<!DOCTYPE ETS PUBLIC "-//UMDLPS//DTD EEBOPROOF 2.0//EN">
<ETS>
<TEMPHEAD>
<REVDESCR>
<CHANGE>
<DATE>2010-02-05</DATE>
<RESPSTMT>
<NAME>Pip Willcox</NAME>
<RESP>MURP</RESP>
</RESPSTMT>
<ITEM>proofed text and revised markup</ITEM>
</CHANGE>
</REVDESCR>
</TEMPHEAD>
<EEBO>
<IDG S="marc" R="OX" ID="A70471">
<STC T="W">L2655A</STC>
<BIBNO T="oclc">12739209</BIBNO>
<VID>93080</VID>
</IDG>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<FRONT>
<DIV1 TYPE="title page">
<PB REF="1">
<P>A TREATISE OF THE EPISCOPACY, LITURGIES, AND ECCLESIASTICAL CEREMONIES OF THE PRIMITIVE TIMES, AND Of the mutations which happened to them in the fucceeding Ages: GATHERED Out of the Works of the ancient Fathers and Doctors of the Church.</P>
<P>By <HI>John Lloyd</HI> B. D. Presbyter of the Church of <HI>North-Mimmes</HI> in <HI>Hertford&s;hire.</HI></P>
<Q><P>Let your moderation be known unto all men, the Lord is at hand.</P>
<BIBL><HI>Phil. 4.5.</HI></BIBL></Q>
<Q><P>Multum &s;acerdotalis officii meritum &s;plende&s;cit, ubi &s;ic &s;ummorum &s;ervatur au|ctoritas, ut in nu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="2 letters"> inferiorum putatur imminuta libertas.</P>
<BIBL><HI>Leonis Epi&s;t. 61.</HI></BIBL></Q>
<Q><P>Epi&s;copi &s;acerdotes &s;e e&s;&s;e noverint, non Dominos; honorent clericos quafi clericos, ut &amp; ip&s;is &agrave; clericis, qua&s;i Epi&s;copis honor deferatur.</P>
<BIBL><HI>Hierom.</HI> ad <HI>Nepotia|num</HI> De vita clericorum.</BIBL></Q>
<P><HI>LONDON,</HI> Printed by <HI>W. G.</HI> for <HI>John Sherley</HI> at the Sign of the <HI>Pelican,</HI> and <HI>Robert Littlebury</HI> at the Sign of the <HI>Unicorn</HI> in <HI>Little Britain.</HI> M.DC.LX.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="dedication">
<PB REF="2">
<PB REF="2">
<HEAD>TO The Right Reverend Father in God IOHN LORD BISHOP OF EXCESTER.</HEAD>
<OPENER><SALUTE>MY LORD,</SALUTE></OPENER>
<P>_WHen the dark night of our con|fu&s;ions was by Gods wonderful mercy, (never to be forgotten) well nigh at an end, by the near approaching of our Sun, the breath of our no&s;trils, our dread Soveraign Lord the Kings Maje&s;ty, unto the horizon of his paenitent and loyal Subjects in his hereditary Kingdomes and Dominions, where|by
<PB REF="3">all began to be revived, &amp; to be prepared for the receiving all good impre&s;&s;ions: in this beginning of our happine&s;s, (con&s;idering with my &s;elf by what be&s;t means men of different apprehen&s;ions concerning Eccle&s;ia&s;tical things might be brought unto godly unity and meet uniformity therein;) I thought that the knowledge of the &s;tate of the Church of Chri&s;t in the Apo&s;tles dayes, and in the four Centuries following their times, (as to the form of Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Government, Di&s;cipline, Liturgy and Rites, u&s;ed in them) would very much conduce to the attainment of that ble&s;&s;ed end. For in tho&s;e dayes many thou&s;ands of holy Con|fe&s;&s;ors and Martyrs flouri&s;hed; in tho&s;e times lived the mo&s;t reverend Fathers of the fir&s;t four general Councils, of <HI>Nice, Con&s;tantinople, E|phe&s;us</HI> and <HI>Chalcedon,</HI> celebrated over all the Chri&s;tian world; of who&s;e wi&s;dome and godly care, to do nothing in tho&s;e particulars again&s;t the in&s;titutions of Chri&s;t and his Apo&s;tles, but rather to do all things as might be mo&s;t plea&s;ing to God, and mo&s;t conducing to the edification of the Church, no prudent and charitable man can enter|tain the lea&s;t doubt: Men they were, and might erre; but that &s;o many men of extraordinary ho|line&s;&s;e and wi&s;dome, compared to the be&s;t men of the&s;e latter Centuries, &s;hould unanimou&s;ly agree
<PB REF="3">for the &s;pace of two, three or four hundred years in &s;etting up and practi&s;ing &s;uper&s;tition, is incre|dible to them who believe that God hath promi&s;ed to teach the humble his way, and &s;hew his cove|nant to them that fear him, and not to for&s;ake them which have not fir&s;t for&s;aken him. Having therefore rea&s;on and religion to a&s;&s;ure me, that all under&s;tanding and &s;ober men, if they could once &s;ee the form of Church-government, with the Liturgies and Rites u&s;ed by tho&s;e Primitive Churches, demon&s;trated by undeniable te&s;timonies of pure antiquity, would ea&s;ily be induced to em|brace them &s;o far as they &s;hould appear to be con|venient for Chri&s;tian unity and edification, in the pre&s;ent circum&s;tances of time, place, and per&s;ons, (whereof not private men, but the Governours Civil and Eccle&s;ia&s;tical are the onely Judges on earth) I made what inquiry I could, if any book were extant in the Engli&s;h tongue containing a brief, full, and plain demon&s;tration of all the &s;aid Eccle&s;ia&s;tical things, which might be had at a cheap rate, &s;oon read over, and ea&s;ily under&s;tood by all men of indifferent capacity, whereby the knowledge of tho&s;e things might be the more divulged: But, after diligent inquiry, finding none, I re&s;olved (being the work was within the limits of my vocation, and in reading
<PB REF="4">the ancient writers, I had with no &s;mall diligence noted the pa&s;&s;ages conducing thereto) <HI>invocato Dei Opt. Max. Nomine,</HI> to u&s;e my poor talent with my be&s;t indevour to write &s;uch a little book, which &s;hould comprehend in it the &s;um and &s;ub&s;tance of all the matters above &s;pecified, as briefly, fully and plainly as I could. And this was the beginning of this &s;mall Treati&s;e; which, being ended in convenient time, was offered to worthy men of excellent indowments to be peru&s;ed by them, in hope that one or other of them (knowing the u&s;efulne&s;s of the matter treated of, and ob&s;er|ving the too plain, low, and uneven manner of writing) would be moved to put forth a work upon that &s;ubject; which (being repleni&s;hed with good variety of well ordered matters, adorned with convenient eloquence, and commended by the worthy name of an Author famous for his lear|ning, eloquence, and vertues) would be by all rea|dily entertained, greedily read, and would &s;weet|ly convey the things de&s;ired to be publi&s;hed, to the knowledge of all men. But herein my hope failed me: For tho&s;e worthy per&s;ons were &s;o im|ployed in the high and weighty affaires of the Church, that they had no lei&s;ure to go about this, (although an u&s;eful work, yet) of le&s;s profit to the Church and le&s;s proportionable to their great abili|ties,
<PB REF="4">then the &s;ublime imployment, wherein their time was &s;pent. What remained then, but that either that needful work mu&s;t be altogether want|ing, or this poor treati&s;e &s;o void of due ornaments mu&s;t be &s;uffred to go abroad. I had indeed once in a manner re&s;olved to bury it in my &s;tudy, but an occa&s;ion bringing the matterr into a new debate, I &s;uffered &s;ome rea&s;ons to prevaile with me to give it leave to pre&s;ent it &s;elf to the view of the world; yet not without &s;ome honourable Pa|tron the glorious lu&s;tre of who&s;e great learning, Excellent Vertues and pretious name might both illumminate it, and conciliate for the mean and ob&s;cure author &s;ome room in the good esteem and affection of learned and good men. For which end I thought it mo&s;t convenient to make choi&s;e of one of tho&s;e very bright &s;tars, which his Maje&s;ties wi&s;|dome and goodne&s;s had been plea&s;ed to &s;et in the firmament of our Church: among whom your Lord|&s;hip was fir&s;t pre&s;ented to my thoughts in your ve|ry learned, elegant and eloquent works, e&s;pecially both in your te&s;tification of your great and very remarkable zeal for the now mo&s;t ble&s;&s;ed and glo|rious Saint and Martyr our late glorious King <HI>CHARLS</HI> the fir&s;t, and in your no le&s;s zealous fidelity to our mo&s;t dear and dread Soveraign Lord King <HI>CHARLES</HI> the &s;econd, manife&s;ted in
<PB REF="5">times of greate&s;t peril, and al&s;o in your &s;ighs, groans, complaints and prayers for and of the Church of <HI>England</HI> in her deep di&s;tre&s;s, in your prudent &amp; indefatigable endevours for her re&s;tau|ration, in tho&s;e parts of your Lord&s;hips mo&s;t learned writings, wherein, as in exceeding fair monuments more la&s;ting then bra&s;&s;e, you con&s;ecrate the ble&s;&s;ed Memories of many very precious names, <HI>viz.</HI> of the right reverend Fathers, Bi&s;hop <HI>Andrews,</HI> Bi&s;hop <HI>Morton,</HI> Bi&s;hop <HI>Potter,</HI> Bi&s;hop <HI>Hall,</HI> Bi&s;hop <HI>Brownrigg,</HI> and other honourable per&s;ons, never to be remembred without due acknowledgement of their tran&s;cendent worth: and e&s;pecially, of the mo&s;t reverend Father in God, Dr. <HI>James U&s;her</HI> late Arch-bi&s;hop of <HI>Armagh,</HI> and Lord Primate of all <HI>Ireland;</HI> who, in an exact knowledge of all good learning, in depth of judgment, in the due &s;tating and well cleering controver&s;ies of Religion, and in &s;anctity of life, was not much (if at all) inferior to any the be&s;t of Bi&s;hops &s;ince the Apo|&s;tles dayes; And la&s;ty, in an acceptable ta&s;t which I have had of the &s;weetne&s;s of your vertue in a particular favour, for which I pre&s;ent my humble thanks to your Lord&s;hip.</P>
<P>May it plea&s;e you, right reverend father, to take this &s;mall work into your honorable patronage and protection, and, pardoning my boldne&s;s in this at|tempt,
<PB REF="5">to take in good part the very humble and hearty tender of my be&s;t &s;ervice to your Lord&s;hip. God Almighty long continue your life and pro&s;pe|rous E&s;tate, and make you a happy instrument of much good to his Church.</P>
<CLOSER><SIGNED><HI>Your Lord&s;hips in all Duty</HI> John Lloyd <HI>Praesb.</HI></SIGNED></CLOSER>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="preface">
<PB REF="6">
<PB REF="6" MS="y">
<HEAD>The PREFACE.</HEAD>
<P>THis &s;hort treati&s;e containeth the &s;um and &s;ub&s;tance of what the reverend Doctors of the Primitive Chur|ches for the fir&s;t four hundred years after the birth of our ble&s;&s;ed Saviour have practi&s;ed and written, and thereby tran&s;mitted to our times, concerning Epi&s;copacy, Presbytery, Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Di&s;cipline, Liturgy and Ceremo|nies, omitting onely tho&s;e which appear to be impertinent to the &s;tate and condition of the pre&s;ent times. Every mate|rial point herein is proved out of authors received by all &s;ides (which cau&s;ed the omi&s;sion of the te&s;timony of <HI>Ignatius, &amp;c.</HI>) and &s;uch authors again&s;t whom it cannot be rea&s;onably pre&s;umed, that they were deceived or erred in their relation of matters of fact and practi&s;e, done or u&s;ed in the times, wherein they them&s;elves or tho&s;e with whom they conver&s;ed, did live. The authorities were not collected by the help of tables, or received from &s;econd hands (whence mi&s;takes do ea&s;ily and u&s;ually ari&s;e) but were taken from the authors own work read and duely con&s;idered. Becau&s;e the Holy Scri|pture by rea&s;on of humane infirmities in all, and perver&s;e|ne&s;s in many, is in many parts thereof-diver&s;ely under&s;tood, it is very needful (&s;aith <HI>Vincentius Lirinen&s;is</HI>) that the line of Prophetical and Apo&s;tolical interpretation be directed according to the rule of Eccle&s;ia&s;tical and Catholick &s;en&s;e. And al&s;o in the very Catholick Church great care mu&s;t be had,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Adver&s;us hae|re&s;. c. 2.</NOTE> (&s;aith the &s;ame ancient author) that we hold that
<PB REF="7">which hath been believed every where, alwayes, and by all. Which direction of this di&s;creet Writer,<NOTE PLACE="marg">In ip&s;a item Catholica Ec|cle&s;ia magno|pre curandum e&s;t, ut id tene|amus quod ubi|que, quod &s;em|per, quod ab omnibus credi|tum e&s;t. c. <HI>3.</HI></NOTE> rightly under&s;tood and applied, is very good, and is and hath been of &s;ingular u&s;e, e&s;pecially again&s;t Schi&s;maticks and Hereticks. For when the con&s;ent of the Catholick Church in her principal members in all the parts of the world, and in all ages, be|ginning in, and proceeding from the Apo&s;tolicall times, unto any other &s;et or propo&s;ed age, doth clearly appear to be in any Divine Doctrine, Di&s;cipline, Liturgie, Rites, or any Eccle&s;i|a&s;ticall u&s;age, who can gain&s;ay that unanimous judgment of all the Saints of God, which is a far better interpreter of the word of God, then any generall councell can be? who dare refu&s;e to embrace the &s;entence of that ju&s;t and impartiall Iudge, except in decrees about things in their nature and mo|rally mutable, which may by the good leave of that Judge be with honour layed a&s;ide, when they become unprofitable or di&s;|&s;entaneous to the edification and peace of the Church? The Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall in&s;titutions which want &s;ufficient evidence to prove their approbation by the Church flouri&s;hing in the Apo|&s;tles dayes, and are found to have the generall approbation of the Churches between the times of the Apo&s;tles, and about the year of our Lord <HI>500,</HI> although they be of le&s;s e&s;teem and re|gard then the in&s;titutions known to be received by the Apo&s;to|licall Church, yet are they Venerable and worthy of very great regard: partly, becau&s;e of the propinquity of tho&s;e Churches, to the time of the Apo&s;tles, from whom &s;ome of them might be probably thought to be derived, although a certaine proofe of their derivation appeared not to &s;ucceeding ages: partly be|cau&s;e of the eminent wi&s;dome of the Fathers, and exemplary &s;anctity of the Churches in tho&s;e times, in compari&s;on of the Churches in the following Generations. The Churches of this &s;pace of time; that is, between the Apo&s;tles decea&s;e and the
<PB REF="7">year <HI>500.</HI> wanted the extraordinary Apo&s;tolicall Spirit, which &s;o guided the Church, planted by them in all publick re&s;oluti|ons, that &s;he would make no Ordinance without the Apo&s;tles approbation, and having it, &s;he could not erre in her deter|minations. All other Churches therefore might ea&s;ily erre, and they that upon good occa&s;ion given them would mode&s;ty affirm, that they did erre in &s;ome con&s;titutions and u&s;ages generally approved by them, and al&s;o in &s;ome remote conclu&s;ions of the Divine Doctrine, are not to be thought to di&s;parage them, &s;eeing upon the matter they &s;ay no more, then that they were men which wanted the guide of the holy Spirit to lead them infallibly to truth and goodne&s;s in all things of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall concernment; but that tho&s;e Churches within the fir&s;t <HI>500</HI> years erred in any publick con&s;titutions or cu&s;tomes unto Ido|latry, or, which is le&s;s, unto apparent &s;uper&s;tition, is a thing improbable and incredible to them, who rightly con&s;ider the publick doctrine and Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Ordinances of tho&s;e times, and take due notice of the great prudence and holine&s;s of ma|ny of the chief Governors and Pillars of tho&s;e Churches; Hereticks, Idolaters and &s;uper&s;titious per&s;ons were in many of the Churches, but that the Churches them&s;elves in any part of that time became Haereticall, Idolatrous, or Super&s;titious, is very untrue and unworthy the thought of a prudent and cha|ritable man. And here by the way, concerning the Church of <HI>England,</HI> if we compare her in her legall con&s;titution with any other Church after the year of our Lord <HI>180.</HI> it will be found that they who charge her with Antichri&s;tiani&s;me, Ido|latry, or Super&s;tition in her con&s;titution, e&s;tabli&s;hed by Law, do by clear con&s;equence pa&s;s the &s;entence of the &s;ame condem|nation upon every of tho&s;e Churches, e&s;pecially them of the 4th and 5th century: the ra&s;hne&s;s and inju&s;tice of which cen|&s;ure is very worthy of a very &s;evere cen&s;ure. The Apo&s;tle, in|deed,
