promiscuously , and indistinctly , and were taught and governed by all the Presbyters promiscuously and in common , and were all called but one Church , as is evident in Hierusalem , Act. 8. 1. Act. 15. 6. 22. 16. 4. 21. 18. So also in these seven Churches , where the beleevers of every City are called but one Church , and were governed in common by divers Angels , or Presbyters ; as we see plainely proved in the Church of Ephesus , Acts 20. 28. Hen●e it followeth that there were no sole-ruling Bishops , nor one Bishop over divers Churches , or set Congregations in Saint Iohns daies . Secondly , according to his wonted language , he tels us of making Bulls and Solecismes , because wee say that the seven Starres are said to be fixed in their seven Candlestickes , whereas these Starres are said to be in the right hand of Christ , as if these two were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Know sir , That in regard of their protection they are said to be in Christs right hand , but in regard of their ●unction and Office they may be truely said to be fixed in their seven Candlestickes . But instead of picking quarrels at words , you should have done well ( if you could ) to prove that these Candlestickes were diocesan Churches . We say each Starre had its Candlesticke , not one Starre over divers . And wee thinke that this Candlesticke was but one particular Church , or one set Congregation ( though happily when they multiplyed , they might meete indistinctly in divers , under divers Angels equally governing ▪ ) For this we alledged Obiter Tindals translating the seven Churches seven Congregations . All you answer is , onely to shew that in other places of the Scripture by Congregation in Tindals sence cannot be meant a parishionall meeting . But what if it be not so in other places , how doe you make it appeare that it is not so in this place ? We are sure it is so taken in twenty other places of Tindals translation , and may very properly be taken here also . We alledge also , that in Ephesus which was one of these Candlestickes , there was but one flocke . You demand whether this flocke were Nationall , Provinciall , or Diocesan ? And why doe you not demand whether it were not Oecumenicall also ? that so the Pope may in time come to challenge his flocke universall . But you are sure , you say , that this flocke was not a parochiall flocke , because it cannot be proved , that all the Elders to whom Paul spake , were onely belonging to Ephesus . But can this Remonstant prove that there were more Elders or Bishops then those of Ephesus ? This is to answer Socratically , and in answering not to answer . Howsoever it is not so much materiall . You your selfe confesse that the Elders or Bishops of Ephesus had but one flocke . And if divers Bishops were over one flocke in the Apostles daies , where is your individuall Bishops over divers flockes in the Apostles daies ? Our second argument is also drawne from the Church of Ephesus , which was one of the seven Candlestickes , in which we are sure in Saint Pauls daies there were many Angels , and those called Bishops , Acts 20. 28. And to one of those in all likelyhood was the Epistle to Ephesus directed , if the direction be meant individually . But yet wee read not a word of any superiority , or superintendency of one Bishop over another . To them the Church in generall is committed , without any respect to Timothy who stood at his elbow . But to all this ne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quideu● , onely he tels us it is answered in answering the first . But how true this is , let any Reader judge . At the end of this reason , wee produce Epiphanlus affirming that in ancient time it was peculiar to Alexandria , that it had but one Bishop , whereas other Cities had two . Here our Remonstrant takes a great deale of paines not to confute us , but to confute Epiphanius . All that we will reply is this ; to desire the Reader to consider that this Epiphanius was the first that ( out of his owne private opinion ) accused Aerius of madnesse , and ( as this Authour saith ) of heresie , for denying the superiority of Bishops over Presbyters . And if this Remonstrant thinke it no disparagement to himselfe to be a confuter of Epiphanius , why should we be cryed downe so heavily for not agreeing with Epiphanius in his judgement concerning Aerius ? The third argument the Remonstrant cuts off in the midst . For whereas wee say , that there is nothing sayd in the seven Epistles that implyeth any superiority , or majority of rule , or power that those Angels had over the other Angels that were joyned with them in their Churches : the answerer makes it runne thus , That there is nothing said in the seven Epistles that implies a superiority ; which indeed is to spoile the argument . For wee grant there is something said to imply a superiority of the Ministers over the people , but the question is of a superiority of power of one Angell over the other Angels which were joyned with him in his Church . But this he conceales , because hee knew it was unanswerable . Onely he tels us ; First , that the Epistles are superscribed to the Angell , not Angels . This is crambe millies cocta . But what is this to a majority of rule or power ? Secondly , he tels us it will appeare from the matter of the severall Epistles . For hee askes ; Why should an ordinary Presbyter be taxed for that which hee hath no power to redresse ? That the Angell of Pergamus should be blamed for having those which hold the doctrine of Balaam , or the Nicola●tans , when he had no power to proceed against them . Or the Angell of the Church of Thyatira for suffering the woman Iezebel ( if it must be so read ) to teach and seduce when he had no power of publique censure to restraine her ? This discourse is very loose and wild , Vt nihil pejus dicamus . Doth not the Remonstrant plead here for sole power of jurisdiction ( which hee doth so much disclaime in other places of his booke ) when hee would have the singular Angel of Pergamus and Thyatira , to have power to proceed against offendors , either he doth this or nothing . For our parts we answer without lisping ; That it was in the power not of one Angell , but of all the Angels of Pergamus and Thyatira , to proceed against those that held the doctrine of Balaam and the Nicolaitans . To restraine that woman Iezebel , or the Bishop of Thyatira his wife ( if it must needs be so read ) wee doe not thinke that one ordinary Presbyter ( as you call him ) was to exercise censures alone , nor one extraordinary Bishop neither . We find the contrary Matth. 8. 1 Corinth . 5. And therefore we referre it to the Minister or Ministers of each Congregation with the advice , and consent of the Presbyters adjoyning which we are sure , is more consonant to the word then to leave it to the Hierarchicall Bishop , and his Chancellor , Commissary , or Officiall . In the next paragraph , wee challenge you to shew us what kind of superiority this Angell had , if he had any at all ? We require you to prove that he had any more then a superiority in parts and abilities , or of order . Where is it said that the Angell was a superiour degree or order of Ministery above Presbyters ? Or that he had solepower of ordination and jurisdiction ? But you flie from those questions as farre as from a Snake that would sting you , and disdaining all that we say ( which is your accustomed way of answering ) you tell us that you are able to sh●w who were the parties to whom some of these Epistles were directed , and to evince the high degree of their superiority . Parturiunt montes , nascetur ridiculus mus . Alas sir , you tell us but what we told you before , and what others have ingeminated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . You say , That Ignatius and Tertullian tell us that Onesimus was now the Angell or Bishop of Ephesus , and Polycarpus of Smyrna . But marke what we answer . First , we doubt of the truth of the story . For others tell us that Timothy was Bishop ( as they call him of Ephesus when Christ wrote this Epistle : and this opinion Ribera , Lyra , and Pererius follow . Others leave it in medio , and say it is uncertaine . But suppose the story were true , we answer Secondly , it doth not follow because Onesimus was Bishop of Ephesus in Saint Iohns daies , that therefore he was the onely party to whom Christ wrote his Epistle . For Saint Paul tels us that there were many Bishops at Ephesus besides Onesimus , and he may very well write to him , and to all the rest as well as him . That Christ wrote not onely to Polycarpus ( if hee were Angell of Smyrna ) but to all the other Angels that were at Smyrna , appeares by what we said before out of Revelation 2. 10. Thirdly , you know sir , that by your owne confession Bishops and Presbyters had all one name in the Apostles daies , and long after , even in Irenaeus his time . And therfore what though Polycarpus be called the Bishop of Smyrna ; and Onesimus Bishop of Ephesus : still the question remaines , whether they were Bishops phrasi Apostolica ? ( that is Presbyters ) or phrasi Pontificiâ ? Whether Bishops Antonomasticè and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so called , or whether Bishops in a generall sence , as all Presbyters are called Bishops . And suppose they were Bishops properly so called ( which we beleeve not ) yet still it lies upon you to prove that these were Hierarchicall Bishops . That they had such power as our Bishops assume to themselves . That they were a distinct order superior to Presbyters . And that they had sole power of ordination and jurisdiction . We are confident that you are so farre from being able to prove that they had a sole power , as that you cannot prove they had any superiority of power over their fellow Angels . For ought of any thing said by you in this large discourse , This individuall Angell may be nothing else then a Moderator of a company of Presbyters , having onely a superiority of order , and this also mutable and changeable , according as Paraeus and Beza hold , whom you follow in this interpretation . In the shutting up of this discourse concerning the Angels , the Remonstrant as if he were very angry , spits out nothing but scorne and contempt against his adversaries . We bring one example and two testimonies to prove that the Angels of the seven Churches were not superior one to another , and he cries out as one much displeased , Away then with these your unproving illustrations and unregardable testimonies which you as destitute of all antiquity shut up the Scene withall . But though you fling them away in your anger and fury , yet we trust the ingenious Reader will gather them up , and consider also that this Remonstrant ( that like another Champion against Doctor Whitaker bragges that all the Fathers , and all the Councels are of his side and yet he ) brings neither Fathers nor Councels for to prove that these Angels are to be understood vidually : and so wee take our leave of this discourse . In the next place we come to the two postscripts ( which indeed were post-scripta after the booke was made , and inserted to avoyd an hiatus ) which all the defenders of Hierarchy cite for the averring of Episcopacy by divine right . To this you reply : First , That you are no waies ingaged to defend these postscripts : It is true , not as you are a Remonstrant , but as you are juratus in verba Magistri , sworne to maintaine any thing that may uphold Hierarchicall Episcopacy . Secondly , you confesse ingeniously they are not canonicall ; yet you say they are of great antiquity ; but you durst not set downe how ancient . For wee have good reason and authority to thinke that they are not ancienter then Theodoret who lived 435. yeeres after Christ. We brought many arguments to prove not onely the Apocryphalnes , but the falsenesse of these subscriptions . To all which you subscribe by your silence . Onely you would faine ( if you could ) justifie that clause in the subscription to Titus written from Nicopolis ; and the rather because you finde it so in that famous ancient Manuscript of Tecla sent by the late Patriarch of Constantinople . It seemes then you have seene that Manuscript . And if so , why doe you not deale faithfully with your Reader , and discover what you finde in it ; for we are credibly informed in that copy there is no mention of Titus his being Bishop of Creet , or of Timothy his being Bishop of Ephesus . But this is your constant course , to conceale whatsoever makes against you , and to magnifie whatsoever hath but a shadow of appearance for you , that all men may perceive you seeke victory rather then truth . But before we leave the Postscripts we will answer to your two questions . First , you would faine see any pretence of so much age against the matter of these subscriptions , the averred Episcopacy of Timothy and Titus . For reply , we referre you to what is said before at large in answer to this demand . Onely we will put you in minde of a speech of Bishop Barlows : We are not unwilling to be judged by antiquity , so it be such an antiquitie to which Ignatius appeales . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Nothing more acceptable to us then Histories , if such as are written by him who stiles himselfe , The ancient of daies . And for the Fathers , none more welcome to us then him whom Iustin Martyr cals Pater Patriae , and that is Saint Paul. Now Saint Paul , when he wrote his first Epistle to Timothy , and purposely undertooke in his third Chapter to set out the Office of a Bishop , mentioneth nothing in that Office which is not competent to a Presbyter ; and therefore omits the Office of a Presbyter , including it in the Office of a Bishop ; which hee would never have done , if hee had at the same time made Timothy an Hierarchicall Bishop , with a power to doe that formally which was unlawfull for a Presbyter to doe . And besides we have proved that this Epistle was written before Pauls first being at Rome , and so before the time that you say Paul made him Bishop . As for his Epistle to Titus , he directly confounds the Offices of Presbyters and Bishops , and makes them one and the same , Chapter 1. Verses 5 , 6 , 7. Which he certainely would not have done if he had made them at that time distinct Orders with distinct Offices . The ancient Fathers indeed some of them call Timothy and Titus Bishops in an improper sense , because they staid longer in Ephesus and Creet then Evangelists ordinarily did . And did preach , and ordaine , and doe those things which Bishops in their time used to doe , which notwithstanding they did not formally doe as Bishops , but virtually and eminently as Officers of an higher degree . Hence Salmeron himselfe saith in his first disputation upon Timothy , Videtur ergo quod fuerit plusquam Episcopus , eti●●si ad tempus in ea civitate ut pastor praedicaverit , & sacros ordines promoverit . Vnde quidam vocant eum Episcopum . Ambrose saith one while he was a Deacon , another while a Prethyter . Others a Primate , and others a Bishop . Lyra proveth him to have beene an Archbishop , and Titus a Priest. Beda calleth him an Apostle . Aquinas thinkes that Titus was Bishop of Dalmatia , because when Paul , wrote his second Epistle to Timothy hee was at Dalmatia , 2 Tim. 4. 10. Thus you see the Fathers agree not amongst themselves , and therefore helpe you little in this point . Your second question is : Whether ever we have beene urged to subscribe to any other cerem●nies then have beene established by the Lawes of this Realme and Church ? And why these Ceremonies are the Bishops more then Ours ? We answer : First , That to our knowledge some have beene urged to subscribe to other ceremonies then have beene established by the Lawes of this Realme , and Church , and to promise obedience editis & ●dendis . Secondly , that this very urging of us to subscribe to the ceremonies established , is more then the Lawes require ; For the Lawes require to subscription onely to the thirty nine Articles . Thirdly , We cannot but justly dislike your distinction of , The Lawes of this Realme and Church . For we know no Lawes of the Church obligatory , but such as are established by the Lawes of the Realme , as both Houses of Parliament have lately determined . And whereas you aske , Why these Ceremonies are the Bishops , more then ours ? We answer : First , because it is ordinarily said , No Ceremony , no Bishop , But it was never said , No Ceremony , no Presbyter . Secondly , because in the Convocation ( which you here terme the Church ) the Bishops , or rather the Archbishop swayes all . And there are five or six which are there , Ex m●ero Officio , and for the most part are the Bishops creatures , and hang their suffrages upon his lippes : and but two Clerkes for the Presbyters , which also for the most part are forced upon them by the Bishop , and his Officers . Thirdly , because they are ours , if ours as a burden . But theirs , as their crowne , and glory , for which they fight as for a second Purgatory , to uphold their Courts and Kitchins . In the next place we propounded an objection framed by Bishop Andrewes and divers others from the inequality in the Ministery appointed by Christ himselfe , betweene the twelve Apostles and the seventy Disciples . To which wee answered : First , that it cannot be proved that the Apostles had any superiority over the seventy , either of ordination , or jurisdiction . S●condly , suppose it could ; yet , That superiority and inferiority betweene Officers of different kindes , will not prove that there should be a superiority and inferiority betweene Officers of the same kinde . To which you reply ; first , That the Apostles ordained the Deacons , that Paul laid hands on Timothy . But this is no solution of the objection , unlesse you can prove the Deacons and Timothy to have beene amongst the number of the seventy Disciples , or Paul to have beene one of the twelve Apostles . Secondly , you answer , That Bishops and Presbyters differ toto genere , and are Offieers of different kind , as much as the Apostles and the seventy Disciples . Which is an assertion not onely contrary to the Fathers ( who accounted the Bishop to be but Primus Presbyter ; and as Hierome saith , Vnum ex se electum celsiori gradu collocatum . ) But also more unsound then most of the Papists who freely acknowledge that Presbyteratus is the highest order in the ministry , and that Episcopacy is but a different degree of the same order , and not a superior order from Presbyters . An order may be reputed higher , either because it hath intrinsecally an higher vertue , or because it hath an higher degree of honour and dignity . Now we deny not but the latter antiquity did by their Canons make Episcopacy an higher Order in regard of dignity and honour , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( as a Councell speakes ) but did never account it an higher power by divine right . This last branch the Remonstrant would faine prove ( if he could ) by an argument drawne from succession ; because ( saith he ) the Bishops succeed the Apostles , and the Presbyters the seventy Disciples . And we are challenged , page 158. to shew whether ever any Father or Doctor of the Church till this present age held that Presbyters were the successors to the Apostles , and not to the seventy Disciples rather . But here is nothing in which the Remonstrant shewes more wilfull ignorance then in this . For the ancient Fathers doe make the Presbyters successors of the Apostles as well as Bishops . Thus Irenaeus liber 4. cap. 43 , 44. Quapropter & eis , qui in Ecclesiâ sunt Presbyteris obedire oportet , his qui successionem habent ab Apostolis , sicut ostendimus qui eum Episcopatus successione charisma veritatis certum secundum placitum patris acceperunt . So also cap 44. and lib. 3. cap. 2. Thus also our Ierome ( as you call him ) in his Epistle ad Heliodorum , Clerici dicuntur Apostolico grad●i successisse . So Origen in Matth. 16. saith , all Presbyters succeeded the Apostles in the power of the keyes . And Ignatius ad Smy●nonses saith the same . Yet still like ( as you say you have heard ) page 125. ) some beaten cocke , you dare erow , and tell your Reader , that all antiquity hath acknowledged 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 three severall rankes in the Church Hierarchie . But where will you begin your antiquity ? We say with the Father , i● verum quod antiquissimum . Shew us your three degrees in Scripture . You confesse page 47. that these three orders are not there to be found . We read in Scripture , the Deacon to be a step to a Presbyter , but not a Presbyter to a Bishop . And wee deny that ever it was accounted in antiquity , that a Bishop did ever differ from a Presbyter , as a Presbyter from a Deacon . For these differ Genere proximo ( No ●erint Diaconi se ad ministerium , non ad sacerdotium vocari . ) But a Bishop differs from a Presbyter as from one who hath that power of Priesthood no lesse than himselfe ; and therefore the difference betweene these Priests be circumstantiall , and not so essentiall as betwixt the other . Thus Bishops and Archbishops are divers orders of Bishops according to some Canons of the Church : not that one excelled the other , as a power of higher vertue , but of higher dignity then the other . Indeed of late yeeres Episcopacy hath beene a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to preferment , and a ladder for all pious and conscientious men to be suspended upon , as Mordecai upon Hamans gallowes ; but now is in danger to become ( like Hamans ladder ) their owne ruine and downe-fall . Iam sumus ergo pares . In your transition to your next Paragraph , that you might disparage the opposets of the Hierarchicall Episcopacy by divine right , you endeavour to make them the Disciples of none but Ierome . But here in you cannot but know how injuriously you deale with them , considering the numberlesse number of Authors , both ancient and moderne , that assert that , which you would fasten upon him alone . In the Paragraph it selfe , you confesse what we undertooke to prove ; That the ancient Bishops and others differ in regard of their Accessories , dignities , titles , and maintenance . But onely whereas among other instances we told you of golden Chalices and wooden Priests ; You tell us , That if in time we should see wooden Chalicer , and wooden Priests , we may thanke our selves ; Truely sir , we may thanke you , and not our selves ; for the Lordlinesse and in solent carriages of some Bishops under the great revenues and the multitude of wooden Priests which they have made , who have beene intoxicated with the Golden Chalice of the whore of Babylons abominations , hath so alienated the affections of people from them ; as that what doome so ever they are sentenced unto , it is no other then what they have brought upon themselves . As for our part , we are still of the same mind , that honourable maintenance ought to be given to the Ministers of the Gospell , not onely to live , but to be hospitable . Indeed we instanced in many that did abuse their large revenues . But you are pleased to say , That in this Ablative age the fault is rare and hardly instanceable . We thinke the contrary is more hardly instanceable . And as for your Ablative age , if you meane it of poore Presbyters , who have beene deprived of all their subsistance by the unmercifulnesse of Bishops , whom they with teares have besought to pitty their wives and children , we yeeld it to be too true . Or if you meane , in regard of the purity of the ordinances , the frequency of preaching , the freedome of conceived prayer ; We denie not but in this sence also it may be called the Ablative age . But if you relate it to Episcopacy and their Cathedrals ( with whom it is now the Accusative age ) We hope that the yeere of recompense is come , and that in due time for all their Ablations they may be made a gratefull ablation . We have done with this section , and feare not to appeale to the same judicious eyes the Remonstrant doth , to judge to whose part that Vale of absurd inconsequences and bold ignorance which hee brands us withall doth most properly appertaine . SECT . XIV . IN this Section hee comes to make good his an●wers formerly given to some objections by him propounded , and by us further urged : The first objection was from that prejudice which Episcopacy challenging a divine originall doth to Soveraignty , which was wont to be acknowledged , not onely as the conserving but as the creating cause of it in former times . The Remonstrant thinks this objection is sufficiently removed , by telling us , there is a compatiblenesse in this case of Gods act and the Kings . And what can wee say to this ? Sir , you know what we have said already , and not onely said but proved it , and yet will confidently tell us you have made good by undeniable proofes , that ( besides the ground which our Saviour layd of this imparity ) the blessed Apostles by inspiration from God made this difference , &c. Made good ? when ? where ? by what proofs ? Something you have told us about the Apostles , but not a word in all the defence of any ground laid by our Saviour of this imparitie ; yet the man dreams of undeniable proofs of that whereof he never spake word . Wee must therefore tell you againe , take it as you please , that if the Bishops disclaime the influence of Soveraignty into their creation , and say that the King doth not make them Bishops ; they must have no being at all . Nor can your questions stop our mouthes : Where or when did the King ever create a Bishop ? Name the man and take the cause . Wee grant you Sir , that so much as there is of a Presbyter in a Bishop , so much is Divine : But that imparity and jurisdiction exercised out of his own demandated authority , which are the very formalities of Episcopacie , these had their first derivation from the Consent , Customes , Councell , Constitution of the Church , which did first demandate this Episcopall authority to one particular person ; afterwards the Pope having obtained a Monarchie over the Church , did from himself demandate that authority that formerly the Church did , and since the happy ejection of the Popes tyrannicall usurpations out of these Dominions , our Princes being invested with all that Ecclesiasticall power which that Tyrant had usurped , that same imparity and authority , which was originally demandated from the Church , successively from the Pope , is now from the King. Looke what influence the Church ever had into the creation of Bishops , the same the Pope had after ; and looke what influence the Pope had heretofore , the same our Laws have placed in the King which is so cleere that the Remonstrant dares not touch , or answer . There was a Statute made the first of Edward the sixth , inabling the King to make Bishops by his Letters patents Onely : Hence all the Bishops in King Edwards the sixt time were created Bishops by the Kings Letters patents ONELY ; in which all parts of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction are granted them in precise words , praeter & ultra jus divinum , Besides and beyond divine right , to be executed onely , nomine , vice , & Authoritate nostri Regis , in the Kings royall stead , name , and Authority , as the patents of severall Bishops in the Rolls declare . But besides the Kings Letters , the Bishop is solemnly ordained by the imposition of the hands of the Metropolitan , and other of his brethren , & these as from God invest him in his