TRIPLE EPISCOPACY: OR, A  ORDER OF BISHOPS: One of GOD, another of MEN, and another of the DEVIL; the two later must be plucked up, the former only must continue, and the Reasons why.  
With a declaration of certain other weighty points concerning the Discipline and Government of the Church:  Matth. 15. 13. Every plant which mine heavenly Father hath not planted should be rooted up.  three men holding books 
Of God,  
bible  
Of Man,  
Service book  
Of the Devil.  
Superstition  

Lo, here are three men, standing in degree,  
The least of these, the greatest ought too be.  
The other two, of men and of the Devil.  
Ought to be rooted out for ere as evil.   
Printed, and are to be sold by SAMVEL SATTERTHWAIT at his house 〈…〉   

A threefold Episcopacy. We must needs make three Bishops: 

1. Of God.  
2. Of MAN.  
3. Of the DEVIL.    
BIshops ordained of God, or set up by the Law of God, doth declare nothing else but their calling, which by another more special name, are called Pastors, whom (saith Luke) the holy Ghost hath appointed Bishops to feed the Church of God. And either of these names of Pastor or of Bishop, is proper to them in the new Testament, whereby the Apostle doth distinguish them from Apostles, Prophets, and Evangelists, which were callings to endure for a time, Ephes. 4. 11. and from Deacons, 1 Tim. 3. & Phil. 1. 1. for otherwise they are every where called Elders; and Paul doth call his Apostleship a Deaconship, Rom. 11. 13. But they are called Bishops in regard of the sheep committed unto them, as though a man should call them Watchmen of overseers.  
These now were one alone, as where any Church but one Pastor, or more, if the Church had more than one. And the meeting of them together jointly with their Elders, whom Paul calls Governors, of the other common name called, was the eldership. Their duty was to attend on the Word and Prayer, both publicly and privately, and in common to govern the Church, as appeareth by many places of Scripture.  
That the same were subject to Magistrates, though profane, appeareth not only by the example of Christ the high Priest, and of the Apostles, but also by the express words of Paul, 1 Tim. 2. and Luke 12. 13.  

Of the Bishop that is of Men.  
THe Bishop that is of Men, that is to say, brought into the Church by the alone wisdom of man, besides the express Word of God, is a certain power given to one certain Pastor above his other fellows, yet limited with certain orders or rules provided against tyranny. They which did bear this office of Bishop, are called Bishops in regard of their fellow Elders, and the whole Clergy, as watchmen set over the Clergy.  
That this calling was not brought in by the Word, it is manifest by that, that there is not to be found in the new Testament, so much as one syllable, whereby there may be the least surmise of any such thing: For although we doubt not, but all things ought to be done orderly in the Lord's house, and therefore, that some one should be precedent in every assembly, whom John in the Revelation seemeth to call the Angel of the Churches, And Austin calleth the moderator Proestota, yet this moderator of actions of the Church, saving this one thing, that he was the first in order in the company, had no authority over his fellows, neither did he exercise any higher office. Therefore the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, as Hierome noteth, doth call the whole company of the Elders, Governors; not any one certain man. Such a one was Peter many times in the very assembly of the Apostles, of a great authority surely amongst the Apostles, who were all otherwise equal, and yet he himself one of the company of the Apostles, sent by his companions to Samaria with John, Acts. 8. 14. and in the assembly giving an account of his Ministry, to those that were of the Circumcision, Acts 11. 2. But if any such Bishop like authority of any one above the rest, as there was afterwards, had been then, surely the Apostles would have set down their names even at that time, in their letters which they sent from one to another, especially seeing Paul in his Epist. to the Philippians doth name Bishops in the plural number, and Deacons: or there should have been at least some peculiar mention made of them. Which, seeing it is not done, it appeareth that amongst these Governors, there was none in degree above their companions and fellow Bishops: but as occasion served, the Churches were governed by a fellowlike and equal authority, among the fellow Elders in their Elderships, he only going before the rest, whose godliness and authority, the company did most allow of.  
Epiphanius against the Arrians, defending the contrary opinion: namely, the Bishop ordained by man, as ordained by God, doth bring forth three Reasons to the contrary. Two, as it were, out of the Word of God: the third out of the History of those times. The first place is, 1 Tim. 5. 1. Rebuke not an Elder, etc. whereby he gathereth, that Timothy had some authority over the Elders, that is, the Pastors of the Church of Ephesus. But (be it spoken with the favour of so worthy a man) he should have marked, that here an Elder is called, he that is such by age, not he that is a Pastor, which is declared by the opposition next following of young men.  