<PB REF="8">&s;aith that the my&s;tery of iniquity began to work in his time:<NOTE PLACE="marg">2 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 2.7. <HI>Revel.</HI> 2.24.</NOTE> but did he meane thereby that the my&s;terious iniquity and depth of Satan, began to work in the publick con&s;tituti|ons of the Catholick Church in his dayes, and that they were parts of the con&s;titutions? no &s;urely, neither can any Chri&s;ti|an be &s;o &s;imple or &s;o injurious to the Mini&s;tery of the Apo&s;tles, and the purity of that Church, as to think that the Apo&s;tle had any &s;uch meaning. The my&s;tery of Iniquity was indeed in the Church in &s;ome dead branches, in &s;ome wicked livers and Hae|reticks, but it was not of the Church, it was no part of the con|&s;titution of the Church, although it did labour to in&s;inuate and work it &s;elf into it: it may be granted as very probable, that the my&s;tery of iniquity in particular, and tho&s;e dead members, and by them working upon the Churches, might more vitiate the Churches of the &s;econd century then the Churches in the fir&s;t century, and the Churches in the third century, more then the Churches of the &s;econd and &s;o of the re&s;t to the end of the fifth century; but that in any part of that time it prevailed &s;o far, as to become a part of the Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Doctrine, Di&s;cipline, Liturgy or Ceremonies univer&s;ally received and u&s;ed, is ra|ther a &s;urmi&s;e of an exce&s;s of jealou&s;y, then an opinion ground|ed upon probable rea&s;ons, it is &s;o far from being an approved truth. After the year <HI>500.</HI> and the divi&s;ion of the Empire, and e&s;tabli&s;hment of the Kings,<NOTE PLACE="marg">2 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 2.3. <HI>Revel.</HI> 17.12, 13.16.</NOTE> which were to give their po|wer and &s;trength to the Bea&s;t, and which in due time were to burn the <HI>Whore</HI> of <HI>Babylon,</HI> the Churches grew generally more and more corrupt; the civill and Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall confu|&s;ions attending the Warrs in the &s;everall Provinces, giving advantage to the my&s;tery of Iniquity, to mingle it &s;elf, fir&s;t with the Di&s;cipline and Ceremonies, and after with the pub|lick Doctrine; whereby, fir&s;t &s;uper&s;tition, then Idolatry, and la&s;tly, Here&s;ies took place in the publick profe&s;&s;ion of the
<PB REF="8">Churches; &s;o that in per&s;ons who knowingly &s;wallowed the good and bad together, the infection of the my&s;tery of Iniquity hindred the operation of the good portion of the whole lump, and working the effect of its poy&s;on into their vital parts, cor|rupted and de&s;troyed them. And therefore the&s;e latter Churches were not by the fir&s;t reformers of our Church propo&s;ed, for patterns, as the former were, which pre&s;erved the purity of Doctrine, Di&s;cipline, and Ceremonies without the addition of any thing cau&s;ing Super&s;tition, much le&s;s Idolatry or Haere&s;y. Our Church hath &s;eparated the Pretious from the Vile, the good of Doctrine, Di&s;cipline, and Rites from the pe&s;tiferous and noxious additions; and now if either the abu&s;e of pro&s;perity, or the iniquity of the late times hath added any evil quality to any of our Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall things, or made us incapable of good by &s;ome Rite or particle of the Di&s;cipline or Liturgy, or if any defect appear to be in our former reformations, and e&s;pecial|ly if any of the&s;e have happened in any Rite of adoration (wherein is the greate&s;t danger;) it is not to be doubted, but that all the&s;e things will be carefully looked into; and whether by omi&s;&s;ion, explanation or otherwi&s;e, the Di&s;cipline and Rites, by the help and ble&s;&s;ing of God, &s;hall be reformed according to the be&s;t patterns, and as &s;hall mo&s;t conduce to the godly unity and peace of the Church and Kingdome. What do I &s;peak only of future Reformation? &s;eeing the deep Wi&s;dome, and the mo&s;t &s;incere piety of his Sacred Maje&s;ty hath by the ble&s;&s;ing of God upon his Royal indeavours, found out the be&s;t tempe|rament for the healing of the pre&s;ent di&s;tempers, and by his gratious Declaration hath e&s;tabli&s;hed a mo&s;t happy Interim, the fitte&s;t that could be devi&s;ed for the preparing different appre|hen&s;ions and affections unto an unity, meet to entertain the be&s;t form of a Chri&s;tian Church, which the infirmities of the&s;e la&s;t dayes of the la&s;t time can well bear. The Regicides
<PB REF="9">of late had proceeded far in breaking down this our Hou&s;e of God,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>P&s;al.</HI> 74. 1 <HI>King.</HI> 6.7.</NOTE> with their iron tooles, their Axes and Hammers, but as it is &s;aid of King <HI>Solomons</HI> Temple, that there was neither Hammer nor Axe nor any toole of iron heard while it was in building, &s;o our ble&s;&s;ed <HI>Solomon</HI> in reedifying this decayed hou&s;e of God, doth the work without all iron in&s;truments, without all unplea&s;ing &s;ounds, it goeth on <HI>&s;en&s;im &s;ine &s;en&s;u,</HI> and it is and will be the glorious effect of his Maje&s;ties incom|parable providence, guided by the mo&s;t gratious direction of God, <HI>cunctando re&s;titui&s;&s;e rem.</HI> But &s;ome of them which will read this &s;mall tractate, may therein ob&s;erve &s;ome pa&s;&s;a|ges, which &s;uppo&s;e the Church of <HI>England</HI> without the benefit of any proceedings of his Maje&s;ty towards her re&s;tauration, and may therefore be ready to cen&s;ure the Author as he well de|&s;erved, if he had not this ju&s;t Apology, namely, That he can make it good by many witne&s;&s;es of worthy per&s;ons of known in|tegrity that this treati&s;e was ready written five months agon at the lea&s;t, at which time the Author could only write of the &s;tate and condition of things as they were then, and not as they would be in times to come. If any object, It had been better, if ever, to have publi&s;hed this at that time, for which it &s;eemes more convenient; to which I &s;ay, That the Con&s;cience of mine own infirmities retarded and had almo&s;t hindred the publica|tion thereof.</P>
<P>But partly my de&s;ire to contribute my poor mite towards the re&s;tauration of Gods Hou&s;e prevailed with me, partly be|lieving the truth of that &s;aying of <HI>Clemens</HI> of <HI>Alexandria,</HI> that the &s;cience of preaching is in a manner Angelical, and whether it be exerci&s;ed by the tongue or hand (writing) profit|eth either way, and knowing my &s;elf to be not far from the time when the &s;trength of voyce may decrea&s;e, I thought it not ami&s;s to put it to the trial by this beginning; whether I might
<PB REF="9">hereafter with any hope of acceptance and profit, attempt to recompence the defect which (if I live) may likely happen in my voyce, with the labour and pains of preaching by the pen. Some may think that I have made no good choi&s;e in preferring the judgment of St. <HI>Hierome</HI> a Pre&s;byter, and not well affected, (as many think) to Epi&s;copacy, before the o|pinion of <HI>Epiphanius</HI> a Bi&s;hop, and the elder of the two.<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Aerius</HI> main|tained that neither the A|po&s;tles were, nor the Chur|ches could law|fully be the au|thors of the preferment of a Bi&s;hop above the Pre&s;byters, and therefore he departed from the Com|munion of the Catholick Church, and became an In|dependent Pre&s;|byter of an in|dependant Con|gregation.</NOTE> Fir&s;t, I mu&s;t deny that <HI>Hierome</HI> was di&s;affected to good Bi&s;hops, or to the Epi&s;copal dignity. His works do abundantly te&s;tify, that he bad in &s;ingular honour, both the one and the other: only he often reproveth, and that &s;harply the Ambition, Covetuou&s;ne&s;s, and other vices of many Bi&s;hops, which not he only, but others before him, and in his time, even Bi&s;hops them&s;elves did performe with no le&s;s &s;harpne&s;s and &s;everity. See one among others, <HI>Gregory,</HI> who was created Bi&s;hop of <HI>Sa&s;imis,</HI> executed his function in <HI>Nazianzum,</HI> and after was advanced to the Arch-Bi&s;hoprick of <HI>Con&s;tantinople,</HI> this Arch-Bi&s;hop wi&s;heth there were no prerogative of the Throne, nor Prelacy, which (&s;aith he) had indeed in former times been de&s;ired of good and prudent men, but which now to &s;hunne, is counted an act of &s;ingular prudence. What? is this wi&s;e and holy Arch-Bi&s;hop for the abrogation of Epi&s;co|pacy root and branch? no; no, he only taxeth the exorbitancy, the abu&s;e, the ambition, and not the holy function: he expounds him&s;elf, when in the &s;ame place he expre&s;&s;eth the prelacy which he wi&s;heth outed, to be the Tyrannie of Authority, and prehe|minence; it is that which cau&s;ed many wife men to &s;hun the function, becau&s;e in had company it is difficult to rule well, which at all times is the work of an excelling faculty,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Greg. Niz. in Apolog, <HI>1.</HI> In orat. ad pa|trem, Ba&s;ilia prae&s;ente.</NOTE> and it many times happens (&s;aith the &s;ame Father) that grace it &s;elf begets Pride, and then we know that the corruption of the be&s;t is the wor&s;t. Secondly, <HI>Hierome</HI> was not inferiour in
<PB REF="10">learning, eloquence and piety to any of the Ancients, neither did any excell him in the knowledg of the antiquities of the Church. And he, that doth not look very narrowly into the works of <HI>Epiphanius,</HI> may find him defective in this la&s;t. <HI>Hierome's</HI> te&s;timony concerning the originall of Epi&s;copacy, although in formall expre&s;&s;ions it differs from <HI>Epiphanius</HI>'s, yet perhaps by the di&s;tinction of extraordinary and ordinary Epi&s;copacy, the difference in words may be brought into an uni|ty in &s;en&s;e; and if there be a difference in the &s;en&s;e between them: Yet <HI>Hierome</HI> affords a more immediate, direct, and efficacious argument for Epi&s;copacy and its contiruance then the other. I am much deceived, and have Cro&s;sed mine own re&s;olution, if I have not delivered the truth impartially, as I found it in the holy old Doctors. And although a lover of the Pre&s;bytery may di&s;like &s;ome pa&s;&s;age of this little book &s;ingly con&s;idered, and a lover of Epi&s;copacy di&s;like &s;ome other pa&s;|&s;age in like &s;ort apprehended; yet I have good hope that, when both have read the whole, and layed before them the en|tire &s;eries of the di&s;cour&s;e, they may &s;ee good rea&s;on to like well in the whole, what they di&s;liked apart, and by it &s;elf con&s;idered, and will candidly acknowledg that every thing therein tends to the &s;ame good end which both profe&s;s to ayme at.</P>
</DIV1>
</FRONT>
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="treatise">
<PB REF="10" MS="y">
<HEAD>A Treati&s;e of the Primitive Epi&s;copacy, Liturgies, Rights, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></HEAD>
<P>_IT having plea&s;ed God to choo&s;e for him&s;elf out of &s;inful men a peculiar people to &s;et forth his glorious prai&s;es, he never left the world de&s;titute of heavenly in&s;titutions and Laws, whereby men might be tran&s;lated from the &s;tate of &s;in and mi&s;ery, to the &s;tate of holine&s;s and Salvation, and be made and pre&s;erved an&s;werable in con|ver&s;ation to the ble&s;&s;ed condition of their tran&s;lation and change.</P>
<P>The&s;e willing and obedient people addicted to the Service of Almighty God, were, are, and will be by him reputed, his hou&s;e, Family, and Kingdome, which therefore cannot be imagined to be without order and rule, without &s;ome certain per&s;ons &s;et apart to teach the Divine Laws, and execute other Divine in&s;titutions, and with con&s;ent of the concerned, to make Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Ordinances, which times, places, and other circum&s;tances require, agreeable to the Divine, and &s;ub&s;ervient to the due and mo&s;t decent execution of them.</P>
<P>Of the number of the&s;e teachers and rulers of Gods hou&s;e were, <HI>Adam, Noah, Abraham,</HI> and other heads of numerous Families unto the time of the giving of the Law by <HI>Mo&s;es;</HI> after the Law, partly fit per&s;ons of the tribe of <HI>Levi,</HI> partly the Prophets, partly men bred in the Schools of the Prophets, and <HI>John</HI> the Bapti&s;t, performed the Divine and Eccle&s;ia&s;tical functions unto the time of our Saviours Bapti&s;m: after which time he him&s;elf the Builder and Ma&s;ter of the hou&s;e and Family, (who&s;e &s;ervants and under-officers all other rulets acknowledge them&s;elves to be, deriving from him not onely their authority, but al&s;o all their abilities,
<PB REF="11">whereby they are made able in any mea&s;ure to fulfill the holy offices) he (I &s;ay) in his own per&s;on and in our nature, was plea&s;ed to execute &s;uch parts of his own in&s;titutions as he &s;aw convenient for him&s;elf to perform, and to choo&s;e, be&s;ides &s;eventy Di&s;ciples, twelve other men to be his Apo&s;tles and Mini&s;ters of the heavenly doctrine, and annexed ceremonies.</P>
<P>It appeareth, that it was the intention of our Saviour, that the number of twelve Apo&s;tles &s;hould be his primary in&s;tru|ments in founding the Original Churches of Chri&s;t, the Mo|thers of all other Churches to &s;ucceed unto the end of the world; It was al&s;o his purpo&s;e to make them parents of all other Mini&s;ters which &s;hould &s;ucceed in an ordinary cour&s;e; which is hereby manife&s;t, becau&s;e Chri&s;t promi&s;ed to be with them unto the worlds end, which cannot be verified of their per&s;ons, and therefore is to be under&s;tood of them in the per|&s;ons of their &s;ucce&s;&s;ors, proceeding from them by &s;ucce&s;&s;ive ordination,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Ba&s;il.</HI> con&s;tit. Mona&s;t. <HI>c. 22.</HI> &amp; <HI>Chry&s;o&s;t.</HI> in Epi&s;t. ad <HI>Colo&s;&s;.</HI> hom. <HI>3.</HI></NOTE> and repre&s;ented in their per&s;ons; wherefore the ordination of the Apo&s;tles, was in &s;ome &s;ort the ordination of their &s;ucce&s;&s;ors, and their mi&s;&s;ion to teach and baptize, was a virtual or legal mi&s;&s;ion of the other.</P>
<P>There were three Editions of the covenant of grace, the one from <HI>Adam</HI> to <HI>Abraham,</HI> the &s;econd from him to our Saviour, the third from our Saviour unto the end of the world. In every of the&s;e, the &s;ub&s;tance and kernel of the Co|venant was, and is the &s;ame, the difference is in remarkable accidents and circum&s;tances; the Mini&s;ters of the heavenly Doctrine in the fir&s;t and &s;econd, preached Chri&s;t to come, and had the Spirit accompanying the word, and &s;eals of the Co|venant mini&s;tred by them, as an incident annexed by Almighty God to their ordination: but yet &s;o, as the &s;pirit was ordina|rily given in a le&s;&s;er mea&s;ure to the mini&s;tery of the fir&s;t, then or the &s;econd Edition; The Apo&s;tles were in their call to the Apo&s;tle&s;hip before the death of our Saviour ordained mini&s;ters of the third Edition of the Covenant, becau&s;e Chri&s;t was now come in the fle&s;h, and had begun to publi&s;h the great Salvation, and therefore they had a proportionable increa&s;e of the &s;pirit added to their mini&s;tery, for the working of repentance, faith, and holine&s;s in men above the ordinary mea&s;ure granted to the mini&s;tery of the &s;econd Edition.</P>
<PB N="3" REF="11">
<P>Notwith&s;tanding that the Mini&s;ters of the fir&s;t and &s;econd Edition of the Covenant of grace,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Sect.</HI> 2.</NOTE> had a power of binding and loo&s;ing, in having the &s;pirit accompanying their office and &s;ervice, and that the Apo&s;tles in the mortal life of our Sa|viour, had the &s;ame in a higher degree; yet the promi&s;e made to the confe&s;&s;ion of St. <HI>Peter,</HI> of giving unto him a power of binding and loo&s;ing with the Keyes of the Kingdome of Hea|ven was not in vaine, as of a thing which he had already re|ceived; for he had received the &s;ame onely in the mea&s;ure and degree meet to be di&s;pen&s;ed at that time, and not in the ordi|nary fulne&s;s promi&s;ed to the mini&s;ters of the new Te&s;tament, fully confirmed by the death and re&s;urrection of Chri&s;t: and therefore our Saviour after his ri&s;ing again from the dead, be|&s;towed upon them that promi&s;ed fulne&s;s of the Spirit, which was in ordinary to accompany their mini&s;tery of the word,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Chry&s;o&s;t.</HI> in <HI>2 Cor.</HI> hom. <HI>6.</HI> Conc. Foroju|lien&s;. an. <HI>791. c. 13. Athana&s;.</HI> dicta &amp; interpret. parabol. S. Script.</NOTE> &s;acraments and cen&s;ures, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> breathing upon them and &s;aying, <HI>receive ye the Holy Gho&s;t, who&s;e&s;oever &s;ins ye remit, they are remitted unto them, and who&s;oever &s;ins ye retain, they are retained;</HI> hence it is, that the mini&s;tery of the new Te&s;tament fully confirmed, is in an eminent way the mini&s;tery of the &s;pirit, and &s;o called; and hence it is that the Apo&s;tle &s;aith, <HI>that the weapons of our war+fare are not carnal, but mighty through God, to the pulling down of &s;trong holds, ca&s;ting down rea&s;onings and every high thing that exalteth it &s;elf again&s;t the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>This mea&s;ure of the Spirit going along and operating in the mini&s;terial preaching, prayer, bapti&s;ing, ble&s;&s;ing, ab&s;olving, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> was now very nece&s;&s;ary, as in other re&s;pects, &s;o in this, that the world that had been &s;o long captivated by Sathan, and mightily habituated in all &s;inful ways,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Semen Sermo|nis Chri&s;ti cum in animam au|dientis inciderit per gradus &s;uos cre&s;cit-tam diu in ancipiti e&s;t, quamdiu pari|at quod con|cepit. Hierom. in Epi&s;t. ad <HI>Gal. c. 4.</HI></NOTE> might be converted un|to God, and pre&s;erved in his grace.</P>