holy calling . As from God ? Good sir prove that ; prove that the Metropolitan and Bishops in such imposition of hands are the instruments of God , & not the instruments of the King : prove they doe it by Commission received from God , and not by command of the King onely . Produce one warrant from Scripture , one president of a Bishop so ordained by a Metropolitan and fellow Bishops , and without more dispute take all . Shortly , resolve us but this one thing ; what is it that takes a man out of the ordinary ranke of Presbyters , and advanceth him to an imparity and power of jurisdiction ? is it humane authority testified in the Letters of the King , or is it divine authority testified by the significative action of imposition of hands by the Metropolitan and fellow Bishops ? if the former , you grant the cause , if the latter , consider with what good warrant you can make a form of Ordination ( by the hands of a Metropolitan and fellow Bishops ) which is a meer humane invention , to be not onely a signe , but a mean of conveying a peculiar and superiour power from Divine Authority , and of making a Presbyter a Bishop Iuredivino . Finally , Sir , make as much as you can of your Ordination by a Metropolitan , slight as much as you please your unworthy comparison between the King and our Patrons , yet did the Kings Conge d'eslire give you no more humane right to Episcopacie , then the hands of the Metropolitan and fellow Bishops give you of right Divine , you would be Bishops by neither . It is not your confident re-inforcing of your comparison that shal call carry it , till you have first proved it from Scripture , that God never instituted an order of Presbyters or Ministers in his Church , as wee have proved , God never instituted an order of Bishops . Secondly , that by the Laws of the land as much of the Ministeriall power over a particular Congregation is in the patron , as there is of Episcopall power in the King. Till then ( wee beseech you ) let it rest undetermined whether your self , or we may best be sent to Simons Cell . We say no more , lest you should think we flout your modesty with an unbeseeming frumpe , which whither our answer be guilty of , as you here charge us , let the Reader compare the 28 and 29 pages of your Remonstrance , and our Answer to those pages , and determine . The second objection was from that imputation which this truth casts upon all Reformed Churches which want this government ; this the Remonstrant must needs endevour to satisfie , that hee may decline the envie that attends this opinion . But what needs the Remonstrant feare this envy ? Alasse , the Reformed Churches are but a poore handfull ! Rumpantur ilia , need the Remonstrant care ? Yet is it neither his large protestation of his honourable esteeme of those Sister Churches , nor his solicitous cleering himselfe from the scandalous censures and disgracefull termes cast upon them by others ( under whose colours he now militares ) that will divert this envie , unlesse he either desert his opinion , or make a more just defence then he hath yet done . The Defence is , That from the opinion of the Di. right of Episc. no such consequence can be drawn , as that those Churches that want Bishops are no Churches . Episcopacy though reckoned among matters essential to the Church , yet is not of the essence of a Church , and this is no contradiction neither . If you would have avoided the contradiction , you should have expressed your selfe more distinctly ; knowing that things essentiall are of two sorts ; either such as are essentiall constitutivè ; , or such as are essentiall consecutivè , You had done well here , had you declared whether you count Episcopacie essentiall to a Church constitutive , or consecutivé ; if constitutivè , then it is necessary to the being of a Church , and it must follow , where there is no Bishop , there can be no Church : If essentiall onely consecutivè , wee would be glad to learne how those officers which by Divine institution have demandated to them peculiarly a power of ordaining all other officers in the Church ( without which the Church it selfe cannot be constituted ) and such a power as that those officers cannot be ordained without their hands , should not bee essentiall to the Constitution of a Church , or tend onely to the well being , not to the being of it ? Either you must disclaim your own propositions , or owne this inference , and not think to put it off with telling your Reader . It is enough for our friends to hold discipline of the being of a Church , you dare not be so zealous . If heat in an Episcopall cause may be called zeale , you dare be as zealous as any man we know . Your friends wee are sure are as zealous in the cause of their Episcopacie as any of ours have been in the defence of discipline . Did ever any of our friends in their zeale rise higher then to frame an oath , whereby to bind all men to maintaine their discipline ? You know some of yours have done as much : but them wee know you will leave to their owne defence , as you doe your learned Bishop of Norwich , now he is dead . It is work enough for you to defend your selfe , and give satisfaction to the questions propounded . First , we demanded the reason why Popish Priests converted to our Religion are admitted without new ordination , when some of our brethren flying in Queen Maries time , and having received Ordination in the Reformed Churches were urged at their return to receive it again from our Bishops ? This shamelesse and partiall practice of our Prelats hee could not deny , but frames two such answers of which the second confutes the first , and neither second nor first justifies their practice . In the first he denies a capability of admittance by our laws , and yet in his second , he confesseth many to be admitted without any legall exception , which how well they consist , let the Reader judge . The second question was , whether that office which by divine Right hath sole power of Ordination , and ruling of all other officers in the Church , belong not to the being , but onely to the glory and perfection of a Church ? The Remonstrant is so angry at this question , that before hee can finde leisure to answer it , he must needs give a little vent to his choller : Can we tell what these men would have ? ( saith he ) have they a mind to go beyond us in asserting that necessity and essentiall use of Episcopacie , which we dare not avow ? What is that which you dare not avow ? is it that Episcopacy hath sole power of ordaining and ruling all other Officers in the Church ? But this wee are sure you will avow , That imposition of hands in ordination and confirmation have ever been held so intrinsecall to Episcopacie , that I would faine see where it can be shewed that ANY EXTREMITY OF NECESSITY was by the Catholike Church of Christ ever yet acknowledged for a warrant sufficient to diffuse them into other hands . Is not this to say that the sole power of ordaining Officers is in the hands of the Bishop ? And dare not WE avow this now ? Blessed be they that have taken downe your confidence . And where you are witty by the way , you tell us we still talke of sole Ordination and sole Iurisdiction , we may if we please keep that paire of soles for our next shooes . Good Sir , wee thanke you for your liberality , but wee doubt you either part with them out of fear you shall no longer keep them , or they will prove no longer worth the keeping . But consider one thing , we beseech you , if you make this donation not onely in your own name , but in the name of the whole Episcopall order , you and they may turn Fratres Mendicantes , and go bare foot , if you part with these paire of soles , and what will become of your Quid facit Episcopus , quod non facit Presbyter exceptâ ordinatione ? You doe not contend ( say you ) for such a height of propriety , &c. that in what case soever of extremity and irresistable necessity , this should be done onely by Episcopall hands . You do not ? It is well you doe not , but did you never meane to affirme it none of you ? Consider ( we beseech ) that forecited place Episcopacie Divine Right , part . 2. pag. 91. weigh the words and then speake , and tell the Authour your judgement . Our third question was , There being in this mans thoughts the same jus divinum for Bishops that there is for Pastors and Elders , whether if those reformed Churches wanted Pastors & Elders too , they should want nothing of the essence of a Church , but onely of the glory and perfection of it ? The answer ( saith he ) is ready , which is indeed no answer , it is in sum but this , that it would be better with them if they had Bishops too . But how it would be if they wanted Bishops and Pastors and Elders too , of that he saith nothing . The Remonstrant had presumed to know so much of the mind of the Reformed Churches as to averre , that if they might have their option , they would gladly imbrace Episcopall government ; a foule imputation saith the Remonstrant : we say so too ; a foul imputation to charge the Reformed Churches of a secret inclination to Apostatize from their owne confessions , which doe not onely maintain a justifiablenesse of their present government , but a necessity of it as the only government appointed by GOD in his Church , as wee shewed in five Corollaries drawn out of those confessions , which the Remonstrant slides over , wherein they doe not onely defend the condition they are in , but tell us by consequence they would not change it for any other forme in the World : Because they tell us Theirs is the form God hath set down in his Word , the forme Christ hath appointed in his Church , the forme by which the Church ought to be governed . Can we think the Churches that thus professe and believe , can ever look for a better form ? Or would accept another though propounded to them as better , when they professe this is that form by which they ought to be governed ? The testimonies of particular Divines must not be put in the ballance against the confessions of whole Churches . God forbid , that all that hath flowed from the pens of Divines of great Learning and place in England should passe for the Doctrine of the English Church abroad . Wee will beleeve you it is possible many eminent Divines of the Churches abroad have wished themselves in your condition , that is in Episcopall Government , not in our condition under Episcopall Government . And as easily we believe , they have magnified our Church as the most famous exemplary glorious Church in the whole Christian World. It better a great deale becomes them then Laodicean like to say ( as you say , pag. 26. ) their own is the most glorious and exemplary Church , the rest are but a poore handfull , and reason they should conforme to it , not it to them . But whether it be the beautie , perfection , and glory of Episcopall government , or the powerfull and lively preaching of the World , the powerfull and lively practice of piety , which through the speciall grace of God are found in this Church ( then which there hath been nothing more hated or persecuted under Episco . government ) that hath made them magnifie the Church of England , there is the question , which is not hard to determine . To induce the Reader to believe the Reformed Churches would change theirs for our government , the Remonstrant hath told us that there is little difference betweene their government and ours , save in perpetuitie of moderatorship and exclusion of Lay-elders . This saith the Remonstrant , You say is a passage of admirable absurdity . Sir , wee said admirable ; the absurdity is your own . To mend it , you would perswade your selfe to feare , wee know not what you speak of : You speake not onely of the next Churches of France and the Netherlands . Sir , you spake if we remember of the Neighbour Churches , and wee conceive , between our Neighbour Churches , & the next Churches of France and the Netherlands , there is not much distance ; sure any common understanding , by Neighbour Churches , would a great deal sooner understand the next Churches of France , and the Netherlands , then the Churches of Germany , Weteraw , Anhault , &c. Especially considering your instance in those Churches , from whose Moderators our Bishops differ onely in perpetuitie of Moderatorship : Which perpetuitie the Lutheran Superintendents have as well as our Bishops . This made us instance in the Geneva forme , as knowing no Churches whose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not fixed , but such as follow their patterne , between which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and our episcopacie wee shewed a sixfold difference : all which the Remonstrant wisely passeth ; that hee may not be forced to acknowledge the difference greater then hee pretended . Onely tels us with what authority Master Calvin and the deputati Synodi carried the affairs of the Church ; which if the personall worth of the one or the other did procure , what is that to carrying all the affairs of the Church ex officio , by vertue of their own peculiarly demandated authority , as our Bishops do , and challenge right to doe ? You put us in minde , that you said the difference between them was little , and we need not put you in minde of what our answer was , Manet aliâ mente repostum : nor do we intend to change . You tell us our note is the note of Babylon , down with it , downe with it . Yet as long as neither we are Edomits , nor speak of Sion , but of Sions enemies , the note is not Babylonish . As Babylon had her time to cry against Sion , downe with it , down with it even to the ground , so the time is comming when Sion shall shout with as strong a cry against her enemies , and the God of Heaven , whose promise is to arise for the sighing of the poore , we