Another place is out of the same Epistle, Receive not an occusation against an Elder, 1 Tim. 5. 19 Whereby he gathereth, that the Elders were subject to the Bishops and tribunal seat. But who will grant him that Timothy was Bishop of Ephesus? For the history will easily refel that, which the Fathers do report as certain; for no man can deny that Timothy was one that accompanied Paul, and therefore no Bishop assigned to any one certain place, who was sent one while to this place, another while to that, for the establishing of the Churches. And finally, that he was an Evangelist, and not a Bishop of any one certain flock. I have desired thee (saith he) to abide at Ephesus, whilst I went into Macedonia. And why so? namely, to look to the Church which he had begun to establish, until he were called for again, which he doth in the other Epistle. What? and did the Apostle rob the Ephesians of their Bishop without ask their Church at the least? Surely, when he went last to Jerusalem, never minding to return to Ephesians either he would have restored Timothy unto them, or the Ephesians would have required him again of the Apostle, when he put them in mind of so great danger at hand: or if any other were to be put into his room, he would have made express mention in that his divine Sermon. But he is said to have sent for the Elders only, and to have warned them of the duty belonging to them all. Yet it need not seem strange to any that the Evangelist Timothy, a man endued with so many and so great gifts remaining at Ephesus, did govern all things by his direction, as one in degree above the Elders, and by the Apostles authority appointed there for a time.  
But let us grant Epiphanius more than this, that Timothy had the authority of the laying on of hands out of these words of the Apostle, Lay not hands suddenly upon any: Let us grant this too, that these duties belonged to the Governors, yet we deny that Timothy could have had any authority therefore over the Elders of Ephesus, except he had been an Evangelist. For Paul himself, Tim. 4. 14. doth show sufficiently, that the laying on of the hands was done in the name of the Eldership itself, not by the authority of any superior. Now the Reasons of the same Epiphanius are these: Bishops (saith he) beget the Fathers of the Church, but Elders the sons, in as much as Bishops, and not Elders ordained Bishops. But what is this else, than to ask to have that which is in question: for it may be, and aught to be answered, that the Bishops took that authority upon them, without warrant of the Word of God, and that the rule is false, which concerning this matter, doth attribute it to the Apostles, which may be showed by the ordaining of Timothy by the Eldership. Again, for as much as election is the chief ground of Church-offices, which dependeth of the voices of the whole company, and not of the laying on of hands, which made not Bishops, but sent them into their possessions after they had made them: we may more truly affirm with the Apostle, that the holy Ghost by the voices of the childrem themselves, made the Fathers, and not the Bishops.  
Another of his Reasons is, a depraving of places alleged out of Paul, that the Church being new borne, Bishops could not be so established every where at the first, as is to be seen in the election of Deacons. Whom yet can Epiphanius persuade, that it was for want of fit men only, that there were many Bishops in every Church? For that which not only Hierome, but Epiphanius against the Miletians also reporteth, concerning them of Alexandria: that is, Alexandria never had two Bishops, as the other cities, upon what ground the men of Alexandria did it, and followed not the examples of other Churches, let them see to it.  
Finally, that this kind of Bishop, which who so beareth it, is not the first in order amongst his fellow-Elders, but in degree above them, being the only man in his diocese, is not ordained by the Word of God, but by custom amongst the Fathers, Hierome witnesseth, as very many others long since have observed: For these are his words in his Epistle to Euagrius.  
The Apostle (saith he) doth teach plainly, that Elders and Bishops are all one, etc. And whereas one after was chosen to be set over the rest, that (saith he) was a remedy found out for a remedy of schism, that every one drawing Christ unto himself, might not rend the Church in sunder. For at Alexandria also, from the time of Mark the Evangelist, to the time of Heraclea and Dionyfius the Bishop, the Elders placed one in a high degree or place, chosen by themselves, whom they called a Bishop. Moreover, upon the first to Titus. An Elder, and a Bishop (saith he) is all one, and before by the instigation of the Devil, there was partaking in Religion, it was said amongst the people: I am of Paul, of Apollo's, and of Cephas: the Churches were governed by the common advice of the Elders. But after that every one imagined, that those whom he baptised were his own, and not Christ's: it was decreed throughout the whole world, that one chosen of the Elders, should be set above the rest; unto whom all the care of the Church might appertain to the taking away of the seeds of contentions. And a little after, as the Elders know, that they are subject by the custom of the Church to the Bishop that is set over them: so let the Bishops know, that they are greater than the Elders, rather by custom, then by any virtue of the Lords appointment. Yea, and Augustine also in his 19 Epistle saith, that according to the titles of honour, which the use of the Church hath gotten, the office of a Bishop is greater than the office of an Elder.  