<P>Some will &s;ay, why are not all hearers of the Go&s;pel con|verted? to which it is &s;oon an&s;wered, that the Holy Spirit worketh in all them that hear the Go&s;pel preached to them, yet gradually; fir&s;t, that they may co-work, and then that they may continue co-working, until the work of &s;aving faith be perfected in them. He gives an eat able to hear, to the hearers he gives ability to under&s;tand, and gives ability in
<PB N="4" REF="12" MS="y">&s;ome degree to will the good, and where the good is willed, he hath given the will and the deed; and where the Good we are enabled to under&s;tand and Will, is not under&s;tood or Willed, that comes from the natural corrupted freedome of mans will, which the &s;pirit doth not take away again&s;t our will, becau&s;e he will not de&s;trey his own work; namely, that good natural freedome of will, conferred upon man in his creation, capa|ble of being a &s;ubject of good or evil.</P>
<P>A per&s;on not ordained to the holy mini&s;tery may in time and place teach and exhort with a &s;peech no le&s;s Orthodox, whole|&s;ome and per&s;wa&s;ive, then any ordained mini&s;ter of the Co&s;|pel can u&s;e, and yet it mu&s;t be acknowledged to be far inferior in its operation tending to true edification, then the &s;peech of a mini&s;ter &s;eeming le&s;s per&s;wa&s;ive; becau&s;e this is alwayes accompanied with the &s;pirit, the other is not, but &s;uppo&s;eth &s;ome grace in the hearer which it &s;tirreth: or if it be accom|panied with a quickning or healing grace, it is of Gods mere indulgence, and not by vertue of Gods ordinary con&s;titution and promi&s;e; and therefore the &s;pirit going with the exhor|tation of the mini&s;ter doth alwayes edifie or is re&s;i&s;ted; and &s;o the word preached by him is a &s;weet &s;avour of Chri&s;t in them that are &s;aved, and in them that peri&s;h; to the one the favour of death unto death, and to the other the &s;avour of life unto life.</P>
<P>The Apo&s;tles all this while had not received the gradual complement of the gifts ordained to be be&s;towed upon the mini&s;ters of the new Te&s;tament;<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Sect.</HI> 3.</NOTE> it was meet that Chri&s;t &s;hould in our entire nature open heaven and enter into it, be|fore the fulne&s;s of the ordinary or extraordinary gifts &s;ub&s;er|vient for the right u&s;ing of the Keyes of Heaven, &s;hould be granted to his Vicegerents upon earth.</P>
<P>Wherefore after his opening and po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of Heaven, he gave tho&s;e gifts unto men, both extraordinary in the Apo&s;tles, Evangeli&s;ts and Prophets, and ordinary, in the Pa&s;tors and Doctors.</P>
<P>The fir&s;t ordinary Pa&s;tors, received their ordination from the Apo&s;tles; of the Apo&s;tles we know no other ordination then Chri&s;ts immediate calling of them to that office, in which
<PB N="5" REF="12">they were by the fore&s;aid degrees perfected; the Pa&s;tors re|ceived in the Apo&s;tles ordination their &s;eminal or virtual or|dination (as was &s;aid) to their function, which received its perfection of degrees in the effu&s;ion of the Holy Gho&s;t upon the Apo&s;tles.</P>
<P>The Author of the Comments upon St. <HI>Paul</HI>'s Epi&s;tles at|tributed to St. <HI>Ambro&s;e</HI> &s;aith, that it was lawful at the fir&s;t for Laicks and Deacons to preach in the A&s;&s;emblies and Baptize; yet of that his a&s;&s;ertion he brings no &s;ound proof; <HI>Philip</HI> was ordained a Deacon, and he bapti&s;ed the Eunuch; <HI>Ananias</HI> a Di&s;ciple bapti&s;ed <HI>Saul,</HI> after called <HI>Paul;</HI> did <HI>Ananias</HI> do &s;o onely in the capacity of a Di&s;ciple, and the other onely in the capacity of a Deacon? No &s;urely; for it appears that they had an immediate mi&s;&s;ion from God to teach and bapti&s;e, which is equivalent to an ordination, to the office of a Pa&s;tor, either as to tho&s;e acts onely, and for that time only, or as to the whole pa&s;toral function to be con&s;tantly exerci&s;ed. If any examples be found in the Acts of the Apo&s;tles of any Laicks or Deacons performing pa&s;toral offices, who&s;e ordination ordinary or ex|traordinary is not mentioned, its meeter to judge and beleive, that they had either the ordinary call or the extraordinary, ac|cording to the examples of <HI>Ananias</HI> and <HI>Philip</HI> (when the con|trary cannot be proved) then to affirm that any lay-man might then at his plea&s;ure exerci&s;e the acts of that &s;acred vocation.</P>
<P><HI>Paul</HI> was no &s;ooner a Chri&s;tian, but he was in&s;tantly by Chri&s;ts immediate appointment made an Apo&s;tle (<HI>Act.</HI> 9.15, 20. <HI>cum Gal.</HI> 1.16, 17, 23.) and without any other ordina|tion preached the Go&s;pel of Chri&s;t;<NOTE PLACE="marg">1 Tim. 2.7.</NOTE> yet &s;ome years after he together with <HI>Barnabas</HI> were by the expre&s;s command of the Holy Gho&s;t ordained by certain Prophets and Doctors which then were at <HI>Antioch.</HI> In which ordination two things are ob&s;ervable. Fir&s;t, that the Apo&s;tles were ordained by their inferiors in office; but the extraordinary commi&s;&s;ion where|by this was done, makes an exception confirming the rule, which is, that without all contradiction, the le&s;s is ble&s;&s;ed of the greater.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Heb. 7.7.</NOTE> The &s;econd thing to be con&s;idered in that ordi|nation are the &s;acred ceremonies u&s;ed in the ordination of Pa|&s;tors, to wit, prayer, which is the principal; fa&s;ting to
<PB N="6" REF="13">commend the prayer, and impo&s;ition of hands, as a vi&s;ible de|mon&s;tration of Gods ble&s;&s;ing them and their mini&s;tery with the gift of the &s;pirit to accompany their &s;ervice to the loo&s;ing of men from the guilt and power of &s;in, and &s;etting of them at liberty, to walk in the wayes of Gods commandements.</P>
<P>An ordination of Pa&s;tors celebrated without any one of the&s;e ceremonies, cannot be accounted right and regular: St. <HI>Paul</HI> with other who were Presbyters ordained <HI>Timothy</HI> by the joint impo&s;ition of his and their hands; we find impo&s;i|tion of hands placed by the Apo&s;tle among the fundamentals of Chri&s;tian Religion;<NOTE PLACE="marg">1 Tim. 4.14. <HI>cum</HI> 2 Tim. 1.6. Heb. 6.1, 2.</NOTE> and there, although it followeth the immer&s;ions in the names of the ble&s;&s;ed Trinity, and there|fore may &s;eem to import confirmation; yet it need not denote confirmation alone, but any other perpetual ordinance of God, wherein this ceremony was to be u&s;ed, by the autho|rity of the Apo&s;tles exampled and practi&s;e.</P>
<P>They which &s;ay that this ceremony was to la&s;t no longer in u&s;e then God was plea&s;ed to continue the miraculous opera|tions u&s;ual in the Apo&s;tolick times, &s;eem to impute incon&s;ide|ratene&s;s to the Apo&s;tle, in reckoning that one of the funda|mentals of Religion, which was not to be perpetually conti|nued in the militant Church: but we are a&s;&s;ured, that the A|po&s;tle being moved by the Holy Gho&s;t, could not &s;peak incon|&s;iderately, and that every fundamental of Chri&s;tian Religion, &s;hall continue in Chri&s;ts Church unto the end of the world, as this ceremony both in confirmation and in ordinations of Pa&s;tors hath hitherto been alwayes u&s;ed in the univer&s;al Church, and without doubt will &s;o continue unto the end of time.</P>
<P>Pa&s;tors are called in the Apo&s;tolical Epi&s;tles by two other names,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Sect.</HI> 4.</NOTE> that is, Bi&s;hops and Presbyters; the Apo&s;tle&s;hip con|tained in it &s;elf the pa&s;toral offices, and therefore an Apo&s;tle was al&s;o called a Bi&s;hop and Presbyter. The fir&s;t mention of Pa&s;tors by the name of Presbyters of Elders, is in <HI>Acts</HI> 11.30. where the Church of <HI>Antioch</HI> is &s;aid to have &s;ent relief by <HI>Bar|nabas</HI> and <HI>Saul</HI> unto the Elders of the Churches in <HI>Judaea,</HI> in the time of the great dearth, which was in the days of <HI>Claudius Cae&s;ar;</HI> in the 15 Chapter of the <HI>Acts</HI> of the Apo&s;tles, we finde
<PB N="7" REF="13">the controver&s;ie concerning the nece&s;&s;ity of circumci&s;ion and keeping of the Law of <HI>Mo&s;es,</HI> brought by <HI>Paul</HI> and <HI>Barnabas</HI> before the Apo&s;tles and Elders or Presbyters in the Church of <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> to be by them determined: We &s;ee in the chap|ter of the <HI>Acts,</HI> how that <HI>Paul</HI> with &s;ome of the brethren, went in unto <HI>James</HI> and all the elders were pre&s;ent; whence we may ob&s;erve, that the Apo&s;tles did not di&s;cu&s;s and end the controver&s;ie concerning circumci&s;ion and keeping of the Law without the pre&s;ence of the Presbyters of the Church where they then were; nor did <HI>James</HI> alone heat <HI>Paul,</HI> but together with his Presbyters did both hear him, and give him that &s;ea|&s;onable Councel, to purifie him&s;elf for the avoiding the of|fence of the beleiving Jews, which were numerous in <HI>Jeru|&s;alem.</HI></P>
<P>Here ari&s;eth a que&s;tion,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Sect.</HI> 5.</NOTE> whether St. <HI>James</HI> was head of the Presbyters of the Church of <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> onely as he was an A|po&s;tle, having his ordinary re&s;idence in that Church, or al&s;o as having an ordinary authority over the Presbyters, which was to be continued to &s;ucce&s;&s;ors over the &s;ucceding Presbyters; it is certain, that as an Apo&s;tle he was the head of the Presby|ters, having a &s;uperiority over them; but as the Apo&s;tle&s;hip was not to pa&s;s to &s;ucce&s;&s;ors, &s;o neither was his authority to be conveyed to any in &s;ucce&s;&s;ion; but to be terminated with his life: it is more then probable, that at that time he was their &s;uperior, onely as an Apo&s;tle &s;ettled in that Church, nei|ther had we need to conceive him in any &s;ub&s;equent times to become their head in any other &s;en&s;e then this, if the unani|mous te&s;timony of the ancient Doctors of the Church did not con&s;train us to be of another judgment, unle&s;s we will reject the witne&s;s of the Catholick Church con&s;tantly per&s;evered in from the beginining of the &s;econd Centuary after our Sa|viours birth unto this day. For the Fathers do con&s;tantly affirm that St. <HI>James</HI> was (for &s;ome time before his decea&s;e) Bi&s;hop of the Church of <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> not onely in the &s;en&s;e of the word [Bi&s;hop] common to an Apo&s;tle and every Presbyter, but in the &s;en&s;e which &s;oon after the time of <HI>Clemens Romanus</HI> was appropriated to it, that is, &s;ignifying &s;uch a Presbyter, as had a &s;uperiority over all the re&s;t of the Presbyters of the &s;ame
<PB N="8" REF="14">Church, to continue in him during life, and to be transferred to &s;ome other after him.</P>
<P><HI>Hege&s;ippus</HI> an Hi&s;torian,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Apud</HI> Eu&s;eb. <HI>hi&s;s.</HI> l. 4. c. 21. <HI>Ibid.</HI> l. 3. c. 29.</NOTE> who flouri&s;hed about the year 170, relateth that after the death of St. <HI>James, Simon Cleopa</HI> being cho&s;en Bi&s;hop of the Church of <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> one <HI>Thebulis</HI> began to corrupt the Church with vain Doctrine, becau&s;e he was not made Bi&s;hop there. And the &s;ame Hi&s;torian writeth, that <HI>Simon Cleopa</HI> lived Bi&s;hop of that place, until the times of <HI>Trajane</HI> the Emperor, under who&s;e government <HI>Simon</HI> &s;uffered Martyrdome, and <HI>John</HI> the Apo&s;tle died; by which te&s;timony of an hi&s;torian who lived within 60 years after the death of the Apo&s;tle St. <HI>John,</HI> it plainly appeareth, that <HI>Simon</HI> was not (af|ter the death of St. <HI>James</HI> brother of our Lord) con&s;tituted onely a &s;ingle Presbyter of that Church, nor <HI>James</HI> before him head thereof only as an Apo&s;tle or an extraordinary gover|nour, but that both were ordinary rulers of the whole Church, as well Presbyters as the other members thereof.</P>
<P><HI>Clemens Alexandrinus,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Paedagog.</HI> l. 3. c. <HI>ult. Strom.</HI> 6.</NOTE> who lived before the year of our Lord 200, makes a clear di&s;tinction between a Bi&s;hop and a Presby|ter, &s;aying, that in the Scriptures &s;ome precepts pertain to Bi|&s;hops, &s;ome to Presbyters, and &s;ome to Deacons; and in another place, that a Presbyter doing and teaching according to Gods will, although he be not on earth honoured with the fir&s;t chair, &s;hall &s;it on the 24 thrones judging the people: and a little after he &s;aith, that here in the Church the provections or proficien|cies of Bi&s;hops, Presbyters, Deacons, be imitations of the angelical glory. <HI>Tertullian,</HI> who flouri&s;hed in the year of our Lord 200,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>De Monoga|mia</HI> c. 11.</NOTE> mentions an u&s;e in his time of asking leave of the Bi&s;hop, of the Presbyters, and of the Deacons to marry: El&s;ewhere he calls upon the Hereticks to &s;hew the beginnings of their Churches, and &s;o to reckon the order of their Bi&s;hops, running from the beginning by &s;ucce&s;&s;ions, that the fir&s;t (Bi|&s;hop) have an Apo&s;tle or an Apo&s;tolical man for his auctor or antece&s;&s;or, as the Church of <HI>Smyrna</HI> relates <HI>Polycarpus</HI> to be placed there Bi&s;hop by <HI>John</HI> (the Apo&s;tle;) and the Church of <HI>Rome</HI> reporteth <HI>Clement</HI> to have been ordained there by <HI>Pe|ter</HI> (the Apo&s;tle.<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Adver&s;us Va|lentin.</HI> c. 4.</NOTE>) In another place the &s;ame author &s;aith, that <HI>Valentinus</HI> becau&s;e he was ingenious &amp; eloquent had hoped
<PB N="9" REF="14">an Epi&s;copacy,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>De Bapti&s;mo.</HI> c. 17.</NOTE> and being angry that another by prerogative of Martyrdome had obtained it, he departed from the Church. In another place he hath this ob&s;ervation, <HI>viz.</HI> the emulation of Epi&s;copacy is the mother of Schi&s;mes.<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Adver&s;us hae|re&s;.</HI> l. 3. c. 3. <HI>&amp; apud</HI> Eu&s;eb. l. 5. c. 18.</NOTE> I mu&s;t not forget the te&s;timony of <HI>Ireaaeus,</HI> who affirmeth of him&s;elf, that he was a hearer of <HI>Polycarpus,</HI> who was not onely taught by the Apo&s;tles, and conver&s;ed with many of them which &s;aw the Lord, but was al&s;o by the Apo&s;tles in <HI>A&s;ia,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Adver&s;. haere&s;.</HI> l. 3. c. 3. <HI>Edit. Pari&s;.</HI> 1567.</NOTE> (in which is the Church of <HI>Smyrna</HI>) con&s;tituted a Bi&s;hop: the &s;ame <HI>Irenaeus</HI> doth enumerate the Bi&s;hops of <HI>Rome</HI> which &s;ucceeded one another from <HI>Peter</HI> unto <HI>Eleutherius,</HI> who was the twelfth &s;uc|ce&s;&s;or of <HI>Peter. Polycrates</HI> (who was 65 years in the Lord when he wrote his Epi&s;tle unto <HI>Victor</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome,</HI> concerning the time of the celebration of the P&agrave;&s;che, which was about the year of our Lord 197, whereby it appeareth, that he began to flouri&s;h about 50 years after the death of <HI>John</HI> the Apo&s;tle, if not much &s;ooner (if he was come to years of di&s;cretion before his Bapti&s;m;) <HI>Polycrates</HI> (I &s;ay) who was &s;o near the times of the Apo&s;tles &s;aith, that he was the eighth Bi&s;hop of <HI>Ephe&s;us.</HI> Now it is acknowledged by all, that in the time of <HI>&V;ictor,</HI> a Bi&s;hop had the preheminence over the Presbyters in every Church; and therefore it is con&s;equent, that <HI>Polycrates</HI> by the &s;even Bi&s;hops preceding him in <HI>Ephe&s;us,</HI> meaneth not &s;ingle Presbyters, but &s;uch Bi&s;hops as were in the Church at the time of his writing that Epi&s;tle to <HI>&V;ictor.</HI></P>
<P>If the principality of the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical regiment had been in the Colledge of Presbyters; until the death of the Apo&s;tles, and after their decea&s;e the principality of that government was committed to one, and not before; &s;urely <HI>Polycrates, Irenaeus,</HI> and <HI>Hege&s;ippus</HI> had egregiou&s;ly prevaticated in attribu|ting the principality of one to &s;ome part of the time of the Apo&s;tles, which (they living with thou&s;ands who mu&s;t have &s;een and con&s;ented to that change made after the Apo&s;tles de|cea&s;e, if any &s;uch had been then fir&s;t made,) could not be igno|rant of. But that the&s;e holy men were not unfaithful in their relation, doth evidently appear by this; namely, that all the Fathers, none contradicting, agree with them, affirming Bi|&s;hops having in an ordinary way a &s;uperiority over Presbyters,