doubt not will vindicate his Church from those proud adversaries that have so long time tyrannized over her , and Judge betweene the Sheep and the Goats . Even hee Judge , whether wee that plead the truth against Bishops , or the Bishops whose cause the Remonstrant ple●ds , have by violent and subtill Machinations most disturbed Sions peace , and advanced Babylons power . SECT . XV. THe Remonstrant had said that Lay Presbytery never had footing in the Christian Church untill this age . Wherein , said we , hee concludes so fully with Doctor Hals irrefragrable propositions , as if he had conspired to swear to what the Bishop had said . The Remonstrant , that it seems knows both better then wee , will phrase it thus ; how like the man looks to Doctor Hall : And answers , As like him as wee are like our selves , insolent and scornfull . Truly Sir , wee could scarce conceive this likenesse by the Remonstrance , and we can lesse conceive it by this defence . For besides the flat contradictions which this Defence gives to Episcopacie by Divine Right ( for which wee doubt the Doctor will give the Remonstrant little thanks ) the very language of the Defence inclines to the contrary . For though we acknowledge the Defence , for the substance of it wholly , and for the phrase of it in a great part , borrowed from episcopacie by Divine Right , yet the extream disdainfulnesse that breaths in every page and line pleads with us , to thinke that it is not his , especially if he have made that vow of leaving his insolent and scornfull language , which an ancient acquaintance of his hath put the world in hope hee would . Your Errata bids us pag. 33. Read Invectives , truly we may read in every page Invectives : and if to be scornfull and insolent be to be unlike Doctor Hall , you have done the Doctor exceeding wrong to say the Remonstrant looks like him . But be the Remonstrant who hee will , we hope hee will not take it ill , if comming into publique nameless , he receive par pari , remembring especially the saying of Hierom concerning Domitius a Senator to his scornfull Consull , si non vis me habere ut Senatorem , cur ego te habeam ut Consulem ? Why should wee use him as a Father , that doth not use us as Brethren ? Make sport with our poore wit , triumph over it . It is truth , not wit wee contend for ; yet Ridentem dicere verum quis vetat . You might have done as wisely to omit the flourish of your wit in scorne of ours ; as you say wee did to omit those three knowne texts which we omitted , because the question betweene us was not whether ruling Elders are an ordinance of God and founded in the word or no , But whether ever they had existence in the Christian Church before this present age . For the determining of this question , ( being de facto , not de ●ure ) it is more proper to produce the practice of the Churches then texts of Scripture ; this doth not please him . Alpatrons of Layeldership before us would not , after the rakings of all the channells of time , have forborne the utmost urging of those Testimonies , if they had not knowne them so far from being convictive that they are unprooving . Is this the man whose chief plea for his divine right is the monument of succeeding ages and Testimony of Antiquity , and will he now vouchsafe the search after the footsteps of antiquity , no better name Then the raking of the Channell of time ? had we spoken so much in the vilification of Antiquity it would have beene accounted hatefull and intolerable insolencie in us . But our evidences are not proving and convictive . Let us put them to the tryall . Our testimony from Origen cannot ( you say ) but shame us if yet we can blush ; belike you remember you have so often without just cause put us to the blush , you beginne to feare the colour is spent ; you charge us with willing concealing the Chap. on purpose that we might not be discovered . Were this a fault and worthy of blame , yet little reason hath the Remonstrant to quarrell with us , it is but this one place in which the Remonstrant chargeth us , wee are punctuall in our other quotations . How-many quotations are there in this defence in which the Remonstrance hath not cited so much as the Book , onely thinks it enough to name the Authour ? But here we are not so culpable as the Remonstrant makes us . The translation of Origen which we followed did not distinguish the booke into Chapters , No more then the Originall doth , Nor other translations with which we have consulted ; Nor are wee yet so happy as to meete with that edition where the Chapters are distinguished : so here is no just cause of suspicion either of fraud or feare . For the text it selfe , whether your collection or ours be most according to the sence of the Authour , let the learned reader judge from the text it selfe , which wee heere set downe translated faithfully according to the Originall . Videamus an non Christiani magis & melius istis populum ad bonam frugem excitent , nam Philosophi quidem , qui in publico disputant , discrimen auditorum adhibent nullum , sed quisquis volet , adstet licet , atque audiat . Christiani vero , quoad possunt , eorum , qui ipsos audire cupiunt , animos prius explorantes , eosdemque privatimerudientes , cum videbuntur illi qui auditores sunt futuri , priusquam in publicum processerint , usque eò profecisse satis , ut velint benè vivere , tum demum eos introducunt , sive admittunt , separatim quendem ordinem constituentes eorum qui initiati recens , introductique sunt , signumque expiationis nondum acceperunt : alter autem ordo est eorum qui pro virili studium suum repraesentant , non aliud velle se , quam quae Christianis recta videntur . Apud quos ( vel supra quos ) sunt quidam constituti , qui in vitam & mores advenientium inquirant , ut qui flagitiosa perpetrant , illos à communi eorum coetu prohibeant , qui verò istiusmodi non sunt , eos ex animo amplexantes , indies reddant meliores . Cujusmodi quoque institutum habent in eos qui peccant , maximèque si protervè se gerant , quos à suo coetu ejiciunt illi , qui Celso judice , similes sunt iis qui inhonestissimas quasque res in foro ostentant . Et Pythagoreorum quidem schola illa gravissima , illis qui ab ipsorum philosophia desciverant sepulchra inania conficiebat , eosque perinde aestimans ac si demortui planè essent . Hi autem quasi pereuntes & mortuos Deo , qui petulantiae aut gravi cuipiam facinori obstringendos se tradiderunt , tanquam mortuos lugent , & tanquam è mortuis excitatos , si non spernendam modo oftenderint resispicentiam , longiori temporis spatio , quàm qui primo introducti sunt , tandem recipiunt , neque ad ullum gubernandi munus in Ecclesiâ Dei quae dicitur , eligimus eum qui priùs fuerit lapsus , postquam ad verbum accesserit , &c. The sence of this place , saith the Remonstrant , is this , That those which were newly admitted into the Church , who by reason of their late acquaintance with such as were left behind them in Pagan superstition , might be fit Monitors to know and notifie the condition of such Candidates as did offer to come into the Church , were designed to that office of Monitorship . Here we desired the Reader to consider : first that the scope of the place is to vindicate the Christian assemblies from the imputations unjustly cast upon them by Celsus , as if they were a confluence of base and worthlesse people . To cleer this , hee divides all Christians into two Orders : the first were Catechumeni , or beginners ; and first he shews the care they took about them , before they were baptized . The other order comprehends all such as were baptized , whom he describes in these words . There is another order of such who according to their ability expresse their endevours to desire nothing but what seems right to Christians , which two orders are in antiquity distinguished in Catechumenos & Fideles . Now that this same alter ordo might be kept to live acording to there profession ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , there were some designed or constituted , who should look to the manners of all such as come to them ; ( that is to their meetings ) that they that lived wickedly might be banished their assemblies , and heartily embracing such as lived well , they might make them better . Those persons here spoken of , the Remonstrant grants to be lay persons ( as we terme them ) and doth not so much as once goe about to affirme them Presbyters . Onely the question is , who those so constituted were ? He saith Novices newly added to the Church . Secondly of whome they had the inspection ? hee saith onely of such as were comming out of paganisme and offered themselves to be added to their Assemblies . Thirdly , what their power was ? hee saith , onely to notifie the lives of such : to be as it were Monitores , and no more . For the two first , we conceive it impossible for him to shew in all antiquity that ever the Church did appoint Novices over Novices to be overseers of their manners , and much more impossible to collect it from this place , since Origen speaks indefinitely of any of this order ( to wit of Fideles ) and punctually of such who had attained such a measure of grace as they were able to expresse endevours to do that which is right , and were fit and able by their acquaintance to better others , and therefore these could not be Novices . For the second , to wit , over whom they had power ? they were not onely such as were lately admitted : for Origen speakes generally of all wicked or scandalous livers among them , who were to be inhibited their assemblies . For the third , the power they had , ( which saith hee was onely to be Monitors ) it appeares from the text , that they had power either to keepe back from their assemblies , or to receive into their assemblies , according as the lives of men were good or bad , and were of that ability , as that they could better them daily with their good counsell . And if any were froward or contumacious , what course was further to be taken with them the following words declare ; and although it is true , the acts of casting such out of the Church is attributed primarily to the teachers ; yet who dare exclude those former 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from all interest in this act ? when Origen himselfe saith , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. the like custome they have about offenders , and chiefely such as are incorrigible . But this great Corrector of Translations cannot let us passe here without a castigation , for translating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Praepositi sunt . Vnfaithfully , deceitfully saith he . Sir it would have become you to spare your censure till you considered better ; if you had but looked in your Lexicon you might have found that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies not onely constituor , but praeficior , and betweene Praefecti and praep●siti certainly there is no such great difference as might deserve the censure of unfaithfulnesse for using the one instead of the other ; besides Turrianus translated it thus before us , who , we perswade our selves , was as able to understand the language of Origen as our Criticall Remonstran● , if wee may judge of him as hee here discovers himselfe ; would any man so confidently charge unfaithfulnesse upon the translation of others , and himselfe go & translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , They do privatly examine such as are bewitched with Paganisme ? it is true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies incant● as well as frequenter admoneo , to inchaunt as well as to instruct or admonish , but heer it must of necessity be rendred in the latter signification , because it is here the participle of the active voice , and the case agrees n●t with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Wch is put in the beginning of that clause : so again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he t●anslates , the rest that are like themselves they may gladly Receive , whereas it should be thus , but receiving those that are not such ( that is ) as those wicked persons last spoke of . These are poore Grammarpec adillio's not worth t●e taking notice of , but that our Remonstrant is so busie with his Ferula , that no sooner can he thinke we trip , but he is presently upon us , Corrig● Magn ficat . The rest of our testimonies produced in this cause , hee thus answers , First , he could double our files , and produce many more . But secondly , in sadierms , we do nothing herein , but abuse our Reader : For all the places are nothing at all to the purpose in hand . For the first , The numbers he could adde to our forces , are no more then our own , except one onely place out of Gregory Turonen , is : all the rest were urged by us , Even that which he saith is more pregnant then any we have brought . Did ever poore man make so great a brag of nothing ? Truly , Sir , you have much enriched us by paying us with our owne colne . Onely here wee are beholding to you for your testimony of the pregnancie of some of them , when as you said before , All of them were nothing to the purpose in hand : it seemes your second thoughts correct your former . For his second answer , hee tels us , all these places are nothing to the purpose . And why ? because those Seniors , are Civill Magistrates , such as wee call Aldermen , whose advice and assistance was used in all great occasions of the Church . To prove this he brings the African Canons , Can. 100. where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are mentioned , and expounds it by the 91 Canon of the African , which he cals a Commentary upon this point , Debere unumquemque no strum in civitate sua cōvenire Donatistarum Praepositos , aut adjungere sibi vicinum collegam , ut pariter eos in singulis qnibusque civitatibus per Magistratus vel Seniores locorum conveniant . To which we answer , That this his Commentary corrupts the text ; For in this 91 Canon there is no mention of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , The words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . By the Magistrate , or those that are of chief authority in those places : these wee grant were as it were our Aldermen , men of civill power and authority , but they were not as those Elders mentioned in the 100 Canon . And why should the Remonstrant choose rather to follow Iustellus , in reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Seniores locorum , then Balsamon , and Zonaras , who read it , Quiprimas ferant , unlesse it were to deceive his credulous Reader , and induce him to thinke there were no other Elders in the Church , then such as were Civill Magistrates ; whereas his own Iustellus in his exposition of the 100 Canon saith , Erant Seniores , Laici , extra Ecclesiam , de quibus supra ad Can. 91. Erant & Seniores Ecclesiastici ; There were Lay-elders out of the Church , of whom wee spake , Can. 91 , and there are Ecclesiastick or Church-elders : To prove which hee brings forth the very testimonies which wee produced from Baronius , and others . And certainly , he that compares the two Canons quoted by the Remonstrant , will see how absurdly the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the one Canon are drawn to expound the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the other . For the former were the Magistrates , who having a coercive power , might compell the Donatists to meet for conference and disputations , if they did refuse it : The other were not Magistrates but Seniores , sent by the Church to accuse their Bishop . Now how well is the one expounded by the other ? But if the Seniors were not Aldermen , yet they were ( say you ) but as our Churchwardens and Vestry-men , onely trusted with the Viensils , Stocks , and outward affaires of the Church ; businesse of seats and rates , &c. This the Remonstrant will , if you will believe him , evince out of our owne testimonies , and yet meddles not with that , which is the most pregnant testimony to prove that the power of these elders did reach to things of a higher nature then seats and rates , and that is the Letter of Pu●purius , which gives to the Seniors a concurrent power with the Clergie , to enquire about the dissentions which troubled the Church , that by their wisdome and care peace might be setled in the same . These dissentions were not about seats or rates , but a contention betweene Silvanus the Bishop , and Nundinarius the Deacon , in a matter of a high nature , too high for our Church Wardens , or Vestrymen to meddle in ; The Bishop being accused , that hee was Traditor & fur rerum pauperum . Did ever Church-wardens , or Vestry men among us , heare , inquire , judge , compose such differences as these are ? What should John a Nokes , and John a Stiles , and Smug the Smith , meddle with a businesse of Bishops ? saith Episcopacie by Divine Right , part . 3. pag. 32. But how doth hee prove they were but as our Churchwardens , or Vestrymen ? First , because Deacons are named before these Seniors where ever they are mentioned . Secondly , because Optatus reckoning up quatuor genera capitum , mentions not Elders . For the first , though the order of reckoning them be not so much to be insisted upon , yet wee can tell you ( if here your confidence had not beene greater then your consideration ) that you might have observed , that in some places they are mentioned not onely before Deacons , but the whole cleargie ; For so Gregories letter cited by us ; Tabellarium cum consensu Seniorum , & Cleri memineris ordinandum : Are not Seniors here mentioned before the cleargie ? His second proofe , that these Elders were no better then meere Churchmardens and Vestry men was , because Optatus mentioning foure sorts of men in the Church mentions not these Elders . But is this the man that hath with such height of scorne vilified poore negative arguments , though drawn from sacred Scripture ? And will he now lay such weight upon a negative argument ? Surely , if all the truth and practice of the primitive times were bound up in one Optatus , ( as all Divine truth is lodged in the sacred Volume of the Scriptures ) the Remonstrant might have made much of his negative argument , yet hee scornes to heare us reasoning , that because we do not read that the holy Ghost did by the Apostles appoint Bishops , in remedium Schismatis , therefore we cannot believe Bishops are of Divine or Apostolicall institution , but of humane . Away ( saith he ) with this poore negative argument . And because the Apostle , Ephesians the fourth , reckoning the Officers whom Christ hath given and gifted for the edification of his Church , reckons up onely Apostles , Prophets , Evangelists , Pastors , & Teachers , if wee should conclude , Ergo , there were no Bishops , The Remonstrant would cry out again , Away with these negative arguments , yet such an argument frō Scripture may be valid , though from no other authority . As for Optatus , First , though in these places he mentions not Elders , yet that other place which wee brought out of the same Author doth , which the learned Antiquary Albaspinaeus ( though a Papist ) with us acknowledgeth . Secondly , these places produced by the Remonstrant crosse one another as much as they crosse us , for Ministri are left out in one as well as Seniores in both . Thirdly , these Seniores are included in turba fidelium , as the Apostle , Rom. 10. 14. comprehends all the Church under these two , hearers and teachers , and so again , Heb. 13. 24. Rulers and Saints . Yet the Remonstrant is resolved to hold the conclusion . Elders in a ranke above Deacons in a setled power of government with the Pastors , shall be damned by him for a new and unjustifiable opinion . Yet this is the man that would by no meanes be thought to condemne the Reformed Churches , Though hee fall as unhappily neere the very words of their profest enemies , the Netherland Remonstants , as ever we did the words of Aerius . Quod attinet Praxin antiquitatis ex ●â videlicet id demonstrari posse idoneis argumentis ( ut Censor asserit ) audaciae & temeritatis est : and again , Tota antiquitatis Praxis ei repugnat : but oh that our Remonstrant would once learn to take the counsell he gives ! And he that adviseth us to give glory to God in yielding to undoubted and cleere truth , would do so himselfe ! For if it be not more cleere , that there were elders anciently in the Church , then that there were none , and that these elders were not civill Aldermen , but ecclesiasticall Officers , Not meere Churchwardens and Vestry men busied about inferiour things of seats and rates , but employed in matters of higher nature , let the Remonstrant never renounce episcopacy . But if it be , let him take heed he do not renounce his word , which he utters , pag. 147. I doe here solemnely professe that if any one such instance can be brought , I will renounce episcopacy for ever . SECT . XVI . XVII . XVIII . THe rest of our Answer ( you say ) is but a meere declamation . And good Sir , what was your whole Remonstrance but a declamation ? And what is your Defence but a Satyre ? But ours is worthy of no other answer then contempt and silence . You are very dextrous and happy in those kind of Answers , your whole Defence is full of them . It is true you say , The religious Bishops of all times have strongly upheld the truth of God against Satan , and against his Antichrist . And it is as true that we told you , that others have upheld the truth as strongly as Bishops ever did ; Yea , & at sometimes when there was never a Bishop in the world to appeare for the truth . And therefore never impropriate all the glory to Episcopacie . It is also true that wee told you , that some irreligious Bishops have upheld Satan and his Antichrist against the truth of God , and what can you say to this ? What is this to their calling ? Sir , their upholding Antichrist makes as much against their calling , as their upholding the truth makes for their calling . If you fetch an argument from the one for their calling , we may as Logically fetch an argument from the other against their calling with as much concluding strength ; but you can tell us of Presbyters wicked and irreligious , shall the function it self therefore suffer ? Like enough . And we could tell you that they find more co●ntenance from Bishops then the painfullest Ministers . But if Presbyters should be as generally corrupted as Bishops now are , have as much strength to suppresse the Gospell , and promote Popery , as the Bishops by their supreame power have , if they can bring no more evidence of Divine institution then Bishops can , and are of no more necessity to the Church then Bishops are , let the Function suffer . We told you what an unpreaching Bishop said of a preaching Bishop ; this say you is our slander not their just Epithite , and challenge us to shew any unpreaching Bishop in the Church of England this day . Sir , pardon us if we tell you that you put us in minde of a poore Sir Iohn that because he had made one Sermon in 40. yeeres would needs be counted a preaching minister : if you speake of preaching after that rate , then indeed you may call all the Bishops in England preaching Bishops . But the people of England can so well tell who deserves the name of a preaching Bishop , that it is not the preaching of a Sermon once a yeere , or a quarter , or a month , that will bee sufficient to merit and maintain that name . Some indeed have taken some paines heretofore ; But there are so few of them now , that sure the Remonstrant intended this booke for posterity : The present Age will never beleeve that England is so full of preaching Bishops , that there is not an unpreaching Bishop to bee found . But what if we should challenge the Remonstrant to shew any preaching Bishop in England , such a preaching Bishop as Chrysostome , Augustine , and the rest of those ancient worthies were 〈◊〉 who if they had preached no oftner then our Bishops , Chrysostome had never mentioned his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so often , nor his Nudi●tertius , Nor his cras and perendie , Nor Austin his Nudius tertiani & hes●erni Sermones , Nor Cyprian his Quotidiani Tractatus . Indeed of old , one saith , Bishops gloried of their chaire , and teaching , as the flowre of their garland ; preferring it far before government ; but when they were faln from spirituall felicity , and inf●cted with Secular smoake , then they commended the labour of teaching to Presbyters , then the Iurisdiction and Consistory did carry all the credit ; Every Office in the Church being counted a dignity as it had more or lesse jurisdiction annexed to it , & this dignity hath almost crowded out the duty . The scandall of inferiour Ministers hee professeth to bleed for , but saith , we blazon : No Sir , as we told you before , and tell you again , they have beene the trumpets of their own shame , that like Hophne and Phineas made the sacrifices of the Lord to be abhorred . But wee beseech you , what is the English of your desires to have had the faults made lesse publike ? Doe you mean you would not have had them medled withall in open Parliament ? or that you would have had the Parliament doe by all Petitions brought in against such seandalous persons , as Constantine did by those Papers that the proud contentious Bishops gave one against another , commit them to the fire ? if so , then as you are Christian tels us , whether you doe not think this had been the onely way to involve the whole Parliament , and Nation in the guilt of those sins ; and expose them to that wrath and vengeance that would from heaven pursue them ? Bethink your self how you will answer this at that great Tribunall to which you make so many rash and bold appeals , as also your prophaning the glorious title of the God of peace , that you might under the sweet name of peace perswade an impunity for sin . Sir , we nothing feare but wee shall answer our opposing the unerring rule of the Word of God ( which texts you never went about to answer ) against that example of Constantine ( who as a man , though good , was subject to errour ) ten thousand times better then you will doe either of these . In our next Section , saith our Remonstrant , we spit in the face of our Mother . Good Reader please to review our Answer , Section 17. and judge . The Remonstrant will deny presently , that hee and the Bishops are the Church of England , and yet here , that which is spoken against them and their Perseus-like practices is spoken against our Mother the Church . Well , be what you please , Fathers , and Mothers , and Sonnes , and all . Onely we desire the Remonstrant if hee can , to tell us what the Church of England is . For it doth not please him here that we should call the Convocation the Church of England , much lesse the Bishops , or Archbishops . Yet if we be not mistaken , you your self call the Convocation the Church of England , pag. 122. And the Canons and Constitutions made in the Convocation are called the Canons and Constitutions of the Church of England , which the Convocation alone excluding the Parliament cannot be so much as a representative of , unlesse you will count the whole Laity of the Nation represented in Parliament none of the Church of England . Yet this is the Church so cryed up , These Canons are the commands of the Church , so rigorously urged , Who ever breaks a Canon especially in point of Ceremony is no dutifull sonne of the Church ; Indeed , in point of Morality , Drinking , Swearing , Gaming , there is more