chrysostom also witnesseth, upon 1 Tim. cap. 3. that the Bishops differ from the Elders only in ordination, that is (as Theophylact speaks more plainly) in the only Ceremony of consecration. Theodoret writing upon the same place, saith, That in the old time they called the same men Elders & Bishops, as though, for sooth, the thing itself had then been only called by another name, and goeth about to prove that, because Paul calleth Epaphroditus the Apostle of the Philippians. This is of no weight at all. The names which are given of fellow-labourer, and fellow-soldier do declare, that he was no Bishop in this kind of Bishop, but an Evangelist, tied to no one City, much less to a Diocese, of the number of those whom the Apostles did keep, to send to and fro, at the motion of the Spirit of God. The Council of Nice also, disputing about the degrees of Bishops, allegeth ancient customs, whereof we mind to speak anon. And whereas Cyprian not in one place, calleth the Bishop's successors of the Apostle, whose authority is from God; and if we take it so, as though by the very commandment of God, these Bishops are the same, that in time past the Apostles; the thing itself doth refute that, seeing there was always a certain portion assigned to every Bishop. But the Apostles, by direction of the Spirit of God, though not confusedly, did exercise their Ministry throughout the whole world. But if this be true, there should have been more Bishops in the Church of Rome itself, namely, Peter and Paul, which yet afterwards was accounted peculiar to one. And surely, there cannot be more, the chief in one and the same company at one time. And whereas the name of Bishops is said of the Apostleship, Acts 1. 20. It maketh nothing to the matter, except a man by a like reason would have the Deacons to have been Apostles, because Paul calleth his Apostleship a Deaconship or Ministry. But we are to look into that also, that Hierome might seem to be of the mind, that this kind of Bishop begun then, when as schisms arose up in the Church. That this is not so, we may gather out of Paul himself, who of purpose writing to the Corinthians about the same matter, doth not only pass over this remedy, but also as foreseeing such a matter, doth in the title of the Epistle, join unto himself Sosthenes, to teach by his example how carefully this Primacy is to be avoided in assemblies of the Church, who (it is evident were not only the first in order next unto Chest, but also highest in degree) did execute their Ministry in common. Wherhfore, no not the same Paul alone would excommunicate the incestuous persons by his Apostolical authority, but by the authority of the whole Eldership, neither doth Peter doubt to call himself fellow Elder.  
Nay, this is so fare off from being any good remedy, from staying of schisms, that contrariwise there was never more bitter contention in the Church, than about this Primacy which had never come to pass, if this pre-eminence above their fellows had been forbidden, or rather, if men had never brought it in. Whereupon we conclude, that this kind of Bishop which is not of order, but of superiority, was brought in of man, and as Hierome saith, Tit. 1. by little and little, and that so as he is indeed thought, that the plants of dissension might be thereby plucked up, all the care was committed to one man.  
And whereas he saith in the same place, that it was decreed throughout all the world: We are to understand it not otherwise, than of a privy custom, brought in by little and little. And whatsoever is found in Ignatius, or other ancient Writers, when the Bishop of Satan was not yet found out, touching the authority of the Bishops or Overseers (as Justin speaketh) is to be understood of this kind of Bishop.   

The Bishop of the Devil.  
THus also we describe the Bishop of the Devil; that even as that kind of Bishop ordained of God, degenerated by little and little into an humane ordinance, whereof we entreated in the second place: so this of the Devil, against which we now labour, is sprouted forth of the corruption of the Bishop brought in by man. Of this intolerable corruption there are foul, most manifest, and undoubted marks. Some of this kind of Bishops have wholly singled themselves from the Elderships, so that they have nothing to do with them: Some have wholly abolished them. And that they have challenged unto themselves, and I know not to what Officials, the whole guidance of the Church, and chief the authority to elect, to depose, and to excommunicate: so as they not only are above others, but as it were alone do exercise Lordship over God's inheritance, contrary to the express inhibition of Peter.  
That also they have invaded upon temporal dominions contrary to the flat commandment of Christ. And that they will not only be present, but also precedent in causes of this life, and affairs of the Commonwealth, the commandment of the Apostle to the contrary notwithstanding, 2 Tim. 2. 1. Cor. 6. yea, and that of Christ himself, Luke 13. 14.  