<PB N="10" REF="15">to have been ordained in the times of the Apo&s;tles.</P>
<P>Concerning Arch-bi&s;hops,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Sect</HI> 6.</NOTE> (omitting the gue&s;&s;es of &s;ome an|cient Doctors concerning the Archiepi&s;copacy of <HI>Mark, Timothy,</HI> and <HI>Titus,</HI>) we may find &s;ome intimation of their be|ing in the end of the &s;econd century, partly, by the act of <HI>&V;ictor</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome,</HI> in his attempt to excommunicate the Churches of the <HI>Ea&s;t,</HI> and partly by a pa&s;&s;age in <HI>Tertullian,</HI> where he &s;aith, the Bi&s;hop of Bi&s;hops hath made a decree, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> but certain it is, that before the year of our Lord 250, where|in <HI>Cyprian</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Carthage</HI> flouri&s;hed,<NOTE PLACE="marg">l. de pudicitia c. <HI>1.</HI></NOTE> Arch-bi&s;hops were ordained in the Church: For <HI>Cyprian</HI> writeth, that there were many years and a long age &s;ince many Bi&s;hops convening under <HI>Agryppinus</HI> (Bi&s;hop of <HI>Carthage</HI>) decreed,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Epi&s;t. ad Ju|b<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 letter">in. ad Cornel. l. <HI>4.</HI> Epi&s;t. <HI>8.</HI></NOTE> <HI>&amp;c.</HI> and in one of his Epi&s;tles to <HI>Cornelius</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome,</HI> he &s;aith, that his adver&s;aries boa&s;ted, &s;aying, that twenty five Bi&s;hops of <HI>Numidia</HI> would come to <HI>Carthage,</HI> who would make unto them&s;elves a Bi&s;hop there.</P>
<P>Among the&s;e Arch-bi&s;hops, (who were &s;uch indeed, but not yet in name, that we can find in any approved auctor of that age) were &s;ome more eminent then other; each of which had &s;ome Arch-bi&s;hops &s;ubordinate to them, which in following times were called primates: for in a province was one chief City, under which were divers mother Cities, which had le&s;&s;er Cities under them; In the&s;e were the Bi&s;hops, in the Mother-cities were the Metropolitans or Arch-bi&s;hops, in the fir&s;t, the Primates; priviledges made &s;ome variations.</P>
<P>Of Primates and Metropolitans, the Council of <HI>Nice</HI> &s;aith, it is manife&s;t, that, if any be ordained without the will and con&s;cience of the Metropolitane Bi&s;hop, this great and holy Council hath decreed, he ought not to be a Bi&s;hop. And in another Canon, the ancient manner (or cu&s;tome) doth la&s;t in <HI>Egypt, Lybia</HI> and <HI>Pentapolis,</HI> that the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Alexandria</HI> have the power of all the&s;e; for the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome</HI> hath a like cu&s;tome, in like manner al&s;o at <HI>Antioch</HI> and other pro|vinces: let the due honour proper to every Church be pre|&s;erved to it. The&s;e Primates and Arch-bi&s;hops had no power in things proper to the cognizance of a Bi&s;hop in his own Dioce&s;s, but onely in tho&s;e things whereof the Canons of
<PB N="11" REF="15">the Church had committed to them the hearing and Judge|ment, or which were of concernment to many <HI>Dioce&s;&s;es:</HI> And this is it which <HI>Cyprian</HI> meaneth, where he &s;aith,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Epi&s;t. ad Quin|tium.</NOTE> none of us (Bi&s;hops) doth con&s;titute him&s;elf to be a Bi&s;hop of Bi|&s;hops, or doth compell this Colledge by tyrannical terror to the nece&s;&s;ity of obeying, &s;eeing every Bi&s;hop hath according to his own liberty and free will, that he may not be judged by another. <HI>Adrian</HI> the Emperour,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Apud Vopi&s;um in Saturnino.</NOTE> who reigned from the year of our Lord 117, to the year 135, writeth in a certain Epi&s;tle hor|rible untruths again&s;t Chri&s;tians; as that there was never a Presbyter of the Chri&s;tians which was not a Mathematician, a South&s;ayer, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> that the very Patriarch, when he came to <HI>Egypt,</HI> was by &s;ome compelled to adore <HI>Serapis,</HI> by others to adore Chri&s;t; that they, which &s;aid them&s;elves to be Bi&s;hops of Chri&s;t, were devoted to <HI>Serapis.</HI> It &s;eems this Emperour had taken notice, that Chri&s;tians had Eccle&s;ia&s;tical officers, whereof &s;ome were-called Presbyters, &s;ome called Bi&s;hops, and (perhaps) that the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Alexandria</HI> was over all <HI>Egypt, &amp;c.</HI> and Bi&s;hops thereof; and therefore calls him by the name of a like civil Magi&s;trate, (Patriarch,) which was af|terward u&s;ed by Chri&s;tians in a like &s;en&s;e: but too much hath been &s;aid to &s;hew that it was ordained in the times of the Apo&s;tles, that the principal authority in every Church &s;hould be in one Presbyter advanced above and over the re&s;t, unto whom in a &s;hort time after, the name of (Bi&s;hop) was made proper. This truth is &s;o clear and written, as it were, with ca|pital or uncial letters in the writings of all the ancients, that he that runneth may read it in them.</P>
<P>In the next place it &s;hould be con&s;idered, whether that Or|dinance con&s;tituting Epi&s;copacy made in the Apo&s;tolical times, was not, in proper &s;en&s;e, an Apo&s;tolical con&s;titution;<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Sect.</HI> 7.</NOTE> and if &s;o, whether therefore it be unalterable? But that this matter may be better under&s;tood, it is convenient fir&s;t to &s;peak of the Authority and Power given to the Bi&s;hop, what it was, and how ample in tho&s;e times.<NOTE PLACE="marg">De bapti&s;me. c. <HI>17.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Tertullian</HI> gives us &s;ome information in this point, when he &s;aith, that the chief Prie&s;t which is the (Bi&s;hop) hath the right (or power) of giving Bapti&s;m; then the Presbyters and Deacons, but not
<PB N="12" REF="16">without the authority of the Bi&s;hop, for the pre&s;ervation of the honour of the Church, which remaining &s;afe, peace is &s;afe maintained. For the under&s;tanding of this, we mu&s;t con&s;i|der, that, where the exerci&s;e of the power of preaching, bap|ti&s;ing, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> in &s;uch place and among &s;uch per&s;ons was not by &s;ome ordinance of the Church determined to this or that par|ticular Presbyter, there it pertained to the Bi&s;hop to do it, and not to any other without his leave; yea the very Ordinan|ces and Canons could not be made without his con&s;ent and au|thority, as their principal author under Chri&s;t.<NOTE PLACE="marg">In Epi&s;t. ad Titum. c. <HI>1.</HI></NOTE> For as <HI>Hierom</HI> &s;aith, the whole care of the Church belongs unto the Bi&s;hop; and therefore he was to &s;ee that all the Presbyters did their duties a&s;&s;igned to them, and that the mini&s;terial acts not al|lotted to any &s;pecial Presbyter, were to be done by the Bi&s;hop him&s;elf, or by him whom he would appoint to do them.</P>
<P><HI>Hierom</HI> mentions one thing proper to a Bi&s;hop;<NOTE PLACE="marg">Epi&s;t. ad Eva|gri<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 letter">m.</NOTE> what doth a Bi&s;hop &s;aith he (excepting Ordination,) which a Presbyter doth not do? where he maketh ordination of Presbytery to be the proper work of a Bi&s;hop, which the Presbyters were not to perform (except perhaps in the Bi&s;hops place, and by his commi&s;&s;ion in &s;ome ca&s;es of nece&s;&s;ity) as &s;hall be &s;hewed hereafter; not that the Presbyters had no hand in Ordination, but that the principal act in it,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Can.</HI> 3.</NOTE> was onely the Bi&s;hops. For the fourth Council of <HI>Carthage</HI> &s;aith,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Sed &s;ola propter auctoritatem &s;ummo &s;acer|dot o Clerico|rum ordina|tio &amp; con|&s;ecratio re&s;er|vata e&s;t, ne a multis Eccle&s;iae Di&s;ciplina ven|dicata concor|diam &s;olveret, Scandala ge|neventur. I&s;id. de Eccl. offic. c. <HI>7.</HI> Can. <HI>5.</HI> circa an. <HI>656.</HI></NOTE> when a Presbyter is or|dained, the Bi&s;hop ble&s;&s;ing him and holding his hand upon his head, let the Presbyters al&s;o which be pre&s;ent, lay their hands by the hand of the Bi&s;hop upon his head. And it follows in the fourth Canon: when a Deacon is ordained, let the Bi&s;hop alone which ble&s;&s;eth him, lay his hand upon his head, becau&s;e he is not con&s;ecrated to the Prie&s;thood, but to a Service. Where we are to ob&s;erve, that the impo&s;ition of the hands of the Presbyters, is a condition antecedent requi&s;ite to the con&s;ecration of a Presbyter, and &s;o proper to it, that it may not be u&s;ed in the ordination of a Deacon, much le&s;s of any other inferior officer; the ble&s;&s;ing is the act in o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 letter">dination, which is appropriated to the Bi&s;hop. And therefore in the &s;econd Council of <HI>Hi&s;p<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 letter">lis,</HI> the Presbyters and Deacons con&s;e|crated by a Bi&s;hop, who having &s;ore eyes could not read,
<PB N="13" REF="16">were depo&s;ed from the degrees which they had ill gotten; a presbyter having contrary to the order of the Church read the benediction.</P>
<P>The Bi&s;hop performed in the Church the chief offices of preaching and admini&s;tration of the Communion, if he plea|&s;ed, none other being to do either in his pre&s;ence, but by his call: &s;ometime to &s;hew his power, or out of envy, idlene&s;s, or di&s;dain, he neither would him&s;elf exhort the people, nor require a presbyter to do it.<NOTE PLACE="marg">ad Nepotianum de vita clerico|rum.</NOTE> Which great fault <HI>Hierom</HI> re|proves; in &s;ome Churches (&s;aith he) is a bad cu&s;tome, that the Bi&s;hop being pre&s;ent, the presbyters hold their peace, as though the Bi&s;hop envied or di&s;dained to hear them.</P>
<P>Some other things were in &s;ome &s;ort appropriated to the Bi&s;hop, but were not made &s;o peculiar to him as ordination was; nor were they all of them &s;o ancient priviledges, nor of that weight; for confirmation was the chiefe&s;t of them,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Greg. Epi&s;t. l. <HI>3.</HI> Ep. <HI>26.</HI> Conc. Carth. <HI>3.</HI> c. <HI>32.</HI> P&s;eudambro&s;. in Ep. ad Eph. c. <HI>4.</HI></NOTE> which in &s;ome ca&s;es and places presbyters might and did u&s;ually per|form: The making of the Chri&s;m, the &s;igning of the bapti|zed in the forehead with the &s;ign of the Cro&s;s, con&s;ecration of Virgins, of the altar, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> were ceremonies of le&s;s mo|ment, and &s;ome of them of a latter in&s;titution.</P>
<P>But notwith&s;tanding that the Bi&s;hop had in &s;ome things a propriety, and in all things Eccle&s;ia&s;tical a principality, yet the presbyters had a &s;ubordinate power ordinary or extraordi|nary in the one, and in the other; for the Bi&s;hop could ordain no presbyter without the con&s;ent of the presbyters, and the im<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 letter">o&s;ition of their hands. <HI>Cyprian</HI> affirmeth, that the Clergy of <HI>Rome</HI> pre&s;ided with <HI>Cornelius</HI> their Bi&s;hop.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Cyprian Ep. ad Cornelium.</NOTE> The fourth Coun|cil of <HI>Carthage</HI> prohibits the Bi&s;hop to hear any mans cau&s;e without the pre&s;ence of his Clergy, and forbids him to give,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Can.</HI> 22. <HI>Can.</HI> 23.</NOTE> &s;ell or change any thing belonging to the Church, without con&s;ent and &s;ub&s;cription of the Clergy. And that there was not &s;o great a di&s;tance between the Bi&s;hop and presbyters, as hath of latter times been kept, nor as is between a presbyter and a Deacon,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Can.</HI> 34. <HI>Can.</HI> 35.</NOTE> doth appear by &s;ome Canons of the &s;ame ancient Council, which ordain that the Bi&s;hop &s;itting in any place, &s;uffer not a presbyter to &s;tand: and that the Bi&s;hop in the Church &s;it among the presbyters in a higher &s;eat, but in the
<PB N="14" REF="17">hou&s;e mu&s;t know him&s;elf to be a College (or companion) of the presbyters. Concerning the di&s;tance between a presbyter and Deacon, the Canons of the Synod &s;ay, that a Deacon is mini&s;ter as well of the presbyter,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Vide Conc. Ni|cenum. c. <HI>14.</HI> &amp; Arelat. <HI>1.</HI> c. <HI>21.</HI></NOTE> as of the Bi&s;hop; that a Deacon in the convention of the presbyters may &s;peak onely when he is asked, and that he is not to &s;it but when he is com|manded by the presbyter.<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Can.</HI> 37. <HI>Can.</HI> 39. <HI>Can.</HI> 40.</NOTE> Therefore it may &s;eem, that if after 300 years &s;ince the decea&s;e of the Apo&s;tles, (at which time the power of Bi&s;hops was much enlarged) there was no more difference between a Bi&s;hop and a presbyter, the diffe|rence was far le&s;&s;e at that time between the Bi&s;hop and the Colledge of presbyters, then the birth of popery hath made between them.<NOTE PLACE="marg">E&s;ai. c. 3.</NOTE> <HI>Hierom</HI> calls the Colledge of presbyters the Bi&s;hops Senate; intimating thereby, that the Bi&s;hop ought to hear and determine Eccle&s;ia&s;tical cau&s;es, in the pre&s;ence, and with the advi&s;e and con&s;ent of his presbyters. Hence it was, that,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>l.</HI> 3. <HI>Epi&s;t.</HI> 22.</NOTE> long before the time of St. <HI>Hierome,</HI> the holy Martyr <HI>Cyprian</HI> (having with con&s;ent of the Clergy of the place where he then was (being ab&s;ent from his own City and presbyters) ordained one a reader, and another a &s;ubdeacon, he) excu&s;eth him&s;elf by his Letters to the Presbyters of his own Cathedral, &s;aying, that nothing new was done by him in their ab&s;ence, but what was begun in their Common Council, was promoted by urgent nece&s;&s;ity; their Council therefore that was requi&s;ite in &s;o &s;mall a matter, was much more nece&s;&s;ary in matters of greate&s;t weight.</P>
<P>It is opportune here to con&s;ider the famous que&s;tion,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Sect.</HI> 8.</NOTE> whe|ther in the fir&s;t twenty years of the Apo&s;tles preaching (&s;ome|thing more or le&s;s) the whole care of the Church did in com|mon belong to the Colledge of presbyters of every Church where no Apo&s;tle was pre&s;ent, nor Evangeli&s;t, nor any &s;up|plying the place of an Apo&s;tle; or did the care and government of every Church (except where &s;ome invincible hindrance with&s;tood) belong unto one as principal and head, and to the presbyters onely as his Senate and Coun&s;ellors?</P>
<P>The Ancients vary in this point:<NOTE PLACE="marg">Contra haere&s;. Aerii.</NOTE> <HI>Epiphanius</HI> and &s;ome others affirm, that the office of a Bi&s;hop was in&s;tituted by the Apo&s;tles, di&s;tinct from the offices of the Apo&s;tles, Evangeli&s;ts, prophets,
<PB N="15" REF="17">and presbyters;<NOTE PLACE="marg">Ultra &s;acer|dotium non e&s;t gradus ordinis &amp; tamen intra hunc gradum &amp; ordmem con|tingit e&s;&s;e di|&s;tinctionem dignitatum &amp; officiorum, quae tamen novum gradum vel ordinem non con&s;tituunt, ut Archipresbyter, Epi&s;copus, Archiepi&s;copus, Patriarcha, pontifex &s;ummus, qui ultra &s;acerdo|tium non addunt ordinem nec gradum novum &s;ed &s;olum dignitatem &amp; officium, &amp; ita Epi&s;copatus prout concernit ordinem &s;acer dotti ben&egrave; pote&s;t dici ordo, &s;ed prout di&s;tinguitur contra &s;acerdo|tium dicitur dignitatem quandam vel officium Epi&s;eopi annexum, &amp; non e&s;t propri&egrave; nomen ordinis, nec no vus character imprimitur, nec nova pote&s;tas datur, &s;ed pote&s;tas data ampliatur; unde &s;icut non recipit alias claves &s;ic nec alium ordinem: &amp; hoc &s;en&s;it magi&s;ter Hugo (de <HI>S.</HI> Victore) &amp; Magi&s;ter &s;ententiarum. Bonavent. in <HI>4.</HI> di&s;t. <HI>24.</HI> q. <HI>3.</HI> Et po&s;tea&mdash;non ita propri&egrave; dicitur a|liquis ordinari cum promovetur in Epi&s;copum, &s;icut cum promovetur in &s;acerdotem, &s;ed magis pro|pri&egrave; dicitur con&s;ecrari, &amp; po&s;tea&mdash;non datur ibi nova pote&s;tas &s;ed &s;ol&ugrave;m pote&s;tas ligandi &amp; &s;olvendi ampliatur.