indulgence . Nay , how many Bishops in England are there that have urged their owne private paper-injunctions as the commands of the Church , and proceeded against such as would not observe them , as disobedient or refractory against their Mother the Church ? That Sir , upon the point there will appeare to be more Churches in England then one . For tell us , we beseech you , when the Church of England at Norwich forbade all prayer before and after Sermon , but onely in the words of the 55 Canon , forbad all preaching in the afternoons , all expounding of Catechisme , or Scriptures , the Church of England in London forbad none of these things ; when the Church of England in London enjoyned rayling in Communion Tables , and all communicants to make their approaches thither , the Church of another Diocesse went further , and enjoyned setting of them Altarwise . And all these were the commands of the church of England . The transgression of any one of these , the omission of any other thing enjoyned , was condemned as disobedience to the church . Now how many churches of England were there at this time ? But you will play off all this as merriment with a Ridiculum caput . To deal with you therefore seriously ; Because you make so strange a thing of hearing of more churches of England then one , and distinguish so deeply between Churches of England , and Churches in England , wee beseech you consider whither the Scripture doe not speak as properly , when it speaks of the Churches of Iudea and of Galatia , as if it had said the churches in Iudea , and in Galatia ? And what difference between Saint Iohn when hoe writes to the Church of Ephesus , of Laodicea , and the church in Sardis , in Thyatira ? Yet , we are not ridiculous enough : therefore the Remonstrant will help the matter , and to make his jeere will corrupt our words . For whereas we had said , if the bounds of a Kingdome must needs be the limits of a Churth , Why are not England , Scotland , and Ireland all one church ? to make it non-sence , hee adds of England ; are not England , Scotland , and Ireland , all one Church of England ? Hee that made it , let him take it . This discourse of Churches of England , cannot end without a descent into the Prelaticall and Anti-prelaticall Church . We said , We acknowledge no Anti-prelaticall Church . The Remonstrant tels us if wee make and condemne the Prelaticall Church , what shall be the other part of the contradistinction . Our reply must be , that not we , but themselves make the Prelaticall Church , wee doe but shew it ; and we shew also the other part of the contradistinction which the Remonstrant pleaseth to call the Antiprelaticall Church . The Remonstrant had upbrayded the Divisions of that part , wee made our just defence , and therein declared that the Prelaticall party were the chiefe Authours and Fomentors of those divisions , which the Remonstrant directly doth not deny , onely bids us lay our hands upon our hearts , and consider whether our fomenting of so unjust and deep dislikes of lawfull government have not been too much guilty of those wofull breaches . Sir , wee have considered it , and can before the great heart-searching God plead not guilty . The dislike of present Church government , which its own exorbitancy hath caused , we have not fomented , but have smothered our thoughts and griefs even untill this present , wherein the gracious hand of God hath inclined the heart of our gracious Soveraigne to call a Parliament , that hee and they might together consult of the pressures and grievances of his people , and conclude their removall . And now we cannot , wee dare not hold our peace , but declare our judgments , that if it shall seem good to our dread Sovereigne , and this Honourable Parliament , upon the many complaints brought in against Bishops and their Hierarchicall government , to remove the Hierarchie , This Act of State may appeare to all to be farre from sinne ; this not being a government appointed by Christ , nor stamped with a Ius Divinum , though some will make that their protection . As One that loves the peace of the Church , which wee ( you say ) are willing to trouble , You aske after the Bounders , &c. Are you one that loves the peace of the Church ? Wee pray of what Church ? Sure that Church that is called Prelaticall , and no other , Where of we give you the boundaries and characters , which it seems please you not . The bounders we shewed from your late Canons , which ( say you ) are too narrow : let them see to that that first made them . It is apparent , that the Canons made by Archbishops , Bishops , Deanes , and Archdeacons , in their Convocation , were never consented to , much lesse confirmed by Parliament , and yet those are called the Canons and Constitutions of the Church of England . And therfore sure , though wee doe not exclude Bishops , Deanes , &c. from being members of the Church , yet They have excluded all the rest of the Nation . For distinction wee brought bowing to the East , to Altars , &c. Now these ( say you ) are not fit distinctions whereon to ground different Churches . Yes Sir , if it be true that some have held , that the outward Formes of worship , and ceremonies attending it are the characters whereby one Church is differenced from another ; but especially when such as will not practise these , shall be disclaimed by such as doe them , as none of the sonnes of the Church . When men shall be forced to subscribe to the practice of these things , or else they shall not bee admitted either into Livings , or Cures , ( as in the instanced particulars wee have knowne it ) then they make a difference of Churches . And who are the authours of such differences , but such as thus urge them ? Next wee brought their Creed and instanced in Episcopacie by divine right : Hee replies , Did ever man make this an Article of Faith ? Judge you by what Bishop Hall saith in his Episcopacie by Divine right part 2. pag. 47. I am so confident of the Divine institution of the Majority of Bishops above Presbyters , that I dare boldly say , there are weighty points of faith that have not so strong ground in Scripture . Is this to make it an article of Faith or no ? And if not an Article of Faith , yet we are sure it is made an Article of the Church . For whereas by the orders of the Church of England , a man upon the admission to his ministry is to be examined upon no other Articles then the Articles of Religion established in the Church of ENGLAND , we have knowne more then one , whose first question hath been , what doe you thinke of Episcopaice ? We added , absolute & blind obedience to all commands of the Bishop & Ordinaries : you bid us blush . But alas Sir we are not such strangers in England , nor your selfe neither , we believe , as not to know but that this hath been the common doctrine , and almost the sole Doctrine preached by prelaticall men these many yeeres together . And the blinder the better . This we have heard , nor is it your limitation of the Oath of canonicall obedience , in Omnibus licitis & honestis , will help you : when some in stead of that have put in , In omnibus editis & edendis ? We added Election upon faith foreseen . The Remonstrant cries What ? nothing but grosse untruthes . Is this the Doctrine of the Bishops of England , have they not strongly confuted it ? Yes sure some few have , we know it . And doth not the Remonstrant know that these few have been had in suspicion , as no true friends of the Church , much lesse sonnes of the Church , more puritanicall then prelaticall , And we would none of them had said , They have beene labouring these twelve yeeres to get off the name of Puritan , and yet tt will not doe , and because of this have beene printed Tantum non in Episcopatu Puritani . And the same Authour in an other booke after that , Dico iterum iterumque dicam , Tantam non in Episcopatu Puritani . As for the Scriptures of Prelaticall men , we mentioned Apocripha and unwritten traditions : meaning that that generation lay as much weight almost upon traditions and Apocrypha , as upon a genuine text , and are more observant many of them of a custome , and tradition , then of the command of God. For Sacraments , we instanced , a Baptisme of absolute necessity , an Eucharist that must be administred upon an Altar . What are these ( say you ) to the Church of England ? Nothing , but to the Prelaticall Church they are . Call them if you will , Popish fooles , and addleheads , that maintaine these opinions yet we know the number of them is not small , that have declined into these popish waies : we acknowledge also that these are men , if not that chiesly support the Prelacy , yet such as have beene chiefely suppoted and countenanced by it . We acknowledge there are many men learned and orthodox , that have in their judgments approved of Episcopall government ; but what little incouragement these have had from the Prelates , especially , if laborious in their ministery , or any way opposing the Prelaticall innovation , in respect of the incouragements of those popish fooles and addle-heads as the Remonstrant cals them , a man may see with halfe an eye . You demanded what Christ the Prelaticall Church had ? Our answer is , a Christ that hath given the same power of obsolution to a Priest that himsefe hath : which answer , you say , is neere to blasphemy : truely an opinion so neere to blasphemy can hardly be delivered in a language much distant from it : but this ( you say ) is a slanderous fiction : no Christian Divine ever held Priests power of absolution was any other then ministeriall . If we know the man bring him forth that hee may be stoned . Truely sir , we knew the man that said the Priests power in absolution was more then Ministeriall , it was judiciary ; but he is past stoning , hee is dead : and we know another said as much ; but he sung Agags song long agoe , surely the bitternesse of death is past . For when he was brought forth to be stoned , hee was rescued by Prelaticall power , and his Sermon for which he was questioned , printed with licence , and in print presented to the Consistory . We know a third that in a Commencement did openly affirme Absolution by a Priest to be absolutely necessary to salvation . Their Heaven we said was a receptacle of drunkards , swearers , adulterers ; and surely justly wee might say so , for when did your Consistories , that pretend to have the keyes that open and shut Heaven , so shut the gates of Heaven against such sinners , as that a silver key could not open them againe ? and though your charity keepe them in Heaven while they live such , yet our charity shuts them not out of Heaven , if they did not die such . But it may be you thinke confession to a Priest , when they lie a dying shall infallibly save them , what ever their lives have beene ; and that 's the reason you slide by that prelaticall opinion and doe not question us who hold it ? We professe still wee had rather goe on in our owne waies , then theirs , and thinke it our duty to separate from these waies and opinions , rather then embrace them : yet farre we are from any thoughts of separating from the Church of England ; nor did we ever intend to affixe those exoticall positions of unsound teachers ( as you call them ) upon her : but on the faction who hath held promoted , countenanced them , and sheltred themselves all the while under the name of the Church . But if the Remonstrant hate these opinions as much as our selves ; we are glad , if he know others doe ( because he speakes in the plurall ) it is well . But wee would be glad to know in what Pallace that Prelate lives , that hath drawne out his assumed sword of discipline against these unsound teachers ? Or if he hath drawne , hath strucke , or if strucke , hath not strucke with the backe ; while the poore Non conformists hath beene slaine with the edge ? or where hee lives that hath opposed these exoticke positions so farre as to hazzard the Archprelates froune in the opposition . Having given sufficient answer to the Remonstrant , wee thought it not unfit to subjoyne some Quaeres about Episcopacy , for the Remonstrant , ( if he pleased ) to answer . Which though he saith are made up of nothing but spite and slaunder : yet surely his owne conscience tels him , there is much truth and strength in them ; else why doth he conclude we put so much trust in them ? ( when we never told him so . ) And why doth he not else apply himselfe to answer ? but like a Socraticall disputant put off the question with question ; knowing it is safer and easier to propound new questions , then to answer ours . 1. Your first Quere is , who ever held the Lordships of Bishops to be jure Divivo ? if no body , whether this be not to falsifie and slander ? you might have considered that we spake not of the Lordships of Bishops in abstracto ; but of Lordbishops in concreto : And who holds them to be jure Divino , is sufficiently knowne . But you aske why it is a greater fault in one of our Doctours to hold the Lords day to stand by humane right ( and is there but one of our Doctors of that opinion ? ) then it is for Master Calvine , ( whom for honours sake no doubt you name here as else where , seldome through your whole defence mentioning that worthy , but in some disgracefull passage . ) But did Master Calvin ever hold Bishops to be jure Divino , or did Master Calvine ever as one of our Lord-bishops , who having received a letter from a Gentleman of his City , against the publication of the Booke of sports , returned no other answer then a sharpe censure of his zeale as giddy and indiscreet ? Or did Master Calvin ever cry up Altars instead of Communion Tables , or Priests instead of Ministers ? yet in these termes our Quere was propounded , and what ever Master Calvin doth in his institution , yet in his Comment upon Deuteronomy hee stands for the strict observation of the Lords day ? 