That also they waste in riot and stateliness against conscience and all shame, the goods consecrated to holy uses.  
That also they have tied the Spirit of God to certain places and persons, as though the Bishop of the more noble place, must needs have necessary gifts above the rest: or, as though he, who now is most fit, must needs be so always.  
And last of all, that they are the Image of that beast which is described, Apoc 13. as Pope Anacletus himself witnesseth, Epist. 2. in as much as they are distinguished among themselves, by those their thrones and degrees, according to the pattern of the Roman Empire The Apostle, Act. 20. 19 foretold of this Hierarchy, as they term it, of the false Bishop, which in time became an Antichristian primacy. And in the 3. John 9 it is most manifest, that Satan begun even then to lay the foundation of this mystery.  
Now, out of the History of the Nicene Council, which otherwise touching doctrine, was every where received, it is clear how foul dissensions were even then, of ordering the bonds between the Bishops, the fountains whereof they were so fare from damning up, that pretending ancient customs, they confirmed the Patriarchship, and made a way for the horrible Papacy of Rome then sliding on, and underlayed the seat for the Harlot that sitteth upon seven mountains. But far be it off, that these things, although they have their ancient & great authority, should be prejudicial to the divine and Apostolical writings, according to the rule whereof, there is no wise man will doubt, that the counsels themselves are to be squared.  
And to what purpose should I confute that agreement between the Priesthood of the Levites, and of Christ, which some old writers allege to prove this devilish oligarchy, and at the length even plain tyranny. Indeed, it is evident, that the high Priest was a figure of Christ himself, whose second Image, if we grant that the Bishops are, it will follow, that there are as many images of Christ as there be Bishops, in as much as there is none above him. But contrariwise, no Bishop hath been the Image of Christ. Besides, Bishops are not heads of the universal Church, but of their own particular: Nay, no heads at all, in as much as the Bishops are under Archbish. the Archbishops under the Patriarches, & they again under the Pope, that is not under the true figure, but the counter seit figure of Christ. Now, seeing that our only head is taken up into heaven, a successor for whom living for ever, we are not to seek; who seethe not, that the Elders ordained by the Law of God, come in theroome of the Priests of the Law, and the Deacons to answer to the Levites?   

The first Question.  
Seeing that there are ordained in several Churches, several Pastors and Ministers, and the authority of all Christ's Ministers in the Church seem to be equal: Whether the office of the Bishops be necessary in the Church to procure meetings when occasion ser●●●● 〈…〉 on just causes: or whether all the Ministers having equal authority, and not under the authority of any superior Bishop, aught to choose fit men with the consent of the Patron who enjoyeth the benefice, and the people themselves, as also to correct and remove from the charge. And the manners of the people themselves, who can hardly, or not at all, be kept in obedience without the bridle of the Bishop's authority, which may run through in visiting of the Churches of the Province, may put us in mind to retain such Bishops. Again, so often as there shall be dealing in matters touching the safety of the common wealth in the solemn assemblies of the Land, according to the Laws which the kingdom hath of a long use and custom received, there can be nothing established without the Bishops, who have the third room and place in the kingdom, which to take away, or wholly to put down, would be very dangerous to the Commonwealth.  

The Answer to the first Question.  
Whereas Satan's Bishop hath been the overthrow of the Church and all the Christian kingdoms, whose head is the Roman Antichrist, it is to be looked unto of all hands, especially of all godly Princes, that they at once abolish it, if they mind the reformation of the Church, and their own safety. As for the Bishop ordained by man, and brought into the Church by little and little, whereby Satan made him a way for greater things, it had been tolerable, so that with all the ancient good Laws providing for the resisting of the governing by some few, had been in their former force again. But besides, that the state of the world being quite changed, experience of so many ages doth teach us too well, that unless this root also be plucked up, it will come to pass, that the same fruit will sprout and bud forth again. Finally, seeing the Lord hath so often decided this controversy of superiority among his own Disciples, that he shut it clean out, seeing the rule both for doctrine & good order of the Church, is to be sought for out of the very writings of the Apostles: and it is manifested, the Churches then prospered, when all this authority of one man over the rest, yet was not, but as that grew up, so all things fell to decay. Finally, seeing where the rem. nants of this government by a few, are not clean taken away, the work of the Lord, is openly hindered: Our judgement is, that after the chase away of this device of man, the Churches shall be well provided for, if they may be repaired according to the writings of the Apostles. And the reformation, as it seemeth to us, consisteth herein; that first the whole kingdom is to be divided into regions. Again, the regions into parishes, either of cities or country towns; that in places most fit, and of greatest assembly, be placed Pastors, being lawfully propounded by the company of their own Elders, to the King's Christian Majesty, or the deputies thereof, and allowed of all. Lastly, being received of their own people, over whom they are to be set, they be placed, promulgation having gone befo●●: and that in every parish the Pastor may have with him sit men to assist him, who also may, being watchful, salve up the offences not so weighty, leaving the other of greater importance, to the whole Eldership. Also, that Eldership made of the Pastors of parishes, both of City and country, and a sufficient number of men approved for their godliness & wisdom, lawfully also chosen, as is aforesaid, be placed in most fit places, who assembling at a certain time and place, may determine of the Church affairs, of their own government, according to the prescript laws, first set down in a general Council, and afterward confirmed by the authority of the sovereign Majesty.  