<P>Solis &s;acerdotibus datur &amp; in ordine &s;acerdotali pote&s;tas clavium, &s;cilicet quantum ad &s;ol|vendum &amp; ligandum qua&s;i mediatoribus inter Deum &amp; &s;ubditos. Si objiciatur quod magis cou|venit pote&s;tatem clavium dart Epi&s;copo in con&s;ecratione Epi&s;copi, dicendum quod nequaquam, quia Epi&s;copus non dicitur novum ordinem, nec in con&s;ecrationem Epi&s;copi datur novus ordo &s;ed tantum ampliatur pote&s;tas. Alex. Halen&s;. to. <HI>4.</HI> de pote&s;t. clavium. q. <HI>20.</HI> m. <HI>8.</HI> a.</P>
<P>Probatum e&s;t (&s;cilicet di&s;p. <HI>140.</HI> c. <HI>1.</HI>) inquit Va&s;ques quod Hieronymus nullam con&s;tituat differentiam jure Divino inter Epi&s;copatum &amp; Presbyterium, &s;ed cen&s;eat jure tantum eccle&s;ia&s;tico di&s;crimen fui&s;&s;e introductum. In <HI>3.</HI> p. di&s;p. <HI>142.</HI> c. <HI>8.</HI></P>
<P>Ego &s;an&egrave; (inquit Va&s;ques) &s;u&s;picor vehementer <HI>S.</HI> Thomam exi&s;tima&s;&s;e con&s;ecrationem cum qua confertur pote&s;tas Epi&s;copajis jure humano e&s;&s;e introductam. In <HI>3.</HI> p. di&s;p. <HI>143.</HI> c. <HI>2.</HI></P></NOTE> and that in all Churches where fit men for that office were found, they were ordained and &s;et over the pres|byters, and that the Senate of presbyters did alone govern onely in &s;ome Churches where no man was found fit to be made a Bi&s;hop.</P>
<P><HI>Hierom</HI> and &s;ome other taught,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Epi&s;copes &s;olae ordinatione &s;uperiores e&s;&s;e Presbyteris. Chry&s;o&s;t. in <HI>1.</HI> Ep. ad Timoth. hom. <HI>11.</HI> Po&s;tea unus e&s;t gradus <HI>S.</HI> Hie|rom in <HI>1.</HI> Ep. ad Tim. c. <HI>3.</HI></NOTE> that the Apo&s;tles left at the fir&s;t the whole care of every Church, (where none of them or their Vicegerents, or Evangeli&s;ts re&s;ided) unto the body of the presbyters of each Church, which exerci&s;ed all Eccle&s;ia&s;tical powers in common, until the presbyters began to divide the flock, and to make of one Church many Independent Congrega|tions: For the avoiding of which inconvenience, the Churches unanimou&s;ly agreed to commit the principal care of every Church unto one presbyter, without who&s;e con&s;ent the re&s;t of the presbyters were not allowed to exerci&s;e any part of their Eccle&s;ia&s;tical function;<NOTE PLACE="marg">In Ep. ad Tit. c. <HI>1.</HI> vide glo&s;&s;. di&s;t. <HI>23.</HI> c. legimus.</NOTE> and to that advanced presbyter &s;ome mini&s;terial acts, and al&s;o the name of Bi&s;hop were after &s;ome time appropriated. Before Sidings in Religion (&s;aith <HI>Hierom</HI>) were made by the in&s;tinct of the Devil; and that it was &s;aid
<PB N="16" REF="18">among the people,<NOTE PLACE="marg">El Amalarium de Eccle&s;. offic. l. <HI>2.</HI> c. <HI>13.</HI> Et Steph. Edu|en&s;. Epi&s;copum de &s;acramento altaris. c. <HI>9.</HI></NOTE> I am of <HI>Paul,</HI> I of <HI>Apollos, &amp;c.</HI> the Churches were governed by the Common Council of the Presbyters: but after that every Presbyter thought tho&s;e whom he bapti&s;ed to be his and not Chri&s;ts, it was decreed in all the world, that one cho&s;en out of the Presbyters &s;hould be &s;et over the re&s;t, unto whom all the care of the Church &s;hould appertain; and &s;o the &s;eeds of Schi&s;mes &s;hould be taken away. A little after he affirmeth, that at the fir&s;t the care of the Church was equally divided among many; and yet a little further (having cited out of 1. Epi&s;t. to <HI>Tim.</HI> and the Epi&s;t. to <HI>Titus,</HI> and the Epi&s;t. to the <HI>Philipp. &amp;c.</HI>) the&s;e (&s;aith he) were &s;aid that we might &s;hew, that the ancient Presbyters were the &s;ame with Bi|&s;hops; but by little and little, that the plants of di&s;&s;ention might be plucked up,<NOTE PLACE="marg">&mdash;In quos (de|linquentes) nonnunquam Epi&s;coporum &amp; Presbyterorum cen&s;ura de&s;ae|vit. Hier. ad Demetriad.</NOTE> all the &s;ollicitude was delated to one. Therefore as the Presbyters know them&s;elves by the cu&s;tome of the Church to be &s;ubject to him who is &s;et over them, &s;o let Bi&s;hops know them&s;elves to be greater then Presbyters, more by cu&s;tome then by the truth of Divine di&s;poti&s;ion, and ought in common to rule the Church, imitating <HI>Mo&s;es,</HI> who when he might have alone ruled the people, yet cho&s;e other with whom he would judge them.</P>
<P>The words of this ancient Father need no explication; for they &s;ay plainly that every Church (meaning wherein no extra|ordinary mini&s;ter re&s;ided, Apo&s;tle, or his Vicegerent) was at the fir&s;t governed by the Colledge of Presbyters, and that their dividing one Church into many Independent Congregations,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Quare in Ec|cle&s;ia baptiza|tus ni&s;i per ma|nus Epi&s;copi accipiat Spiri|tum Sanctum? id factum re|perimus ad ho|norem potius &s;acerdotii qua~ ad legis ne|ce&s;&s;itatem. Ec|cle&s;iae &s;alus in &s;ummi &s;acerdotis dignitate ac veneratione con&s;i&s;tit, cui &s;i non exors quaedam &amp; ab hominibus [omnibus] eminens detur pote&s;tas, tot in Eccle&s;iis efficientur &s;chi&s;mata quot &s;a|cerdotes. Inde venit, ut &s;ine chri&s;mate &amp; Epi&s;copi ju&s;&s;ione neque Presbyter neque Diaconus jus habeat baptizandi, quod frequenter (&s;i tamen nece&s;&s;itas cogit) &s;cimus licere laicis. Hier. contra Lucifer.</NOTE> fir&s;t (that we can find) in <HI>Corinth,</HI> after, in many other places, put a nece&s;&s;ity upon the Churches to provide a convenient re|medy again&s;t &s;o dangerous a di&s;ea&s;e; which remedy was the committing of every Church to one chief mini&s;ter, to whom the re&s;t were to be &s;ubordinate in the manner before &s;pecified.</P>
<P>Here ob&s;erve, 1. that, according to St. <HI>Hierom,</HI> every Bi|&s;hop ought to rule the Church in common with the presbyters. 2. that <HI>Hierom</HI> &s;aith, that the decree of making one chief in
<PB N="17" REF="18">every Church was in all the world; whereby he intimates this in&s;titution of Bi&s;hops to have its beginning after the planting of the Churches in mo&s;t parts of the then known world. 3. that he affirmeth, that <HI>Paulatim</HI> (by little and little, or by degrees) the care of every Church was committed to one; which doth in&s;inuate, that the decree in&s;tituting a Bi&s;hop was not in a Synod of the Apo&s;tles or Churches; but enacted in every Church, fir&s;t in &s;ome, then in other, and in a &s;hort time in all, over all the world, in &s;uch manner as a general cu&s;tome is created; and therefore he &s;aith, that the Presbyters are &s;ub|ject to the Bi&s;hop by the cu&s;tome of the Church, and the Bi|&s;hop greater then they, rather by cu&s;tome then by the Lords di&s;po&s;ition. So <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI> writing to <HI>Hierome;</HI> although (&s;aith he) according to the names of honour, which the u&s;e (or cu&s;tome) of the Church hath kept, a Bi&s;hop be greater then a presbyter, yet <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI> (a Bi&s;hop) is in many things in|ferior to <HI>Hierome</HI> (a presbyter:) So mode&s;tly and humbly doth the mo&s;t pious and wi&s;e Bi&s;hop <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI> write unto the holy presbyter <HI>Hierome,</HI> his elder in years, and his inferior in dignity. They that affirm Epi&s;copacy to be in&s;tituted by a Council, do not mean a Council taken in a proper &s;en&s;e, but for the unanimous votes of the Churches decreeing the &s;ame thing upon the &s;ame grounds and rea&s;ons, which are the prin|cipal things re&s;pected in a Council: and it is truely &s;aid, <HI>illud unumquod&abque; dicitur quod e&s;t principalius in eo.</HI> Fourthly, it &s;eems con&s;equent to <HI>Hierom</HI>'s above-cited di&s;cour&s;e, that it is not certain, which &s;ome affirm, that Bi&s;hops were &s;et over the Churches before the time wherein St. <HI>Paul</HI> wrote his fir&s;t E|pi&s;tle to <HI>Timothy,</HI> or his Epi&s;tle to <HI>Titus, &amp;c.</HI> out of which <HI>Hierome</HI> proves the identity of Bi&s;hops and presbyters, and the government of the Church by the Colledge of presbyters. But of the exact time of the in&s;titution of Bi&s;hops it's not much material to know, &s;eeing all agree, it was made in the time of the Apo&s;tles. By &s;ome of tho&s;e places cited by him, it's likely he intended onely to prove the name Bi&s;hop to be common at that time as well to presbyters as to their &s;uperior Eccle&s;ia&s;tical officers.</P>
<P>But it might be thought that <HI>Hierome</HI> in this matter contra|dicts
<PB N="18" REF="19">him&s;elf,<NOTE PLACE="marg">In cataloge Scriptorum Eccle&s;. in Jacobe.</NOTE> becau&s;e el&s;ewhere he &s;aith, that <HI>James</HI> the brother of our Lord was <HI>&s;tatim</HI> (quickly) after our Lords pa&s;|&s;ion ordained by the Apo&s;tles Bi&s;hop of <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> and that he ruled that Church for 30 years, until the &s;eventh year of <HI>Nero:</HI> unto this difficulty another may be added, &s;hewing a &s;eeming contrariety in this learned Father's &s;peeches con|cerning the in&s;titution of Bi&s;hops; which is, that here he affirmeth the Epi&s;copacy to be an Eccle&s;ia&s;tical and &s;o an hu|mane con&s;titution, and in another place that it is an Apo&s;toli|cal tradition. It is not hard to reconcile the&s;e &s;eeming con|trary expre&s;&s;ions:<NOTE PLACE="marg">Epi&s;t. ad Eva|grium.</NOTE> for fir&s;t, we mu&s;t con&s;ider Epi&s;copacy or government by one as chief among the presbyters, to have been either extraordinary, (managed by one extraordinary per&s;on, which was not by any ordinary rule of the Church to have a &s;ucce&s;&s;our,) or ordinary, in the hand of one per&s;on, which, by a Canon of the Church, was to have a &s;ucce&s;&s;our: an A|po&s;tle pre&s;ent in any Church had power over the presbyters, and the preheminence in all &s;acerdotal duties above them in that Church. Of Apo&s;tles &s;ome were primary, as the twelve, other &s;econdary; and the&s;e were either indeed (as well as in name) A po&s;tles, or onely becau&s;e they were conver&s;ant with the Apo&s;tles and their helpers, and many times left by them in &s;ome Churches, or &s;ent to them as their Vicegerents, &s;uch were <HI>Timothy, Titus, Linus, Clemens, &amp;c.</HI> all the&s;e by their A|po&s;tolical function, or by vertue of their Vicegerency, had the principal rule in the Churches wherein they abode, even then, when in all other Churches, the Colledge of the presby|ters took the care of all, having no Superior con&s;tantly re&s;i|dent over them. Afterward, when upon occa&s;ion of the presbyters abu&s;ing their power by rea&s;on of the Apo&s;tles ab|&s;ence, to the be getting of Schi&s;mes, the Churches by Apo&s;to|lical con&s;ent agreed to give in every Church a principality to one presbyter above the re&s;t (which in &s;ome time after had the name of (Bi&s;hop) made proper to him, and was made an ordinary officer in all Churches;) then the Apo&s;tles and their Vicegerents in the Churches of their re&s;idence had the power over the Colledge of presbyters, not onely by their Apo&s;tle|&s;hip or Vicegerency, but al&s;o by the new decree, and in&s;ti|tution
<PB N="19" REF="19">of an ordinary Epi&s;copacy. Now, becau&s;e it was thought fit by the Apo&s;tles that <HI>James</HI> &s;hould re&s;ide at <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> (and that not long after the a&s;cen&s;ion of our Saviour) it might truly be &s;aid, that he was then ordained, that is, con&s;tituted Bi|&s;hop (extraordinary) in that place for &s;ome particular rea&s;ons taken from con&s;ideration of &s;ome particular condition of that place, who&s;e Epi&s;copacy afterward was continued for the ge|neral rea&s;on of preventing Schi&s;mes; and con&s;equently of an extraordinary Epi&s;copacy was made an ordinary Epi&s;copacy, which was to pa&s;s to &s;ucce&s;&s;ors. The &s;ame proportionably mu&s;t be &s;aid of the Epi&s;copacy of St. <HI>Peter</HI> in <HI>Rome</HI> and <HI>Antioch,</HI> of <HI>Timothy</HI> in <HI>Ephe&s;us,</HI> of <HI>Titus</HI> in <HI>Crete,</HI> of <HI>Linus</HI> and <HI>Clemens</HI> in <HI>Rome,</HI> and &s;o of others: all of which were fir&s;t Bi&s;hops ex|traordinary, and after the general decree they were al&s;o made as ordinary Bi&s;hops in the Churches where the decree found them extraordinary Bi&s;hops. <HI>Hierom</HI> doth in many places &s;peak as one that &s;uppo&s;ed Bi&s;hops to be above Presbyters be|fore the making of that decree; but his meaning was not, that ordinary Bi&s;hops were before it (for then he had contradicted him&s;elf) but the extraordinary.</P>
<P>If the re&s;t of the Fathers be &s;o under&s;tood (as it is not very improbable but that many of them may) the &s;eeming diffe|rence between him and &s;ome of them may be perhaps in the main reconciled. <HI>Theodoret</HI> &s;aith, that Bi&s;hops in the life time of the Apo&s;tles were called Apo&s;tles, the name of the extraordinary Bi&s;hops being al&s;o communicated to the ordi|nary Bi&s;hops, who al&s;o had &s;ome appearance of being Vicege|rents unto tho&s;e twelve general Pa&s;tors of the univer&s;al Church while they lived, as they were counted their &s;ucce&s;&s;ors after their decea&s;e.</P>
<P>As to the other &s;eeming contrariety in St. <HI>Hierom</HI>'s writings affirming the ordinary Epi&s;copacy to be of Eccle&s;ia&s;tical and humane in&s;titution and al&s;o of Apo&s;tolical tradition, it is ea&s;ily an&s;wered.</P>
<P>Fir&s;t, That the ordinary Epi&s;copacy is not a primary tradi|tion of the Apo&s;tles but of the Churches; to who&s;e decree the Apo&s;tolical approbation added no new &s;anction, but ratified the authority of the Churches as prudently exerci&s;ed in making that con&s;titution.</P>
<PB N="20" REF="20">
<P>Secondly, that decree may be &s;aid to be of Apo&s;tolical tra|dition, becau&s;e their extraordinary Epi&s;copacy and the ex|traordinary Epi&s;copacy of their Vicegerents e&s;tabli&s;hed by them, were patterns, which the Churches had an eye unto for their direction and encouragement in the framing of that decree; hoping that the good of peace, pre&s;erved where the extraordinary Epi&s;copacy was placed, would be be&s;t main|tained in all Churches when the like government &s;hould be &s;etled in all to continue by &s;ucce&s;&s;ion.<NOTE PLACE="marg">3.</NOTE> Thirdly, the ancient Fathers affirm many eccle&s;ia&s;tical ob&s;ervances to be of divine or Apo&s;tolical in&s;titution or tradition, upon other grounds then may beget a certain belief of their being truely divine or Apo&s;tolical. <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI> &s;aith, that what&s;oever the univer&s;al Church holdeth, and is not found in following Councils con|&s;tituted, but always retained, is mo&s;t rightly believed to be delivered by the Apo&s;tolick authority.<NOTE PLACE="marg">De bapt. contra Donati&s;t. l. <HI>2.</HI> c. <HI>7.</HI> &amp; l. <HI>4.</HI> c. ult.</NOTE> <HI>Hierom</HI> affirmeth, that many things, which are by tradition ob&s;erved in the Churches, have u&s;urped to them&s;elves the authority of a Di|vine law; as in bapti&s;m, to immerge the head thrice, and then to ta&s;t the concord of milk and honey,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Adver&s;us Lu|ciferianos.</NOTE> to &s;ignifie infancy: and on the Lords day, and in all the Penteco&s;t not to pray kneeling nor to fa&s;t. <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI> the great exhorteth all to embrace the decree of the <HI>Nicene</HI> Council concerning the &s;et time of the celebration of the Fea&s;t of <HI>Ea&s;ter,</HI> as a gift of God, and a Commandement &s;ent down from heaven:<NOTE PLACE="marg">Eu&s;eb. de vita Con&s;tantini. l. <HI>3.</HI> c. <HI>18.</HI> Edit. Ba&s;il. <HI>1570.</HI></NOTE> for what&s;oever is decreed in the holy Councils of Bi&s;hops, that ought to be a&s;cribed to the divine will. <HI>Hierom</HI> in another place &s;aith, let every one judge the precepts of the ancients to be Apo&s;to|lical laws.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Hierom. Ep. <HI>28.</HI></NOTE> It is not to be doubted (&s;aith <HI>Leo</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome</HI>) but that every Chri&s;tian ob&s;ervance is of divine erudition; and that what&s;oever is received by the Church into a cu&s;tome of devotion,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Serm. <HI>2.</HI> de je|jun. Penteco&s;t.</NOTE> proceeded from the Apo&s;tolick tradition, and the Doctrine of the holy Spirit. The Fathers u&s;e very frequently to affirm &s;ome in&s;titutions or rites to be divine or Apo&s;tolical, becau&s;e they &s;eemed a greeable to, and their lawfulne&s;s demon|&s;trable by, the old Te&s;tament, the Go&s;pels, or Apo&s;tolick E|pi&s;tles: So the Lent Fa&s;t is by them &s;aid to be of Apo&s;tolical and Divine tradition, becau&s;e it &s;eems an imitation of the
<PB N="21" REF="20">Fa&s;t of <HI>Elias</HI> and of Chri&s;t; and Monachi&s;m is affirmed to be Apo&s;tolick, becau&s;e it hath an appearance of being an imi|tation of <HI>John</HI> the Bapti&s;t,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Amalar. Alcuin. Pontifical. Dama&s;.</NOTE> <HI>&amp;c.</HI> yet many ancient writers make Pope <HI>Tele&s;phorus</HI> (who flouri&s;hed Forty years after the de|cea&s;e of St. <HI>John</HI> the Apo&s;tle) to be the author of the <HI>Quadrage|&s;imal</HI> Fa&s;t (although indeed it had a much later beginning,) and affirm <HI>Paul</HI> and <HI>Anthony</HI> to be the Fathers of Monachi&s;m. So that many in&s;titutes were counted Apo&s;tolick, becau&s;e &s;ome example or rea&s;on of the Scripture did &s;eem to warrant them. Whence <HI>Hierom</HI> and others intimate,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Hierom. in vita Pauli.</NOTE> that Epi&s;copacy was in&s;tituted in imitation of <HI>Aaron</HI> and his Sons, or of the Apo&s;tles and 70 Di&s;ciples, affirming Bi&s;hops to be &s;ucce&s;&s;ors of <HI>aaron,</HI> and the Apo&s;tles and Presbyters the &s;ucce&s;&s;ors of the Sons of <HI>Aaron</HI> and of the 70 Di&s;ciples.</P>