2. Whether it were any other than King Iames himselfe , of blessed memory , that said , No Bishop no King , &c. King Iames of blessed memory , never spake this of Bishops by divine right , which are the Bishops now contended for . And if King Iames of blessed memory said , no Bishop , no King : it was not hee , but others that added , no Ceremony , no Bishop ; nay some have risen higher , and said ; if neither Bishop , nor a King , how a God ? 3. Whether since it is proved that Bishops are of more then meere humane ordinance , and have so long continued in the Christian Church to the great good of Church and State , it be not fit to establish them for ever , and to avoyd a dangerous motion of innovation ? sure if the Remonstrants words may goe for proofe it is proved , else not ; that Bishops are of more then humane ordinance , and so long continuance , and how advantagious to the good of Church and State , Acta probant , and though motions of innovation may be dangerous , yet motions of Renovation are not . Non est pudor ad meliora transire , it s no shame to amend . 4. Whether these Answerers have the wit or grace to understand the true meaning of the Divine right of Episcopacy ? We will not impute it to want of wit , or grace in the Remonstrant ; but sure himselfe doth not clearely understand it , hee is so unconstant to his opinions : but whether the Remonstrant or his answerers understand the right of Episcopacy better , let the Readers to whose censure both in this controversie must stand or fall , determine : for our parts wee hope , wee understand what jus divinum meanes , but doe ingenuously confesse we have neither wit nor grace to understand the jus divinum of Episcopacy . 5. Whether there be any question at all in the fifth question ? yes certainely , if the Remonstrant would not have baulked that which he knew not how to take away ; the distinction of Apostolicall right , which say we , is either such as is founded upon the Acts , or Epistles of the Apostles , and is ( we grant ) divine : or such , as is not recorded in their writings , and is onely of things reported to be introduced into the Church the Apostles yet living . Now if the Remonstrant hold Episcopacy to be of Apostolicall right in the first sence , why doth he then grant us in expresse tearmes that in originall authority of Scripture Bishops and Presbyters are originally the sam● ? and why doth he in the same page make his retreat from the writings of the Apostles , to the monuments of succeeding times ? If he hold it in the latter sence , these two things yet remaine to be done : First , he is to prove that Bishops in a superiority of power over Presbyters , were introduced into the Church the Apostles yet living , and answer his friend Cassander , and our other testimonies produced to the contrary . Secondly , to prove , that such things may be of Divine right , whereof no record is found in Divine writings . 6. Whether Master Beza have not heard soundly of his distinction of the three kinds of Episcopacy in the full and learned answer of Soravia ? Yes , and Soravia , and others that have borrowed from him , have heard as foundly of their defences of Episcopacy , both by domesticke and forreine Divines , who have sufficiently declared how well our story of the Painter suits with your Discipline : but i● that please you not , we can ●it you with an other of the Painter , mentioned in Plutarch ; who having drawne a cocke very unskilfully and rudely , could not indure any cocke to stand within view , for feare of discovering the deformity of his picture : So our Bishops having drawne a forme and line of government , which they propose to the world as divine ; will not indure the true divine government to come in view , for feare of discovering the irregularity of theirs . 7. Whether it were not fit that we also should speake as the ancient Fathers did ? Sir , by your leave it is safe to speake in the language the Scripture speakes , but you should have done well to have spoken to the reason upon which our Quere was grounded , and what further reasons we then had , and still have to make this Quere may appeare by what wee have sayd before in vindicating Timothy and Titus from such like objections . 8. Whether Presbyters can without sinne arrogate unto themselves the exercise of the power of publike Church-government , &c. to say nothing what honour here you give to your deare Sister-Churches : Our answer is , Yes they may take the exercise of that power without sinne , though not without danger , if your High-Commission were standing . For our Saviour Christ when he gave to Peter the promise of the keyes , made in one undistinguishable act , a donation of the power both of preaching and governing ; and therefore if Presbyters may without sin publickly exercise the one by vertue of that donation , they may by the same charter as warrantably exercise the other . The last branch of your quere ; Whether any Father or Doctor till this age held that Presbyters were successors to the Apostles ? &c. We wonder that any man who hath but the repute of learning should● make such a quere . And for the answer , we refer you to what we have said before in this booke . 9. Whether ever any Bishops assumed to themselves power temporall to be Barons ? &c. Our answer is : You shew better writts for your temporalties , then you have done yet for your spiritualties . And our quaere was directed to shew the spirituall power of Bishops to be of more dangerous consequence then their temporall ; to which purpose we produced five reasons , which wee perswade our selves you scarcely read over ( for in the third there is a fault in the printing , which had you seene , your charity would scarce have let passe without an observation ) which remaining unanswered , wee conclude as before ; it concernes all those that have spirituall eyes , to endeavour to abrogate their spirituall usurpations● as well as their temporall . As for the latter part of this Quere , it is a begging of the whole dispute , Et eadem facilitate rejicitur , quâ affirmatur . 10. Whether the answerers have not just cause to be ashamed of patronizing a noted hereticke Aerius , &c. To this we answer : That if Aerius was accounted an heretique for denying Bishops to be all one with Presbyters by divine right , we are not ashamed to patronize him , till you have answered our allegations for his defence which are brought in this quere , and in divers places in this Booke . But you could not be so ignorant but to know how Bellarmine and divers others doe say . That Aerius was accounted an hereticke , not for denying the inequality of Bishops and Presbyters by Scripture , but by the Canons of the Church . But wee wonder how we escaped the brand of the heresie of the Audiani , who by the same Epiphanius are called heretiques ( though men of a blamelesse conversation ) because they did not without just cause ) freely and boldly reprove the vices of the Bishops of their daies . 11. Whether the great apostacy of the Church of Rome doe , or did consist in the maintaining the order of government set by the Apostles themselves , &c. Sure no : wee never sayd , nor thought it . But that a great part of the Apostacy of the Church of Rome consisted in swarving from the discipline of Christ and hi● Apostles , as well as from the doctrine and setting up and maintaining a new Hierarchicall forme , which cannot enter into our hearts to thinke the Apostles did ever set up : and which the most part of the Churches in the Christian World , that are professedly opposite unto the Church of Rome doe oppose , as much as they doe Rome it selfe ; though you beare the Reader in hand , they all maintaine it no lesse constantly then Rome it selfe doth ; which no man but he that hath captivated reason , & modesty to his cause , and will , would have so confidently and untruly spoken . Once againe let us aske you , whether by this bould speech all the reformed Churches of Christ be not now shut out of the number of Churches ? 12. Whether if Episcopacy be ( through the m●nificence of good Princes ) honoured with a title of dignity , &c. it to be ever the more declined ? Since the time that Episcopacy has bin honored with dignity , and revenues , the office hath not bin declined ; but the Bishops themselves haue bin declining . Yet our Quere was not whether this were a ground of declining the place , but rather of desiring the place . As for our crying up the Presbytery , because wee hope to carry some sway in it . We acknowledge our selves unworthy to beare any part in it ; but we heartily desire that Christ may rule , and wee shall most willingly subject our selves to his government . 13. Whether there bee no other apparent causes to be given for the encrease of popery and superstition in the Kingdome , besides Episcopacy ( which hath strongly laboured to oppose it ) &c. We deny not but there may have bin other causes , but none so apparant as Episcopacy . But whereas in a parenthesis which you might well have left out without any detriment either to your sense or the truth , you say that , Episcopacy hath strongly laboured to oppose popery : we answer Quid verba audimus cum facta videmus ? you aske againe whether the multitude of Sects ( you should have added which the tyranny of Bishops hath made , ) And professed ●lovenlinesse in Gods service have not bin guilty of the encrease of prophanenesse . We answer againe , not so much as the forbidding of preaching and Catechising , as the countenancing of sports on the Lords day , as the scandalous lives of too too many episcopall men , and the libertinisme of the Bishops houses and Courts . 14. Your 14. Quere consists of a Paradox , and a Sol●cisme . A Paradox in saying , That all Churches throughout the whole Christian world have ever observed , and doe constantly and uniformely obserue and maintaine Episcopall government . When as you know all your deare sisters of whom you professe a tender care , doe disclaime it . Of a Bull and sol●cisme in saying That all Christian Churches doe constantly and uniformely observe it . And yet confessing , that there are lesse noble Churches that conforme not unto it . 15. In your next Quere you contradict your selfe and the truth as a selfe confounded man. For here you say , That the name of Bishop hath bin for this 1600 yeares appropriated ( in a plaine contradistinction ) to the governours of the Church . But page 48 where we bring Iren●us calling Anicetus , Pius , Hyginus , &c. Bishops of Rome Presbyters , And others also using the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; You cry out with a loud voyce , Is this al ? that your trifling may appeare to all the World. Name but any one of our writers , who have hitherto stood up in the cause of Episcopacy , that have not granted and proclaimed this which you contend for . In the latter end of this quere , you thinke to stop our mouthes with Balaams wages , and demand . Whether if we will allow you to be Bishops , all will not be well ? Wee are scripture Bishops without your allowance . As for to be Hierarchicall Bishops , since God will not allow it , we care not for your allowance . But what Patent or Monopoly have you among all the multitude of late Projectors obtained , that without your allowance a Presbyter may not be admitted into a Bishoprick ? 16. To your last Quere we answer . That if God had set your episcopall government in his Church ; wee know it could not bee lawfull for us to deny subjection unto it . But we have proved the contrary in this discourse . Neither have the Lawes of this land so firmely established it ; but that it may be repealed by the same Lawes , and suffer a just period for its matchlesse pride , and insufferable oppressions . Which for the present we perceive is out of feare a little aba●ed , and that makes you aske ; Whether it were not most lawfull and just to punish our presumption and disobedience , &c. Time was when the High commission and other Episcopall Courts would have made both our eares more then tingle for such a question without enquiring either the lawfulnesse and justice of it . Thus we have answered his 16. Queries , but before we end our booke , we cannot but take notice of what the Remonstrant addes in the conclu●ion . For there he tells us , That he hopes he hath given a sufficient answer to our bold and unjust demands : And yet notwithstanding he doth not vouchsafe to give any answer at all , but only propounds new questions , insteed of answers : which if the Reader will conceive a sufficient way of answering ; we doubt not but we shall quickly give satisfaction to all that ever hath bin written for Episcopall government , either by Bishop Bilson , Bishop Downham , Bishop Hall , or any other whatsoever . To all the Postscripts . Wee will not create trouble to the Reader , by a reiterated justification of our sincerity , though it be againe prodigiously wounded . Here is much cry , and little wooll . Hee cannot deny what in our Postscript we have proved to be the practises of Prelates , ever since Austins erection of the See of Canterbury , onely first hee salsely tells us , that wee have borrowed a great part of it out of Sions plea. But if that Author hath collected any of the same Stories ( which yet wee know not ) out of the Chronicles , why should we be thought to have borrowed them from him , ( whom wee durst not for feare of the Prelates keepe in our studies ) rather then from the Chronicles themselves ? Secondly he answers , That they were popish Bishops , limmes of that body whose head we abjure , &c. But Sr you know that in Henry the eights time , when this head abjured , the Body of popery still remained . This Body of popery ( comprehended in six Articles ) was called a wh●p of six strings , And you with all your Rhetoricke will hardly perswade the people , but that they have bin lashed for these many yeares with a whip of six and twenty strings . Have not most of these denied this Head to be Antichrist ? And that if wise men had the handling of it , we might be reconciled unto it ? Hath not one of their abettors written , that the Religion of the Church of Rome is not onely a possible , but a safe way to Heaven ? What then will it availe to say that our Bishops and they have different heads ? Thirdly , he answers , That a charitable man might have made a longer Catalogue of the good fruites of our Episcopacy , and reckons up a multitude of their good deeds , many whereof , ●hould ●ee wipe our eyes never so much , wee feare wee should not see , and the rest which are in any kind visible , will not , if weighed in a just ballanc● , beare any proportion , to all those unnaturall fruits mentioned in our Postscrips . In his close he tells us , That the Bishops foote hath bin in our booke , which is quite spoiled by his just confutation . We confesse truly the Bishops ●o 〈◊〉 hath left much dirt behinde it ; but could many hundred● of godly Ministers , have as easily got the Greene Wax and Red Wax of the Bishops out of their mouthes with which they have bin a long time stopped , As we have wiped away the dirt that hath bin throwne upon our booke ; The Church of England had never made so many sad complaints , and presented so many dolefull petitions unto the high and supreme Court of Justice . 