In this company let there be chosen by common voices, one first in order, not superior in authority, who shall be thought most fit, and that without making choice of any certain place, and but for a certain time. After the expiring whereof, either let another be chosen, or else the same man is to be established again for another time by a new consent: whose office is to make report of the common affairs to the company, to demand their judgements, and to give sentence by the judgement of the Eldership, having no authority given him over his fellows, to whom rather he is most subject. In this assembly let nothing be debated of besides matters of conscience, & that by the Word of God, and the laws of Church discipline established, drawn out of the Word of God, not one whit meddling with the authority of the civil Magistrate. And let the sovereign Majesty and the lawful Magistrate thereby appointed, be keepers of this order, and the punisher of those that seditiously rage against it. But if any shall imagine that this sudden abolishing of both these Bishops will minister occasion of new stirs, although we see not with what conscience the Bishops may so challenge to themselves the goods of the Church, or else call themselves Bishops, and live like Princes of this world: yet for to keep the common peace, the sovereign Majesty may leave unto them, which are now Bishops, their revenues whole for their life time, so they trouble not the well made order of the Church, with providing there be none chosen into their place, when they be dead. As for the frowardness of the people, it may be kept down better a great deal by other reins, than by the authority of a false named Bishop; as by preaching of the Word of God, by censures of the Church, and the authority of the Magistrate of the country, against the open troubles of the public state, either Ecclesiastical or civil. The Churches may very well be visited at set times without any great cost and Bishoplike pride, by them whom every Eldership hath chosen under the King's Majesty's authority, which will not be always necessary, if the Elders do rightly execute their office. This sitting of the Bishops with the authority of the voice in the public estates of the kingdom, came in with a manifest abuse, contrary to the Word, and therefore in our mind is to be utterly abolished. For the Bishop hath nothing to do in ordering of mere civil affairs: yet forasmuch as in such assemblies, especially some things many times happen, belonging to the establishing of the estate and order of the Churches: the keepers whereof the godly Magistrates ought to be, and not the overturners, as we are taught by the example of holy Kings. It is very necessary, that as often as the meetings of the land are proclaimed, intelligence thereof be given to the chief Elders, who may be present in the behalf of their seignories, yet not sitting as Judges, but dealing about matters of the Church only with the estates of the land, as their Elderships have given them in charge, except the states think good upon extraordinary occasion, that they ask counsel of God about some other affairs also. If also the King's Majesty think good to admit into counsel amongst the Pastors, or Elders, one, who shall be thought to be wise and experienced in things, he may admt him, though not as a Pastor or Elder, yet as a citizen. And it were injurious to remove from their office in the Church, the Pastors, and much less the Elders and Deacons, otherwise Laymen from that degree, which they hold as Citizens, either in the common wealth, or in the assemblies. But the King's Majesty, and all the Princes and Lords, are to be exceeding wary, that they make not courtlike governor's of their Pastors, to the great indamaging of the Church, as we have a fair example in Eusebius of Nicomedia in the Court of Constantine. As for the right of the patronage, lest some man should say, that it was gotten for himself; Our judgement is, that it may be concealed, but not without some conditions: namely, that he which shall be chosen by the free voices of the Eldership, should be offered by the Patron to the King's Majesty, being also to set upon his charge, after the consenting of his flock.    

The second Question.  