<P>Fourthly, it is a certain truth, acknowledged by all the learned, that the Apo&s;tles were authors as well of local and temporary or univer&s;al and temporary ordinances, rites, or ceremonies, as of univer&s;al and perpetual: for they were in&s;pired by the Holy Gho&s;t infallibly to di&s;cern both what the pre&s;ent condition (although variable) of &s;ome or all the Churches required, and what upon rea&s;ons ari&s;ing from un|variable grounds and circum&s;tances was needful to be ob&s;erved in all the Churches of Chri&s;t: <HI>Polycarpus</HI> (a hearer of the A|po&s;tles, and by St. <HI>John</HI> made Bi&s;hop of <HI>Smyrna</HI>) celebrated the Pa&s;che in the fourteenth moon, and &s;o did the re&s;t of <HI>A&s;ia</HI> and &s;ome of the <HI>Ea&s;t:</HI> ob&s;erving it the &s;ame time with the <HI>Jews,</HI> moved thereto by the countenance and example of St. <HI>John</HI> the Apo&s;tle; but <HI>Anicetus</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome,</HI> (who flouri&s;h|ed in the life time of <HI>Polycarpus</HI>) and generally the Churches of the <HI>We&s;t;</HI> kept the Fea&s;t at another time, and on the Lords day, induced thereto as they affirmed by the tradition and example of St. <HI>Peter</HI> the Apo&s;tle. We cannot with rea&s;on and charity think that either <HI>Polycarpus</HI> with the <HI>A&s;ians</HI> and <HI>Ea&s;t,</HI> or <HI>Anicetus</HI> with the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Churches,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Apud Eu&s;eb. &amp; Iren.</NOTE> could be igno|rant of the time when <HI>Peter</HI> in the <HI>We&s;t</HI> or <HI>John</HI> in <HI>A&s;ia</HI> ob|&s;erved that Fea&s;t, <HI>Polycarpus</HI> being an eye witne&s;s of what the Apo&s;tle St. <HI>John</HI> did, and <HI>Anicetus</HI> being a hearer of the hearers of <HI>Clemens,</HI> who was contemporary with the Apo&s;tle
<PB N="22" REF="21">St. <HI>Peter;</HI> or that they would con&s;iderately &s;peak, and per&s;e|veringly maintain an untruth, imputing a fact to either Apo&s;tle which he had not done, e&s;pecially, &s;eeing the untruth, on either &s;ide, might have been confuted by a thou&s;and witne&s;&s;es: wherefore we mu&s;t judge this to be an evident example of a va|riable apo&s;tolick in&s;titution. I might in&s;tance in part of the A|po&s;tles decree in the 15 chapter of the <HI>Acts</HI> of the Apo&s;tles, of things &s;trangled, and blood; but lea&s;t I move &s;cruples in weak con&s;ciences, which they cannot ea&s;ily be rid of, I will only commend to the con&s;ideration of the judicious the judg|ment of &s;ome ancient writers quoted in the margent.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Augu&s;t contra Fau&s;tum l. <HI>32.</HI> c. <HI>13.</HI> Et tract|cti contra grae|cos in biblioth. patr. to <HI>4.</HI> pag. <HI>1308.</HI> et <HI>1318.1319.1320.</HI></NOTE> There be many rites which the Fathers held to be Apo&s;tolical, which in the times of the &s;ame Fathers, were in many places altered or neglected; as the three immer&s;ions in bapti&s;me; the repairing of neighbour Bi&s;hops to the people where a Bi&s;hop was wan|ting, there to ordain one in the pre&s;ence of the people; not to fa&s;t in the dayes of Penteco&s;t, and &s;ome other; which prove that according to the judgment of tho&s;e Fathers, the Apo&s;tles, (guided by divine in&s;piration) made &s;ome decrees alterable, and which were upon ju&s;t rea&s;ons accordingly changed or di&s;|u&s;ed: and therefore if it were proved, that the Apo&s;tles by divine motion were the primary Auctors of Epi&s;copacy and not the Church; yet if it cannot appeare to be a con&s;titution built upon perpetuall rea&s;on, and in its nature independing upon variable circum&s;tances, it may po&s;&s;ibly be changed by the Church.</P>
<P>Here it may be demanded by what members of it &s;elf did the univer&s;al Church abrogate the Presbyterian and in&s;titute Epi&s;copal Government; and what power was taken from the Presbyters by that abrogation? For an&s;wer to the&s;e demands, we mu&s;t di&s;tingni&s;h between the power given to mini&s;ters, to doe &s;ome things; as to preach, baptize, ordain Pa&s;tors, excomu|nicate, ab&s;olve, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> and &s;econdly, the free exerci&s;e of tho&s;e acts, and thirdly, the regulation of the exerci&s;e of them, as to the per&s;ons about whom, time when, the place where, the man|ner, decency, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> To the regulation belong, 1. The making of laws concerning the due exerci&s;e of the power, agreeable to the divine laws, and &s;econdly the &s;uperintendents of the execution, and thirdly the executors of them. As for the power, it doth
<PB N="23" REF="21" MS="y">not appear, that any of that was taken from the Presbyters or their Colledge by the in&s;titution of Epi&s;copacy, if they were deprived of any part of it,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>can.</HI> 13.</NOTE> that mu&s;t be the ordaining of Presby|ters; but the Council of <HI>Ancyra</HI> &s;eems to demon&s;trate, that the power of ordaining Pa&s;tors did and doth remain in them, which they did exerci&s;e by the leave,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Et Synod An|tioch c. <HI>16.</HI> vide Va&s;que. in <HI>3.</HI> p. Di&s;p. <HI>143.</HI> c. <HI>4.</HI></NOTE> and in the place of the Bi&s;hop which Could not at his plea&s;ure give them, but &s;uppo|&s;ed the power continuing in them. The words of the Council be the&s;e (according to the Greek Original and not their vulgar tran&s;lation) it is not lawful (&s;ay the Fathers of that Synod) for the Choropi&s;copi (Countrey, or Village Bi&s;hops) not for the Presbyters of the City to ordain Presbyters or Deacons, unle&s;s that be committed to them by the Bi&s;hop (being ab&s;ent in another Dioce&s;s) by his letters. And therefore the Churches decree con&s;tituting Epi&s;copacy, abridged the Presbyters whe|ther dividedly, or conjunctly con&s;idered, but onely in the exer|ci&s;e of their power. Surely it mu&s;t be beleeved, that no ordination would be made by the Apo&s;tles excelling the ordination which our Saviour celebrated, breathing upon his Apo&s;tles <HI>&amp;c.</HI> and gi|ving them a comi&s;sion to teach, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> with promi&s;e to be with them unto the worlds end, whereby the Presbyters were virtual|ly ordained and comi&s;&s;ionated astruly as the Bi&s;hops, and there|fore received thereby as much power as they in re&s;pect of the kind and nature; which hinders not, but that the exerci&s;e of &s;ome part of it might be taken from many of the per&s;ons ordai|ned. But &s;ome perhaps may &s;ay, that Chri&s;t in that ordination or|dained in the Apo&s;tles &s;ome as elder Brethren, and others as the younger, yet hence it will follow, that the kind and nature of the ordination is the &s;ame in all, (as the nature of the Father is in all his Sons) and that onely a principallity in the having and exerci&s;e of it belongs to the Bi&s;hops; which is granted. Others may &s;ay farther, that Chri&s;t in ordaining the Apo&s;tles did vir|tually ordain &s;ome as the Sons of the Sons of the Apo&s;tles, and others as their grand-children; if this can be well proved, it will indeed evince, that the power of ordination, as well as the exerci&s;e of it, is proper to the Bi&s;hops; but until it be made clear, that this was the primary meaning and intention of Chri&s;t in that Act of ordination, and not an effect onely of a con&s;equent occa&s;ional
<PB N="24" REF="22">providence of the Apo&s;tles and Churches, it is probable that the power of ordination remaineth &s;till in the presbyters re&s;trained in the u&s;e by the canon of the Churches and Apo&s;tles. The members of the Church, which made the decree of Epi&s;co|pacy and limited the u&s;e of the Ecle&s;ia&s;tical power, in the pres|byters, were the greater number of the presbyters them&s;elves which remained in the unity of the my&s;tical body with the greater part of the people; and the Authors of it by way of ap|probation and confirmation were the holy Apo&s;tles. The Apo|&s;tles and Presbyters, in the effecting of it, exerci&s;ed the ordi|nary, Vicary Authority,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Ba&s;il. con&s;tit. mona. c. <HI>22.</HI></NOTE> which they had as being by their ordi|nation made the Vicegerents of the ble&s;&s;ed Mediator Chri&s;t Je&s;us (con&s;idered only as Mediator) according to his own &s;ay|ing, <HI>he that heareth you, heareth me and he that de&s;pi&s;eth you de&s;pi|&s;eth me,</HI> &amp; the &s;aying of the Apo&s;tle, <HI>we are Emb<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;&s;adors for Chri&s;t and we pray you in Chri&s;ts &s;tead be ye reconciled to God.</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">2. <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.20.</NOTE> That autho|rity when it is duely exerci&s;ed ought to be obeyed. And becau&s;e presbyters may erre in the u&s;ing of it, a &s;pirit of di&s;cerning noxious doctrines and con&s;titutions is given to Chri&s;tians to examine and trie,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Ba&s;. l. reg. <HI>72.</HI> c. <HI>1.</HI></NOTE> with command to reject the evil and receive the good: which good, if the major part refu&s;e, being by their Pa&s;tors propounded to them,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Aug. de temp. &s;erm. <HI>143.</HI></NOTE> they may do it upon their peril, &amp; as they will an&s;wer it to God; unity and peace interceding and forbidding that no Eccle&s;ia&s;tical con&s;traint or cen&s;ure proceed again&s;t the civil higher power, or the major part of the peo|ple. It is therefore requi&s;ite, that con&s;titutions to be made laws in the Church, be, by the leave of the &s;upreme magi&s;trate, if he be a Chri&s;tian, propounded to the people, that their con|&s;ent being given, the mini&s;terial authority may make them laws Eccle&s;ia&s;tically obliging, if no higher authority hinder. Before the&s;e Law-makers con&s;tituted Epi&s;copacy, every &s;in|gular Presbyter was to act according to the directions and rules of the Presbyterian Colledge, which was the Church Law-giver, and &s;uperintendent of the execution, having the &s;upreme dignity under the Mediator, and preheminence in all things properly Eccle&s;ia&s;tical. What is &s;poken concerning the Colledge of Presbyters mu&s;t be applied proportionably to the &s;everal bodies of them in the Dioce&s;an, provincial, impe|rial,
<PB N="25" REF="22">or univer&s;al Church. The decree con&s;tituting Epi&s;co|pacy, took from the Colledge its high dignity and prehemi|nence, and conferred it upon one, and &s;o divided the exerci&s;e of the Legi&s;lative power among the Bi&s;hop and the Colledge, that the one might not duely u&s;e it without the other. For although the dignity and precedency of the Bi&s;hop may give more weight to his vote, yet is the Vicary authority (which cannot be &s;eparated from Presbyters as long as they be Pres|byters) as truly exerci&s;ed in their votes, whether in deciding controver&s;ies of faith, or making of Canons, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> as it is in the Bi&s;hops vote: Which is manife&s;t, as by many te&s;timonies of antiquity, &s;o by the practi&s;e of our Engli&s;h Synods, which are conformable, in the &s;ub&s;tance, to the be&s;t and mo&s;t ancient con&s;titution of Councils. The &s;uperintendency, which the Colledge had over the execution of all Eccle&s;ia&s;tical duties and ordinances, was chiefly in the Bi&s;hop, yet &s;o as without his Presbyters he could not regularly hear and determine Ec|cle&s;ia&s;tical cau&s;es, as before was &s;hewed out of the fourth Coun|cil of <HI>Carthage,</HI> and might be further demon&s;trated out of St. <HI>Cyprian</HI> and other ancient writers.</P>
<P>Every &s;uprem civil power on earth, as Gods Vicegerent,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Sect.</HI> 10.</NOTE> is bound to advance, and pre&s;erve the true Religion, &s;o far as the light of nature can manife&s;t it, or divine revelation doth make it known unto him: &s;o that a King, which hath em|braced Chri&s;tian Religion (which alone is the true Religi|on) is obliged to maintain it, and to cau&s;e that the Chri&s;tian duties be by all in their &s;everal &s;tations and charges duely per|formed; and therefore a Chri&s;tian King is a law-giver above the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Law-makers; but &s;o, that he ought not to hinder the due exerci&s;e of their legi&s;lative power, and make laws purely or properly Eccle&s;ia&s;tical, without their concurrence in Coun&s;el and con&s;ent: but by his Laws and power, partly to cau&s;e them to meet for the due exerci&s;e of their duty, partly to maintain and &s;trengthen their right proceedings in perfor|mance of their office, and la&s;tly (if their Edicts be co&s;i&s;tant with the peace of the common-wealth, and meet for the edification of the Church) to perfect and make them full and complete laws, by putting the hand and &s;eal of his highe&s;t Vicary authority, as
<PB N="26" REF="23">Gods Vicegerent, to the re&s;olves of the &s;ubordinate Vicary, authority of the Vicegerents of our ble&s;&s;ed Mediator, as Me|diator God and man, the Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t. God is a God of order, and hath ordained that this unity and harmony between the&s;e two authorities &s;hould be firmly kept, otherwi&s;e by a &s;upine neglect of duty or by an exorbitant u&s;urpation on ei|ther &s;ide, the unity and peace, both of Kingdome and Church are equally in danger of being broken. The propounding of the true doctrine in deci&s;ion of controver&s;ies, or of con&s;titutions of expedient or nece&s;&s;ary to aedification are acts of religion mo&s;t proper to the Bi&s;hops, and presbyters; the fir&s;t an act of the praedication of the go&s;pel; the other an act of eccle&s;ia&s;tical Go|vernment. The embracing of the truth and ordinances &s;een to be profitable together with the confirming of them by his de|cree and &s;anction, or addition (where he &s;eeth it needful) of a reward or mulct, is the part of a Chri&s;tian Prince di&s;cerning upon due &s;earch, the truth and the u&s;efulne&s;&s;e, of the ordinan|ces propounded unto him; who&s;e embracing is his act of &s;ubje|ction to Chri&s;t; and confirmation and &s;anction, an act of his Vi|cary authority. To make laws be&s;towing civil gifts or privi|ledges on the Church, and ordaining civil puni&s;hments for of|fences committed again&s;t Chri&s;tian religion and Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Canons, and con&s;tituting Courts for the cognizance of &s;uch cau|&s;es, and the execution of tho&s;e Laws, is the peculiar and pro|per work of a Chri&s;tian King, which he may well doe without the authority of Bi&s;hops and presbyters; but which he may be&s;t doe with their grave advice and coun&s;el.</P>
<P>In the unanimous Votes of the Kings Maje&s;ty, the honou|rable Hou&s;es of Parliament, and the venerable convocation, all Powers and intere&s;ts are fully &s;atisfied, whether in deci&s;ion of controver&s;ies in religion,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Chry&s;o&s;t. in <HI>2.</HI> Cor. hom. <HI>18,</HI> &amp;c. Sect. <HI>11.</HI></NOTE> or making Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Canons, or any the like Eccle&s;ia&s;tical matters, becau&s;e they are the con|junct Votes of all the concerned.</P>
<P>Before the civil Magi&s;trate became Chri&s;tian, the Clergy and people according to their &s;everall rights, concurred per|&s;onally in the elections of Bi&s;hops and Presbyters; and this remained in u&s;e under many Chri&s;tian Emperors and Kings, untill for the avoyding of contention and &s;chi&s;mes and many
<PB N="27" REF="23">abu&s;es (which became familiar to popular elections in a cor|rupted &s;tate of the Church) and for the encouragement of Princes, Nobles and others to erect and endow Churches, it &s;eemed good to Kings in their Parliaments, and with the con|vocation or Synod of the Bi&s;hops and Clergy, to ordain, that Kings &s;hould pre&s;ent to the Colledge of Presbyters, meet per|&s;ons to be cho&s;en and made Bi&s;hops, and meet Presbyters to the Bi&s;hop for &s;uch Churches as they had built and endowed; and that all other per&s;ons &s;hould in like manner pre&s;ent to the Bi&s;hop a fit per&s;on for the Church which they had endowed. Patrons did indeed in &s;ome places put in whom they plea&s;ed without the Bi&s;hops con&s;ent,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Vide Epi&s;t. Alexandr. <HI>3.</HI> ad Epi&s;copos Angliae.</NOTE> and for &s;ome time of publick confu&s;ion this was very u&s;ually done in <HI>England;</HI> but this cu|&s;tome was no law, as &s;ome would have it, becau&s;e it was an unrea&s;onable cu&s;tome, and de&s;tructive to the Church, and therefore always contradicted in all Councils where occa&s;ion was given to mention it.</P>
<P>All humane laws have their mixture of &s;ome bad with ma|ny good: And certain it is, that our Eccle&s;ia&s;tical laws have many imperfections; and their ambiguous halting between the papal Canon-law, (whence their interpretation hath been wont to be fetched) and the laws of the Realm, is not the lea&s;t; which hath been one of the principal occa&s;ions of &s;ome act|ings, which made the Clergy much abhorred by many, and brought infinite calamities upon the Civil and Eccle&s;ia&s;tical &s;tate.</P>
<P>The ancient pure Epi&s;copal government is much changed, and the beginning of its change was not of late dayes:<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Sect.</HI> 12.</NOTE> for in the fourth Century the Bi&s;hops and Presbyters began to ad|vance Arch-presbyters and Arch-deacons to &s;ome part of the exerci&s;e of the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical government.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Optat. adver&s;. Parmenian. l. <HI>1.</HI></NOTE> The fir&s;t Arch|deacon we read of was <HI>Caecilianus,</HI> who reproved <HI>Lucilla</HI> a rich and proud woman, which being thereat vexed, became after|ward a zealous promotrix of the Schi&s;m of the Donati&s;ts. The fir&s;t Arch-presbyter,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Greg. Nazianz. in land. Ba&s;il. crat.</NOTE> that I can remember to be mentioned by the ancients, was <HI>Ba&s;ile;</HI> who being made Bi&s;hop, offered that honour to his old friend <HI>Gregory,</HI> after the Bi&s;hop of <HI>Nazianzum.</HI> But the&s;e were at that time but in &s;ome Churches,
<PB N="28" REF="24">and acted onely in place of the Bi&s;hops and Presbyters and at their plea&s;ure; whereas their power in time increa&s;ed, and after &s;ome hundreds of years, the Canons gave them an ordi|nary juri&s;diction, erected their Courts, added new names of Eccle&s;ia&s;tical judges, as Deans, Chancellors, Commi&s;&s;aries, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> and filled them with numerous attendants, which were mo&s;tly to live by the &s;ins of the people. If the&s;e had been Officers onely of the civil magi&s;trate, to execute the power which is proper to him over all per&s;ons, and in all cau&s;es Ec|cle&s;ia&s;tical, the Church could not in rea&s;on have been charged with their mi&s;cariages: but becau&s;e they exerci&s;ed with the former, acts of the power proper to Bi&s;hops and Presbyters, and in which the civil magi&s;trate had onely a &s;uperintendency over them, all their mi&s;doings were a&s;cribed to the Bi&s;hops and the Clergy: their Courts heard the cau&s;es of excommu|nication, adjudg'd a per&s;on to excommunication, and cau&s;ed a Presbyter, no judge in the cau&s;e, to excommunicate the party: whereas Chri&s;t by his Apo&s;tles made them judges in his place as well to hear the cau&s;es of the &s;piritual cen&s;ures, as to execute the &s;ame by the &s;entence of excommunication. The &s;piritual cen&s;ures are &s;piritual remedies, and the Pa&s;tors of the Church, are under Chri&s;t the Phy&s;icians; how then can it be congruous, to imploy one that is no Phy&s;ician to &s;earch and take knowledge of the di&s;ea&s;es of the Soul, and leave or<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 letter">y the application of the remedies to the Phy&s;icians? in the hearing of the cau&s;es of &s;piritual cen&s;ures, pa&s;toral acts are to be exerci&s;ed, as of teaching, of redargution of &s;in, and conviction, which prepare the offendor for the due and pro|fitable receiving of the &s;piritual Phy&s;ick; which acts are all wanting where a per&s;on that is no Pa&s;tor condemneth a &s;inner to be excommunicated by a Pa&s;tor.</P>