2. His second Postscript is an advertisement to the Reader , for the vindication of the credit of the person of Doctor Hall , and his Episcopacy by divine right , from the censure which Doctor Voetius is reported to have passed upon them both . True it is , there was tendred to us a justification of what that angry Pamphlet ( as he calls it ) had published to the world . But because wee found that it would deeply reflect upon the credit of Doctor Hall , and that in a language more disgracefull then that was before said , wee refused to insert it . Our businesse is with a namelesse Remonstrant , not with the undervaluation of any mans person in particular . If hee please to call for it , he may have it . His third Postscript brings in the judgement of Scultetus to ●make the World believe that his new opinion of Episcopacy by divine right is not destitute of Patrons in the reformed Churches . But what is one Scultetus to the many hundred learned men amongst them of a contrary judgement ? We might here retort upon our Remonstrant , that he saith concerning the moderator of Geneva page 138. You tell me of the moderator of Geneva as if all the Church of God were included in those strait walls . We could have translated Voetius his Theses for the justification of lay Elders both out of Scripture and antiquity . But for brevity sake wee will content our selves with what that learned Rivet spake ( when these two Treatises of Scultetus were shewed to him by a great Prelate amongst us , and his judgement required ) Haec omnia jamdudum sunt protrita & profligata . This was related to us by Doctor Twisse , who had it from Doctor Rivet himselfe . FINIS . The Printer to the Reader . Courteous Reader , WE cannot but confesse , that the crouding in of many little Pamphlets into the Presse hath for many weeks detained this Book , to the great grief of the Authors : Wee desire thee to correct with thy pen these following Errata , and to cover the lesser faults with thy Charity . PAge 12 line 11 dele more to be read●line 18 read ●r . p 14 l 5 deest Although . l 30 r obtain . p 18 d Zanchy and Cassander out of the marge●t . p 21 l 6 r ●nstruct●oribus . p 26 l 17 next appointed adde , a hint thereof we have Acts 3. 1. p 18 l 17 r Presb●ters for Priests . l 18 for not r once . p 29 l 27 d because . p 38 l 12 d for our part . l 31 r time . p 42 l pen. r Reformed Protestant Churches . p 36 l 18 r Their. p 64 l 24 r Prebyterii . p 74 l 30 At That make a comma . p 81 l ult r Common . p 84 r hasty . p 86 l 15 r Contradiction . p 92 l 25 for are r have been p 93 l 16 r admisimus . p 96 l 14 r Leo● p 111 l 31 r proved . p 112 l 27 r please . p 113 l 18 r proofs for processe . p 114 l ●6 for promise r. prem●se p 115 l 21 for alone r along . p 118 18 r office for worke . p 126 l 24 make a comma at of . p 127 l 21 r of for as● p 129 l 14 r Capp●llus . p 132 l 29 to Dowah●m , adde Epis●opacie by Divine Right . p 135 l 11 next to Thirdly adde is there . p 136 l 26 adde The in the beginning of the line p 159 l 27 r Campian . p 160 l 31 for we r you , and for you r we . p 174 l 11 dele particular . p 176 l 6 dele Call. Notes, typically marginal, from the original text Notes for div A52063-e140 Apol. pro Sancta Manic . pag. 77. 95. Notes for div A52063-e1190 Pag. 1●3 . Bone habet his in●●bus non ve●tuntur fortune Ecclesiae . * A Gentleman student in Philosophy , that was by chance present at the reading of this passage , tooke such a fancy to this rare mystery of light froath , sinking aloan , that he would take no nay , till he had entreated us to obtain so much of the Remonstrant , as to publish his receit of making light froath sinke alone , that it may be added to the Secrets of Alexis , or the rare experiments of Baptista Porta . 〈◊〉 . 25. Iust. Mart. Apolog 2. Tertull. Apol. cap. 39. 1 Cor. 14. Dictatas ●sacrificulo preces non concipimus , sed ex ipsa sede Animi Spiritusque nostri cum suspiriis gemituque , &c. Nicholl . Riga●● . 1. C. in Tertull. Animad . Apud Ethunicos , Monitor praeibat preces , ac de script . quidem ne quid verborum praete●iretur art praeposterum diceretur , rursusque alius cust●s erat , qui attenderet , alius qui linguis favere juberet . The changing of orationes sua● in the text , into orationes nostras in his margin is not over-much faithfulnesse . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ●●ssander . Vn●m quidem , scilicet primam silentio . Quamvi 〈◊〉 haec precum & aliarū orationum conscribendarum privata ●bido imperitos homines usque adeo invas●rit ut necessum fuerit in Conciliis modum aliquem huic rei constitui ne temere quae●is orationes in usum praesertim Eccl●siasticum admitte●●tur . Castand . p. 30● ubi cit . Conc● Carth. & Mil● Concil . Milevit . cont . Caelest , & Pelag. The Seder Teph●ll●th to which hee now refers being 700 yeers after Christ. Answ. pag. 8. De Emend . Tem● . Commentis Samaritanis incrustat● . Synag . Iudaiea , lib. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost. Psal. 41 Quis tuler●s Grac●●os . We know the Apostles gro●●d , this 〈◊〉 tolerate the Iewish Ceremonies a while , but wh●● th●y saw the I●ws remayning ha●d●ed still , they quickly purged the Church of them . Among the rest Master Abbot whom we quoted ●n out answer but by a mistake it is referred to the fourth 〈◊〉 instead of this Har. Synod . Belg. cap. 11. Ca● . 21. Minister preces vel dictante spiritu , vel certa sibi propos●●â for●ula concipiet . Peracta coena haec gratiarum aut aliqua ei similis adhibetur . This speech was spoken in the Lords house by a Noble Peere , and had the approbation of many others . Greg. l. 6. epist. 6 ep . 64. Cam. 2. 17. Bether in Heb. is division . Pocem Ecclesie Martyrio praeferim●● . Cypr. Pax sine veritate est execrabile adulterium . Cyp. Pag. 35. Episc. by divine Right , part . 2. p. 6. Pag. 35. Pag 36. Bishop Hall saith expresly in Episcopacie by divine right , p. 29. that Timothy was a Diocesan Bishop , and Ephesus a Diocesan Church ; it seems you dare ●ot say so . Episc. div . Right 2 part . p. 113. Episc. div . Right part . 2. p. 110 , 111. Pag. 39. Pag. 39. Pag. 40. Pag. 41. Pag. 42. Pag. 45. Catolog . Test. verit . Tom. 2. Tantum duos ordines ministrerum esse debere judicavit , viz. Presbyteros & Diaconos . Wals. Hist. Aug. Rich. 2. p. 205. Fox Martyre● . Catal. Test. T. 2. Silvest . Gi●ald . in specim . Eccles. li. 3. c. 1. & 14. Balcent . 3. c. 61. Math. Paris . l. 4. Anno 960. Quod in novo Testamento nulla mentio facta est ullorum graduū , aut dist●ncti onum in Ordinibus , sed tantum Diaconorum vel Ministrorum & Presbyterorū sive Episcoporū . Pag. 46. Pag. 128. Pag. 125. The Author of Episc. by divine Right , affirmes the same part 2. pag. 49. Pag. 47. Pag 47. 48. Pag. 48. Pag. 48. Pag. 49. Irenaeus lib 4. cap. 44. Pag. 49. Ep. 19. Ep. 16. Answ. p 38. Bibl. Pat. T●m . 15● . 170 de Gcrae●o 〈◊〉 rat●r Liturgica . Pag. 49. Pag. 49. So said S●●via of Hierom before . Pag. 24. Fran. Sancta Clara. Apol. Epis. pag. 67. 68. Whit. Contr. a● Quaest. 5. 2 Iohn 10. 11. Pag. 50. Pag. 51. Pag. 51. Pag. 53. This Text is brought by a late Writer for Episcopacy , to prove that as yet there were no bishops over Presbyters in the Church of the Apostles , And for this purpose he brings Hirome upon the same text , affirming the same thing . Page 55. Page 55. Def. p. 56. Episcop . by divine right , part 2. p. 91. Can. Sardic . can . 6. Page 56. Beliar. de Script . Eccles. Page 57. Def. 58. Ierom de Scriptoribus Eccles. Page 59. In his defence , p. 125. Page 59. Iob 33. 23. Page 60. Def. p. 61. Down . def . 3. lib. cap. 4. pa. 80. Page 62. Page 62. Page 63. * Page 77. Page 64. Page 64. Epist. 11. 13. Rom. 11. 13. August . contra Maxim. Arian . Episc. Lib. 3. August . de verbo Ap. sec. 29. Page 65. Suidas tels us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was a principall place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , aliis studio est princeps locus , & he cals him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 qui primam tenet sedemet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est sedibus primis vel honoribus primis dignari . Balsam . in Can. 89. Conc. Carthagin : Page 66. Page 68. Page 69. * And yet the wise writer of this Defence did not contradistinguish them in his defence , p. 78. where he expresses ordination under spirituall jurisdiction . Page 70. Page 70. Page 71. Page 71. Page 72. In Arnob. li. 3. Episc. Di. Right , part . 2. p. 91. Quaest. de utroque mixtim . 101. Page 72. De Clericis , l. 1. c. 17. Perpet●gon . c. 14. Lib. 2. c. ● . 52 , 53. Page 73. Episc. Di. Right , part . 2. p. 10. Page 74. In our former booke sententia was by a mistake printed for presentia , the whole Canon not being quoted ▪ Page 74. Page 75. Page 75. Page 76. Down . Defen . 1. lib. c. 8. Page 76. Page 77. Page 77. Page 78. Page 78. Page 79. Page 79. Lisest mihi de tribus capellis : Tu Cannas , Mithridati cumque bellum , Magra voce sonas Iam dic Posthume , de tribus capellis . Mart. l. 6 Page 80. Balsum . in Can. 78 Concil . Carthag . in can . 100. Zonar . in can . Concil . Carth. 81. & can . 108. Page 79. Page 73. Page 81. Matth. 26. 63. Your Bishop of the Church of Thyatira , might have given his wife lezabel ( as you call her ) this oath . Calv. ad Farel . Page 83. Page 84. Page 74. By Bishop Hall , in his Episcopacy by divine right . * Parker on the coss e , part . 2. c. 8. sect . 2. Page 90 , 91. Def. p. 94. Page 100. Page 97. Vide Lud. Capell . hist. Eccles. p. 66. 74. Page 60. Estius in Arg. in secundam ep ad Tim. So Bilson . Vide Episc. by Di. Right , p. 2. Prolegum . in Chron. Euseb. Euseb. lib. 3. c. 4. Ephes. 4. 11. Page 92. Page 93. Part 2. p. 2. An Evangelist in the naturall sence of the words is he that preacheth the glad tidings of the Gospell . Page 94. Page 95. You cannot shake it out so easily . Page 96. Page 97 , 98. Epist. 2. part . p. 39. Page 98. Page 99. Chrys. in Tit. c. 1. Hom. 2. Page 100. Ans. p. 51. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epis. Div. Rig. part 2. Centur. 1. lib. 2. cap. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Page 102. Page 103. Episc. by Di. Right , 1 pt . 35. For the further high commendation of Clement and this his peece , See Epil . by div . right part ●●●ct . 10. p. 59 , 60. Whom yet he hath wronged in his quotations . Whitak . de Pontif . qu. 2. cap 15. Page 104. Page 104. Page 105. Page 106. The memorable copy of Tecla●s may be translated , Thy woman Iezeb●l , or That woman of thine Iezebel . We see no shadow of reason why the Remonstrant should translate it , Thy wise Iezebel . In the Arabick it is , Quod sivisti muli●rem ●ocatam Iezebel , according to our ordinary Greeke copies . Page 106. Page 106. Page 107. Page 107. Page 108. Censura lib. Apooryph . prael . 64. Page 109. Page 109. Page 110. Page 111. Page 111 , 112. Page 112. Page 113 Page 114. Page 114. Page 116. Page 117. Page 117. Page 118. Page 118. Page 121. Page 119. Page 122. Page 123. Page 124. Aquin. Aureol . Capreol . &c. Page 124. Page 125. Page 127. Page 128. Remonst . p. 26. Pag. 129. Pag. 130. Pag. 130. Pag. 132. Pag. 133. Pag. 134. Episc. div . Right part . 2. p. 91. Pag. 135. Pag. 136. Pag. 137. And even in these Churches of Germany , the Superintendents are nothing like our bishops . They are of the same degree with other Ministers , they are onely Presidents while the Synod lasteth ; when it is dissolved , their prerogative ceaseth : They have no prerogative over their fellow Ministers , They are subject to their Presbyteries . The Synod ended , they returne to the care of their particular Churches , Zepper . lib. 2. cap. 10. Ezek. 34. 16 , 17 , 18 Pag. 140. Pag. 140. Pag. 141. Pag. 141. Pag. 142. 143. Austin . Serm. 14 de verb. Apost . Pag. 142. 143. Pag. 142. Pag 143. Pag 144. Pag. 145 Pag. 146. Gest Purgationis 〈◊〉 & Faelicis . To answer your margine in a margine : why may not Presbyteri be as truly translated Elders as Seniors ? Pag. 147. Pag. 147. Pag. 148. Pag. 149. Pag. 149. Pag 149. In the late Canons the Bishops Consistory is called the Church . No●e the sixteenth of the new Canons . Pag. 150. Pag. 151. Pag. 152. Pag. 153. Pag. 153. Page 155. ● Montague . Page 156. Quaere 2. Ambr. Page 157. Def. p. 47. Page 158. Page 160.