After that religion is reform, it hath been a received custom that the Bishops, and of the Ministers, Pastors and Elders, so many as should be sent of the Bishops, should assemble themselves, that they, together with the chief Barons and Nobles which profess the true Religion, might make enquiry after the doctrine and manners of every one. But seeing the Prince himself is a lover of the true Religion, it is a question whether there may be such an assembly without the consent or commandment of the Prince. Whether the Ministers alone may meet as often as they will. Last of all, whether the Nobles and other godly men and Elders (which are yearly chosen with us out of the people & nobility together) may lawfully or expediently come without the commandment of the King to such assemblies. Which assembly of the nobles and people, seemeth to some altogether needless under a godly Prince, either because it hath not long since been received by a mere custom without any Law, and that under a Prince, who then resisted the Religion, whereby such assemblies might have the greater authority: or else because it may seem dangerous, if so many nobles assemble so often without the consent of the King, they may sometimes consult of something else besides Religion.  
Others think that this assembly is in no case to be refused, but rather that it is very needful, that the Nobles and other Religious men be present as helpers to their Ministers in the assembly bearing witness of their life and the people's behaviour, otherwise it will after come to pass, that if an impious Prince reign afterward, that neither Ministers may safely assemble, neither can the determination be put in execution, without the consent, help and aid of the nobles.  

To the second Question.  
Counsels are necessary in the Church for many causes, both to the retaining of agreement, and also to the seeking of remedies by common advice for the dangers which fall out. And last of all, to take order for those that rest not in the judgement of particular seignories, if they think they have any injury done them. And these Counsels are either of a whole nation, or of some one Region or Province or Diocese (as they have begun to speak after the description of the Provinces of Rome) divided into many Signories.  
It is necessary that the Counsels of the Provinces be divided for many causes, and except there be other urgent causes, they would be appointed rather every halfe year then quarterly, lest in discoursing of matters, they spend the time in vain. And it will be best for the avoiding of Ambition, that the Council be not always assembled in the same place of every Province: but as soon as one half years Synod is discussed, it may be determined by common consent, where shall be the place of the next following. It will be very well that two of every signory of the Province, chosen by common voices, and sent with some commission, be present at these Counsels: one a Pastor, and the other an Elder or a Deacon, Neither would we have any strife about sitting, who should sit first or last, but every one to sit, as it shall fall out without any contention, and the judgement to be given as any one shall sit.  
Now, he that shall govern the whole action, who was chosen for this one thing by common consent of voice, the chief Pastor of the place, being in the beginning Precedent, which office shall end, when the Council shall be ended. There are no matters in question to be propounded to these Counsels to take knowledge of, but such as are more spiritual and belong to that Province, where they are to be decided without appeal by the Word of God, and the rules there set down, without any brabbling or disturbance of the company. Yet if any great private controversy shall fall out in the Provincial Synod, where some may think that he hath cause to complain of injury done unto him, he may put up his complaint to be decided in a general Council; when it shall be thought good to assemble it.  
Furthermore, it is chiefly required, that if all the Laws of the Church be established of the King's Christian Majesty: It followeth, that the Counsels are to be assembled by his commandment and direction, and not otherwise. Neither yet is there a new commission every time to be sought for of the King for that purpose, seeing his Majesty hath once established a Law touching the set times of ordinary Synods. But yet if there arise just cause of suspicion of handling in these meetings, other matters besides mere Ecclesiastical, it shall be safe for the King's Majesty to send one of his Subjects whom he will, to grace by his presence the meeting of the Synods: where yet he is not to be as a Judge, except some thing fall out where it is necessary that the authority of the civil Magistrate be put between.  
A general Council of the Land is not to be assembled, but upon great causes, which seeing they agree not with set times, it followeth, that they are not to be standing neither; but as often as something shall seem to fall out of so great weight, either in doctrine or in government of the Church, as cannot well be decided but in a general meeting, that Province is to be careful, to put other Provinces in mind concerning that matter, in these half year's Synods: that with the consent of all, or the greater part, they go unto the King's Majesty, who (as being a Christian Prince, is to desire nothing more, than the peace of the Churches) ought without any stay or doubting, at the suit of the Churches, to appoint a place and time for a general meeting, as the need of the Churches shall require. And the same order may seem to be kept in the general counsels, which is in the Provincial, whether before the King's Majesty himself, as in some general Counsels, the Emperors of Rome have been present, or before the honourable Lords of the King's Majesty. And last of all, whatsoever shall be allowed by the common consent of the Synod, shall be confirmed by the King's Majesty's express authority, after the example of the godly Emperors.    
FINIS.