<P>There is another mi&s;chief that accompanies the mixture in one and the &s;ame per&s;on of the exerci&s;e of acts purely mini|&s;terial and acts proper to the civil magi&s;trate in &s;piritual cau|&s;es (as it is in Arch-deacons and the like) that is, commu|tation of paenance (as to take &s;o much money, a Cow, a Hor&s;e, and the like, as it hath been u&s;ed) be it in pretence of giving it to the poor, where &s;u&s;pen&s;ion or excommunication was by
<PB N="29" REF="24">the Apo&s;tolical ordinances to have been exerci&s;ed. If the power proper to the mini&s;ters, &amp; the power proper to the ma|gi&s;trate were in di&s;tinct per&s;ons, this too frequent abu&s;e would be well avoyded; For the &s;ole &s;piritual power is not to medle with body or pur&s;e: Cudgelling, whipping, impri&s;oning fining &s;candalous &s;inners were not at all in u&s;e before the times of Chri&s;tian Emperours. And as to the redemption of the whole&s;ome &s;everities, which the paenitents were enjoyned willingly to exerci&s;e upon them&s;elves, it was not u&s;ed until about the end of the fift Century.</P>
<P>I might mention other mi&s;chiefs, as the intollerable abu&s;e of excommunication for very &s;mall offences (of old con|demned in the Canons of the Church) under pretence of con|tumacy, or the like: But I am weary of raking in this puddle,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Concil. Aure|lian. <HI>5.</HI> c. <HI>2.</HI> &amp; Leo. Epi&s;t. <HI>87.</HI></NOTE> where the many dependences upon tho&s;e Courts &s;eemed to re|quire exorbitances, that every one might have a tolerable livelyhood. If the excre&s;cencies, which the corruptions of the times made to adhere to the primitive Epi&s;copacy, were cut off, and the &s;piritual juri&s;diction re&s;tored to the Bi&s;hop and Presbyters, it is not to be doubted,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">(i.e. mu|nus baptizan|di) <GAP DESC="foreign">, &amp;c. <GAP DESC="foreign">, &amp;c. Chry&s;o&s;t. in <HI>1</HI> Cor. hom. <HI>3.</HI></NOTE> but that our bre|thren who di&s;like the Epi&s;copacy in its pre&s;ent con&s;titution, and the more, becau&s;e they took an oath (whether well or ill I let go) to endevour the abrogation of it, would be abun|dantly &s;atisfied with the Apo&s;tolical Epi&s;copacy, where one was ordained for the union &amp; &s;trengthening of the juri&s;diction of Presbyters: for the defence of which Epi&s;copacy, they had taken a former oath in the &s;olemn Prote&s;tation, which, as taken lawfully and in lawful things, maketh all contrary oaths unlawful to be after either taken or kept.</P>
<P>Although the Apo&s;tles ordained no governing Elders be&s;ides the Bi&s;hop and preaching Elders, yet the primitive Epi&s;copa|cy will well bear, that &s;ome lay Elders be joyned to the Pres|bytery, and in every pari&s;h, (where fit per&s;ons may be had,) to help the Bi&s;hop and Presbyters in the in&s;pection of man|ners, in the in&s;truction of the ignorant, in brotherly admo|nitions and teproofs, and in giving notice to the Bi&s;hops and Presbyters of the &s;candalous offences, to be proceeded again&s;t in an Eccle&s;ia&s;tical order, and al&s;o to repre&s;ent the people and vote for them; where their con&s;ent is requi&s;ite.</P>
<PB N="30" REF="25">
<P>Here I de&s;ire it may be noted, that when I &s;pake of Pres|byters which were the Senate of the ancient Bi&s;hops,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Conc. Neocae|&s;ar. cum Ep. <HI>7.</HI> Zachariae papae ad Bonifac. c. <HI>4.</HI> &amp;c. <HI>15.</HI> Et Concil. Mel|den&s;. an. <HI>845.</HI> c. <HI>54.</HI></NOTE> I un|der&s;tood not all and every one &s;ubject unto the Bi&s;hop, but the more ancient, grave, pious, learned, di&s;creet and moderate of them; for &s;uch were the City Presbyters in the old times which alone u&s;ually and mo&s;tly were the Bi&s;hops a&s;&s;e&s;&s;ors in the &s;piritual judicature, and which therefore in &s;ome places and &s;pecially in <HI>Rome</HI> obtained the name of Cardinal Pres|byters.</P>
<P>Some di&s;like the civil honour wherewith godly Kings have dignified our reverend Prelates:<NOTE PLACE="marg">Sect. <HI>13.</HI></NOTE> truely, if the taking of it had made them le&s;s able to fulfil the office of preaching the Go&s;pel, or did widen the di&s;tance between them and the Presbyters, or made them le&s;s acce&s;&s;ible by or conde&s;cending to their flock, or ecclip&s;ed the veneration due to their Co~-pres|byters, or involved them in civil affaires, which all the ancient Canons forbid, the addition of that honour were not to be liked: but it is evident enough to the eye of every impartial judgement, and the lives of many mo&s;t holy Bi&s;hops have made it good, that if any of the&s;e evils happen'd from the receiving of that dignity, as too often hath been &s;een, it proceeded from the evil of the per&s;on, and not from the in|nocent honour, which w<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 letter">s conferred upon them by pious Princes out of their love to Ch<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="4 letters"> and his Amba&s;&s;adors, the better to pre&s;erve them from the contempt of the wicked, (who regard no goodne&s;s be&s;ides the civil and worldly) and to enable the better to maintain the great intere&s;t which in civil things belongs to the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical e&s;tate, and that the great Council of a Chri&s;tian Kingdom &s;hould not &s;it without gi|ving the Amba&s;&s;adors of Chri&s;t an honourable place and pri|viledge among them, that in them Chri&s;t might be &s;een to be the more pre&s;ent, and their ready &s;piritual Council might pre|vent &s;ome proceedings not well agreeing with the intere&s;t of religion and the laws of Chri&s;t, which without them might more ea&s;ily happen. But what was done in a heat, may be un|done in a milder temper. <HI>Irenaeus</HI> who was born within very few years after the decea&s;e of the Apo&s;tles &s;aith, that the Church nouri&s;hed &s;uch presbyters, of whom the Prophet &s;aith,
<PB N="31" REF="25">I will give thy Princes in peace and thy Bi&s;hops in righteou&s;|ne&s;s, where this ancient Father doth &s;hew that Bi&s;hops be princes. And &s;o doth <HI>Hierom</HI> upon the place, the prophet (&s;aith he) calleth the future princes of the Church Bi&s;hops.<NOTE PLACE="marg">E&s;a. <HI>60.17.</HI> Secund. <HI>70.</HI> in|terpret.</NOTE> It is then very congruous that the Chri&s;tian Kings &s;et over the&s;e Eccle&s;ia&s;tical princes, and by their mini&s;tery made par|takers of the caele&s;tial dignities, &s;hould in a certain way of retribution dignifie them with &s;ome eminent degree of civil honour, which cannot be well &s;upported without &s;ome pro|portionable revenue.</P>
<P>The Holy Scripture tells us, that it is a more ble&s;&s;ed thing to give, then to receive: Surely God would have every of the presbyters of the Church enabled for that ble&s;&s;ed work of gi|ving, over and above a convenient maintenance for Wife and Children, which the Apo&s;tle &s;uppo&s;eth to be in their families, for whom they are bound to provide, or in the judgment of the &s;ame Apo&s;tle to be deemed to have denied the faith, and to be wor&s;e then infidels. And if every Presbyter ought to be thus provided for (if po&s;&s;ible) then the elder Brethren &s;hould have a double portion, be&s;ides the proportion which their ci|vil dignity doth require; and where any of the re&s;t are indued with more excellent mini&s;terial gifts, it's very convenient they &s;hould have a larger mea&s;ure of the matter and in&s;tru|ments requi&s;ite for the fu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 letter">l exerci&s;e of their more excelling vertues. What the revenue of the reverend Bi&s;hops is, I do not know, but I have good rea&s;ons to a&s;&s;ure me that it is not exce&s;&s;ive, at which any would grudg or envy, except the &s;acri|legious truckers, which would have the reverend Clergy live upon their leavings and &s;craps. Certain it is that the mainte|nance of many hundreds of P<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="2 letters">sbyters is &s;o &s;mall that they can &s;car&s;e feed and cloath their Families, &s;o that when they die, many Ho&s;pitals might be filled with their poor Wives and Children. And if no better provi&s;ion be made for the poor Cures and Vicarages, it were an eminent work of charity to erect and endow Ho&s;pitals proper to poor Mini&s;ters Wives and Children. This &s;tarving of Chri&s;ts Amba&s;&s;adours is the &s;hame and great &s;in of the Kingdome: But now it is the hope and expectation of all good men, that his &s;acred Maje&s;ty and the
<PB N="32" REF="26">mo&s;t honourable hou&s;es of parliament will provide a remedy for this mi&s;erable di&s;ea&s;e of the Church, for it's onely an act of parliament that can &s;urely, &s;weetly, and fully cure it.</P>
<P>There be not a few who complain again&s;t the canonical oath:<NOTE PLACE="marg">Sect. <HI>14.</HI></NOTE> concerning which I can find no mention until about the year 813. wherein the Fathers of the &s;econd Council of <HI>Ca|bilon</HI> &s;ay, it is &s;poken of certain of our brethren that they compel them whom they are to ordain to &s;wear that they will do nothing again&s;t the Canons, and that they will be obedient to the Bi&s;hop, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> which oath becau&s;e it is dangerous; we do all with one con&s;ent ordain, that it be prohibited. A Canon of a Council celebrated <HI>an.</HI> 1355, comes to my mind, which &s;aith, le&s;t the faithful (who~ the divine piety was mercifully plea&s;ed to put under a light burthen and a &s;weet yoke) &s;hould be burthened with the weight of &s;in, by rea&s;on of their tran&s;|gre&s;&s;ions again&s;t the Canons; we ordain that the provincial con&s;titutions of our predece&s;&s;ors, and tho&s;e which &s;hall be hereafter made, oblige not the trangre&s;&s;ors to &s;in <HI>(ad culpam)</HI> but onely to puni&s;hment <HI>(ad paenam.)</HI> Whether the modera|tion of the&s;e Synods be worthy of imitation, I leave to others to judge.</P>
<P>Many have entertained a great fear,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Sect. <HI>15.</HI></NOTE> which hath alienated their minds from all Epi&s;copacy; namely, that an innumera|ble company of unnece&s;&s;ary and burthen&s;ome ceremonies be in&s;eparable concomitants of Epi&s;copal government. In|deed the fear is not vain and without ground, if we re&s;pect the degenerated Epi&s;copacy, as it is, if we regard the primi|tive, which hath and will be contented with very few, if need be. Witne&s;s <HI>Gregory</HI> the great, who &s;aith, that it was the cu&s;tome of the Apo&s;tles,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Greg. Epi&s;t. l. T. Ep. <HI>63.</HI></NOTE> to con&s;ecrate the Euchari&s;t, u&s;ing on|ly the Lords prayer; with him agrees <HI>Walifridus Strabus;</HI> it is the relation of our Ance&s;tors (&s;aith he) that the Ma&s;s was wont to be made in the fir&s;t times as now in the Good Friday,<NOTE PLACE="marg">De rebus Eccl. c. <HI>22.</HI></NOTE> <HI>i. e.</HI> after the Lords Prayer, and the commemoration of Chri&s;ts pa&s;&s;ion, as him&s;elf hath taught us, the communion of the bo|dy and blood of our Lord was given to all that were prepared. About forty years after the death of St. <HI>John</HI> the Apo&s;tle, <HI>Ju&s;tin Martyr</HI> relates,<NOTE PLACE="marg">In Apolog. ad Auton.</NOTE> that when the people of the City and
<PB N="33" REF="26">Countrey adjacent met together on the Lords day, the Reader read out of the Apo&s;tles and Prophets, and then the Pre&s;i|dent made a Sermon upon the Scripture then read; which ended, all &s;tood up to prayer; which done they ki&s;&s;ed one a|nother: then bread and wine and water were offered to the Pre&s;ident; which he having received prayed again, and gave thanks as he was able; which ended, the people &s;aid, <HI>amen.</HI> Then the Deacons gave the con&s;ecrated bread &amp; wine and wa|ter to every one pre&s;ent to receive, and they carried the &s;ame to the ab&s;ent. Here we have the &s;ub&s;tance of the ancient Liturgy of the Church in u&s;e at that time, &s;hort and &s;weet: Where the Lords prayer was not alone u&s;ed in the con&s;ecration, as in the Apo&s;tles time, but al&s;o the Bi&s;hops prayer, whereof the words [as he was able] may imply, either that he prayed as well as his memory would &s;erve him to utter a premeditated prayer without book, or that he prayed as devoutly as he could, which is the be&s;t con&s;truction of them. So that hence it may not appear whether it was a read, or a premeditated and memo|rially delivered prayer. The &s;ame old author &s;aith concerning Bapti&s;m; as many as believe tho&s;e things to be true which have been told and taught them by us, and promi&s;e to live accor|dingly, are in&s;tructed to pray fa&s;ting for the pardon of their &s;ins, we fa&s;ting and praying with them; and then they are by us brought to the water and regenerated, as we our &s;elves were, in the name of the Father and our Saviour Je&s;us Chri&s;t, and of the Holy Gho&s;t, being wa&s;hed in the water: Then we bring them to the Brethren who are met together making common prayers for them&s;elves, the baptized, and all other where|&s;oever, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>We are to note that he mentions a <HI>Reader,</HI> which whether he were a Presbyter or a Deacon, or a di&s;tinct degree in&s;titu|ted by the Church, cannot be gathered from his writings which are now extant. In the end of the &s;econd Century the Reader appears to be a di&s;tinct degree; the ordinations of Haereticks (&s;aith <HI>Tertull.</HI>) are ra&s;h, light, uncon&s;tant, therefore one is with them to day a Bi&s;hop, and another to morrow,<NOTE PLACE="marg">De prae&s;cript. haeret. c. <HI>41.</HI></NOTE> he is to day a Deacon which &s;hall be the next day a Reader, he is to day a presbyter which is the next day a Laick. And it is
<PB N="34" REF="27">to be &s;een in <HI>Cyprian</HI> about the year 250,<NOTE PLACE="marg">2. <HI>Epi&s;t.</HI> 5. <HI>&amp; l.</HI> 3. <HI>Ep.</HI> 22.</NOTE> that he ordained <HI>Au|relius</HI> and <HI>Saturus</HI> Readers in his Church, and <HI>Optatus</HI> a &s;ub|deacon. At the &s;ame time <HI>Cornelius</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome</HI> (writing to <HI>Fabius</HI>) &s;aith,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Apud Eu&s;eb. l. <HI>6.</HI> c. <HI>42.</HI></NOTE> that in the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> there were of Presbyters forty &s;ix, of Deacons &s;even, of &s;ub-deacons &s;even, of Acolythes 42, of Exorci&s;ts, Readers, and Porters 52, of Widows and Poor above 1500, all which the Church fed.</P>
<P>Here we find Exorci&s;ts and Readers (both which were in <HI>Ju&s;tin Martyrs</HI> time about the year 150) to be reckoned a|mong the Clergy of the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> and the Reader di&s;tingui&s;hed from the Presbyter and Deacons. After this, about the year 400, the di&s;tinct ordinations of Bi&s;hops, of Pres|byters, of Deacons, of Sub-deacons, of Acolythes, of Exor|ci&s;ts, or Readers, and of Porters or Dore-keepers, and of Sin|gers, are &s;et down in the fourth Council of <HI>Carthage.</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Conc. Carth. <HI>4.</HI> c. <HI>1.</HI> ad <HI>10.</HI></NOTE> It mu&s;t not be imagined that any of the&s;e, be&s;ides a Presbyter and Dore-keeper, was in every Parochial Church, but only in the Cathedral or mother Church of the Dioce&s;s, and in &s;ome &s;uch parochial Churches as were able to maintain a greater or le&s;&s;er number of them. And therefore it &s;eems hard to lay upon one mini&s;ter in the pari&s;h Church the burthen of all the offices, to be born by him&s;elf alone, which in the Cathedral were executed by many. As to read every Lords day all the &s;ervice fir&s;t and &s;econd, being a thing above the &s;trength of mo&s;t, if the Sermon be not omitted; as the Bi&s;hops and Presbyters bordering upon the times of the Apo&s;tles, with the peoples con&s;ent, committed the office of reading the holy Scriptures in the Churches to men of an inferior ordination, &s;o their &s;ucce&s;&s;ors &s;hortly after committed the office of teaching the Catechumens to the like per&s;ons, but more learned and apt to teach. Both the&s;e (as al&s;o &s;ome others) were &s;eparated from the Laicks and de&s;tinated for the Presbytery: They were the Bi&s;hops and Presbyters Scholars, bred up by them for the high and &s;acred mini&s;tery, and advanced thereto, if they became capable, and the Church had need of them. So that Readers and Catechi&s;ers were incomplete preachers of the Go&s;pel, until by the higher and divine ordination Chri&s;t breathed upon them, giving them the Holy Gho&s;t, which made them
<PB N="35" REF="27">complete preachers; who do not perform a complete act of preaching, unle&s;s with the publi&s;hing of the text, wherein the Readers help them; they al&s;o publi&s;h an expo&s;ition and ex|hortation thereupon; as <HI>Ju&s;tin Martyr</HI> did, and the &s;ucceeding ancient Fathers; who grounded their Homilies, or Sermons upon a portion of the Scriptures then read before them. One or|dinance of God is not to be made to thru&s;t another out of the Church, but reading and prayers, and preaching, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> ought to be &s;o proportioned to the time appointed for them, and the &s;trength of them that officiate, that no nece&s;&s;ity, that may be prevented, may compel to the omi&s;&s;ion of any divine or|dinance that ought to be performed. In the &s;ixt Council of <HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> (at which time much corruption was crept into the Churches) the Fathers pre&s;ent in it commanded, that the Bi&s;hops and Presbyters &s;hould dayly preach,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Gan. <HI>19.</HI></NOTE> e&s;pecially on the Lords day. It is commanded by another Council, that if a Presbyter cannot preach by rea&s;on of &s;ickne&s;s,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Conc. Va&s;en&s;. Can. <HI>4.</HI> &s;ub Leone. <HI>1.</HI></NOTE> that a homily or &s;ermon of one of the ancient Fathers be read by the Deacon. In another Council, its thus decreed; that if the Bi&s;hop be not at home, or is infirm, or is not able for &s;ome other cau&s;e, yet never let on the Lords days or Fe&s;tivals any want to be of one which may preach the Word of God, &s;o as the vulgar peo|ple may under&s;tand.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Concil. Ma|guntiac. c. <HI>25.</HI> circa an. <HI>813.</HI></NOTE> The Primitive Bi&s;hops were preaching Bi&s;hops, and u&s;ually preached every Lords day (as we &s;ee in <HI>Ju&s;tine Martyr,</HI>) and in Fe&s;tival days in the principal fa&s;ting days in <HI>Lent,</HI> as we find in <HI>Ambro&s;e, Chry&s;o&s;t. Augu&s;tine</HI> and others.</P>
<P>But I mu&s;t return to &s;peak of the Ceremonies of the Church. The Ceremony of &s;tanding and not kneeling in prayer on the Lords days, and the days between <HI>Ea&s;ter</HI> and <HI>Whit&s;ontide,</HI> was in u&s;e in the Apo&s;tles days, and in&s;tituted by them;<NOTE PLACE="marg">Apud anthorem Chri&s;tian. re&s;p. re&s;p. <HI>115.</HI></NOTE> as <HI>Irenaeus</HI> the hearer of <HI>Polycarpus</HI> Auditor of the Apo|&s;tle <HI>John</HI> doth te&s;tifie. In the time of <HI>Tertullian</HI> about the year 200, many other Ceremonies are mentioned by him, (which we find not in any approved Author before him &s;poken of) and are affirmed by him to de&s;cend from the Apo&s;tles; as the &s;igning of the forehead of the baptized with the &s;ign of the Cro&s;s, be&s;ides,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Tertull. de co|rona militis c. <HI>3.</HI></NOTE> the u&s;ual &s;igning with the &s;ame &s;ign upon &s;undry occa&s;ions, the ta&s;ting after Bapti&s;m of milk and honey, the
<PB N="36" REF="28">u&s;e of having Suerties for Infants to be baptized,<NOTE PLACE="marg">De Bapt. c. <HI>7.</HI> &amp; <HI>18.</HI></NOTE> the an|nointing of the bapti&s;ed with oyl, Offering for the faithful decea&s;ed, which was thus: the friends of the decea&s;ed of|fered bread and wine in their behalf for the u&s;e of the Sacra|ment of the Lords Supper, and the Prie&s;t by faith in prayer, in the celebration of the Euchari&s;t, pre&s;ented to God the Father the &s;acrifice of Chri&s;t once offered by him, and which was in &s;ome manner pre&s;ent in the Sacrament, be&s;eeching him for that mo&s;t holy and perfect &s;acrifice &s;ake to take away the remainder of &s;in from the &s;oul departed (which was not taken away in this life) both as to the guilt and inhaerency of it, and to grant to the &s;oul the promi&s;ed pre&s;ent ble&s;&s;ed re&s;t, and in the day of judgment, to make the per&s;on partaker of the publick ju&s;tification and po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of full faelicity. Before the re|ceiving of the Lords Supper they ki&s;&s;ed one another with the holy ki&s;s, the &s;ign of true love and peace; which we are &s;ure was u&s;ed in the Apo&s;tles dayes, and &s;eems to argue &s;trongly for the u&s;e of <HI>&s;ignificant</HI> Ceremonies. The Ea&s;ter and Penteco&s;t were the &s;et and &s;olemn times of the admini&s;tration of the Sacrament of Bapti&s;m.<NOTE PLACE="marg">de bapt. c. <HI>18.</HI></NOTE> I need not &s;peak of Confirmation, of the ob&s;ervation of the Fea&s;ts of Ea&s;ter and Penteco&s;t, of the fa&s;t in the days of our Saviour's death and burial, of the le&s;s perfect and voluntary fa&s;ts of <HI>Friday</HI> and <HI>Wedne&s;day,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Tert. de jejun. c. <HI>2.</HI></NOTE> which be in part before touched; for my purpo&s;e is not to make an ex|act collection of the ancient rites, but of &s;uch as may give &s;ome light to &s;ee, whence tho&s;e Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Ceremonies, which have been and partly are u&s;ed in our Church, took their beginnings.</P>
<P>As concerning the ge&s;ture of the body u&s;ed in the prayers of the Church,<NOTE PLACE="marg">de Orat. c. <HI>12.</HI></NOTE> it was kneeling or &s;tanding; this la&s;t on the Lords dayes,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Tertul. l. <HI>2.</HI> ad uxor. c. <HI>9.</HI> de Monogam. <HI>6.10</HI></NOTE> and in all the Penteco&s;t: For as <HI>Tertullian</HI> &s;aith, it is a mo&s;t irreligious fact to pray to God &s;itting before him, unle&s;s we upbraid Him that prayer hath wearied us.</P>
<P>Concerning Matrimony;<NOTE PLACE="marg">De Veland. Virg. c. <HI>11.</HI> de pudicitia. c. <HI>9.</HI> Ambro&s;. Ep. <HI>70.</HI> Nazianz. Epi&s;t. <HI>57.</HI></NOTE> in <HI>Tertullian</HI>'s time, they defired of the Bi&s;hops, presbyters, Deacons and Widows, leave to marry; they were married by a Bi&s;hop or presbyter, the wo|man u&s;ed a Vaile, they joyned their right hands, ki&s;&s;ed; and <HI>Tertullian</HI> doth al&s;o &s;eem to intimate the u&s;e of a ring, it is cer|tain
<PB N="37" REF="28">it was in u&s;e in <HI>I&s;idors</HI> time and before:<NOTE PLACE="marg">I&s;idor. de Eccl. offic. l. <HI>2.</HI> c. <HI>19.</HI></NOTE> the Bridegroom (&s;aith he) gave a Ring to the Bride, which was put upon her fourth Finger.</P>
<P>We may gather from <HI>Tertullian,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">De bapt. c. <HI>9.</HI> Apolog. conta+gent. c. <HI>30.</HI></NOTE> that the Lords prayer was commonly u&s;ed in the publick prayers of the Church; for he calls it the legitime and ordinary prayer, which (&s;aith he) being laid as a foundation, we may build upon it the petitions which our particular ca&s;es require. He &s;hews, that our private prayers, wherein we expre&s;s to God our particular wants and de&s;ires, mu&s;t not be loud, not altogether &s;et formes, but promp|ted to us, without &s;uch monitor, by our own hearts, which alone can tell us our particular nece&s;&s;ities. When we pray (&s;aith <HI>Cyprian</HI>) let the Father acknowledge the words of his Son:<NOTE PLACE="marg">Cypr. de orat. Dom.</NOTE> And we do (&s;aith he) the more effectually obtain what we ask in Chri&s;ts name, if we ask u&s;ing his own prayer.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Hom. <HI>42.</HI> ex <HI>50.</HI></NOTE> The Lords prayer (&s;aith <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI>) is dayly &s;aid at the Altar of God in his Church. The fourth Council of <HI>Tolet.</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Can. <HI>9.</HI></NOTE> called it a Quotidian, a dayly prayer, and commanded it to be &s;aid by the Clergy, not onely on the Lords days, but every day both in the publick and private duty. Concerning prayer,<NOTE PLACE="marg">de orat. dom.</NOTE> <HI>Cyprian</HI> hath the&s;e remarkable words; when we &s;tand to prayer (&s;aith he) our mind mu&s;t be onely upon that it prayeth, and there|fore the Prie&s;t, premi&s;ing a preface before the prayer, prepares the minds of the Brethren; &s;aying, Lift up your hearts; that the people an&s;wering, We have unto the Lord, may be admo|ni&s;hed they ought to think on no<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 letter">hing but the Lord: By which words we learn two things; Fir&s;t, that in <HI>Cyprian</HI>'s time (which was 250 years after our Saviour's birth) &s;et forms of publick prayers were u&s;ed in the Churches. Secondly, that the people had other an&s;wers be&s;ides [Amen] to make to the mini&s;ter in the &s;olemn prayers of the Church.<NOTE PLACE="marg">De bono per|&s;everantiae. c. <HI>13.</HI> &amp; de Spir. &amp; lit. c. <HI>11.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI> di&s;|covereth what followeth tho&s;e words of the publick prayers mentioned by <HI>Cyprian;</HI> the Prie&s;t &s;aid (&s;aith St. <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI>) let us give thanks to our Lord God, to which the people an|&s;wered, it is meet and right &s;o to do; and then the Prie&s;t went no &s;aying, it is very meet, right, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>Out of Authors now extant, who flouri&s;hed in the three fir&s;t Centuties, no more (that I can remember) concerning
<PB N="38" REF="29">the divine &s;ervice of the Church and the Ceremonies, perti|nent to our purpo&s;e, is mentioned, then what hath been al|ready touched. But the holy writers of the fourth Century and downward do affirm, both that many other rites have been u&s;ed in the three fir&s;t Centuries, whereof &s;ome were in&s;tituted by the Apo&s;tles (as they write) others by &s;ome Bi&s;hops of <HI>Rome,</HI> and that many more were added in the fourth Century. One rea&s;on why the Ceremonies increa&s;ed in the fourth Cen|tury may be this; becau&s;e then the Church more flouri&s;hed in pro&s;perity, then any time before, and it might be thought convenient that the external glory of the Church &s;hould be proportioned to the glory of the Empite now made Chri&s;tian.</P>
<P>The u&s;e of &s;inging P&s;almes and Hymnes in the Churches,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Epi&s;t. <HI>119.</HI></NOTE> may (as St. <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI> &s;aith) be defended out of Scripture, &s;eeing of this we have &s;o profitable in&s;tructions, examples and precepts of Chri&s;t and his Apo&s;tles: But the manner of &s;ing|ing was various.<NOTE PLACE="marg">l. <HI><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 letter">.</HI> c. <HI>8.</HI> hi&s;t.</NOTE> <HI>Socrates</HI> relateth that <HI>Ignatius,</HI> having in a vi&s;ion &s;een Angels &s;inging Hymnes Anthemewi&s;e unto the prai&s;e of the Holy Trinity, delivered that manner of &s;inging P&s;almes unto his own Church in <HI>Antioch,</HI> which was gene|rally received thence by the Greek Churches, and then by the Latines and <HI>We&s;t,</HI> fir&s;t by <HI>Ambro&s;e</HI> in the fourth Century, and after by the re&s;t of the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Bi&s;hops. The Rubrick in our Common-prayer Book before <HI>Te Deum laudamus</HI> (we prai&s;e thee O God) hath the&s;e words; that the people may the better hear, in &s;uch places where they do &s;ing, there &s;hall the Le&s;&s;ons be &s;ung in a plain tune after the manner of di&s;tinct reading, and likewi&s;e the Epi&s;tle and Go&s;pel. This Rubrick puts me in mind of a place in St. <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI>'s Confe&s;&s;ions,<NOTE PLACE="marg">l. <HI>10.</HI> c. <HI>33.</HI></NOTE> where he &s;aith, that it was often told him, that <HI>Athana&s;ius</HI> Bi|&s;hop of <HI>Alexandria</HI> made the reader of the P&s;alm to &s;ound with &s;o mean bending or turning of the Voyce, that he might be nearer a pronouncer then a &s;inger:<NOTE PLACE="marg">Epi&s;t. <HI>119.</HI></NOTE> And in another place he &s;aith; when the Brethren are met in the Church, when is it not time of &s;inging holy &s;ongs, unle&s;s it be the time of reading, or preaching, or of prayer? <HI>&amp;c.</HI> By which words it &s;eemeth that the Chapters, Epi&s;tle and Go&s;pel were not &s;ung in tho&s;e dayes. And in truth any manner of &s;inging them
<PB N="39" REF="29">&s;eemeth incongruous. The Fathers u&s;e to reprove the abu&s;es which were too often found in &s;inging P&s;alms in the Churches, e&s;pecially, that they were many times more plea&s;ed with the &s;weetne&s;s of the voyce then the divine matter, or when onely a few of the Church did &s;ing, that they &s;o &s;ung that few un|der&s;tood what they &s;ung.<NOTE PLACE="marg">In Epi&s;t. ad Ephe&s;. c. <HI>5.</HI></NOTE> Let the &s;ervant of the Lord (&s;aith <HI>Hierome</HI>) &s;o &s;ing that the words which he reads may more plea&s;e then the voyce of him &s;inging. It is no perfect &s;inging nor plea&s;ing to God, when mens hearts do not &s;ing unto the Lord as well as their voyces. I will not &s;peak of &s;inging with Organs in the Churches (not that I think that God refu&s;eth to be heartily prai&s;ed in and with the u&s;e of them, but) becau&s;e they were not brought into the Churches until much later times.</P>
<P>The Doxology, Glory be to the Father, to the Son, and to the Holy Gho&s;t, for ever, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> is by St. <HI>Ba&s;ile</HI> proved to be u&s;ed from the Apo&s;tles times, both out of <HI>Clemens, Rom. Irenaeus, Orig. Gregor. Thaumaturg. Diony&s;ius Rom. Diony&s;ius Alex.</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">, &amp;c. Ba&s;il. de Sp. S. c. <HI>29.</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">. Ibid.</NOTE> and the Evening-candle light thank&s;giving which had been u&s;ed time out of mind of man, wherein they &s;aid, We prai&s;e the Father, and the Son, and the holy Spirit of God. But this Doxology with the addition, as it was in the beginning, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> was fir&s;t<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Epi&s;t. Hier. ad Dama&s;um. Conc. Va&s;en&s;. c. <HI>7.</HI></NOTE> ordained to be &s;aid in the Divine Service of the Church after the P&s;alms, by <HI>Dama&s;us</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome,</HI> about the year of our Lord 370. He fir&s;t commanded<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Greg. l. <HI>7.</HI> Epi&s;t. <HI>63.</HI> &amp; inter Ep. Hier. Aug. de temp. &s;erm. <HI>151.</HI> de can. ob&s;er|vant. praepo|&s;it. <HI>23.</HI> Gregor. l. <HI>7.</HI> Epi&s;t. <HI>63.</HI> Conc. Va&s;en&s;. c. <HI>5.</HI> Radulf&s; Vigre&s;. de can. ob&s;er|vant. praepo&s;it. <HI>23.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Alleluia</HI> to be u&s;ed in the Roman Church, following therein the Liturgie of the <HI>Hiero&s;olymitane</HI> and Greek Churches. <HI>Kyrie elei&s;on</HI> and <HI>Chri&s;te elei&s;on,</HI> Lord have mercy and Chri&s;t have mercy often repeated were in imitation of &s;ome greek Liturgies re|ceived into the Romane Divine Service-book by the authority of Pope <HI>Sylve&s;ter</HI> (about the year 330) &s;aith <HI>Radulphus Tugr</HI> which many years after were omitted, and at la&s;t re&s;tored by <HI>Gregory</HI> the great.</P>
<P>The collection of the Epi&s;ties and Go&s;pels for the whole year into the form like that in pre&s;ent u&s;e is attributed to <HI>Hierom,</HI> and by Pope <HI>Dama&s;us</HI> commanded to be read in the Churches.</P>
<P>The Symbole or Creed compo&s;ed in the fir&s;t Council of
<PB N="40" REF="30"><HI>Con&s;tantinople</HI> was by the &s;ame Pope <HI>Dama&s;us</HI> ordained to be &s;aid or &s;ung after the Go&s;pel.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Rupert. l. <HI>2.</HI> c. <HI>21.</HI> Strab. c. <HI>22.</HI></NOTE> It was received into the <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 letter">i|vine Service in <HI>Spain,</HI> by the command of the third Syno<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 letter"> of <HI>Tolet.</HI> The rea&s;ons brought to prove the Apo&s;tles or the <HI>Ni|cene</HI> Creed to have been &s;aid in the Liturgies of the fourth Cen|tury or before are of &s;mall weight, and therefore I omit them. How <HI>Dama&s;us</HI> can truely be &s;aid to have enjoyned the &s;inging or &s;aying of the Creed, and yet that it was not &s;ung at <HI>Rome,</HI> until about the year 1014 is ea&s;ily an&s;wered, if we conceive his command to be directed unto all other Churches &s;ubject unto him,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Berno de offic. my&s;&s;ae c. <HI>1.</HI> Vide Conc. tolet. <HI>3.</HI> c. <HI>2.</HI></NOTE> excepting <HI>Rome,</HI> for that &s;pecial rea&s;on which <HI>Berno</HI> relates.</P>
<P>Bi&s;hops, Presbyters, and Deacons, in the time of the ce|lebration of the Lords Supper,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Hierom. l. <HI>1.</HI> dial. contra Pe|lag. Chry&s;o&s;t. in Matt. hom. <HI>83.</HI> Conc. Carthag. <HI>4.</HI> c. <HI>41.</HI> Et vide re|&s;pen&s;s. Leonis <HI>3.</HI> ad mi&s;&s;os ca|roli M. &s;ub Conc. aqui&s;|granen&s;</NOTE>, u&s;ed the white garment, which we call the Surplice; whether it was in u&s;e before the fourth Century is not related by any approved author living in tho&s;e times. Prayers compo&s;ed after the manner of our Litany are to be &s;een in the Liturgies of <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tome</HI> and <HI>Ba&s;ile.</HI> In their time,<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Chry&s;. in Ep. ad Eph. hom. <HI>14,</HI> &amp; <HI>24.</HI></NOTE> glory be to God on high, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> and<NOTE N="&dagger;" PLACE="marg">Idem in Epi&s;t. ad Colo&s;&s;. hom. <HI>3.</HI></NOTE> holy, holy, holy, Lord God of Sabboth, were wont to be &s;aid in the Divine Service. <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tome</HI> &s;aith, that the Bi&s;hop was wont often in the time of the publik wor&s;hip of God, to &s;ay to the people,<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">in <HI>2</HI> Cor. hom. <HI>18.</HI> &amp; in Ep. ad Colo&s;&s;. hom. <HI>3.</HI></NOTE> Peace be unto you, and that the people an&s;wered, And with thy &s;pirit. The &s;ame author relating how the people did in another part of the Service an&s;wer the mini&s;ter; &s;aying, Let us give thanks to our Lord God, it is meet and right (&s;ay the people) &s;o to do, addeth,<NOTE N="&dagger;" PLACE="marg">Chry&s;o&s;t. in <HI>2</HI> Cor. hom. <HI>18.</HI> in <HI>2.</HI> Epi&s;t. ad Corinth, hom. <HI>2.</HI></NOTE> why &s;hould any marvel that the peo|ple &s;hould (thus in the publick prayers) &s;peak with the Prie&s;t, &s;eeing they &s;end up unto Heaven with the Cherubims and Cae|le&s;tial powers tho&s;e holy Hymnes? one rea&s;on of this is in the &s;ame place intimated by <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tome,</HI> which is, to ma|nife&s;t unto the people, that the prayers of the Church are not proper to the mini&s;ter, but theirs al&s;o by joyning with him in them; which is more fully te&s;tified by their proper prola|tion of &s;ome part of them, then onely by their pre&s;ence and &s;aying Amen. Another rea&s;on may be the &s;ame which the &s;ame Father giveth, of the Deacons exciting the people &s;ay|ing, Let us pray, and let us pray more fervently, and the rea|&s;on
<PB N="41" REF="30" MS="y">is, becau&s;e the Soul is wont to &s;lumber in a long prayer. T<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="2 letters"> Fathers of the Council of <HI>Bracar</HI> require the Bi&s;hop or Pr<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="3 letters">yter to &s;alute the people in due place in the Divine &s;er|vice; &s;aying, the Lord be with you; to which the people &s;hould an&s;wer, and with thy Spirit: which ceremony (&s;aith the Council) all the <HI>Ea&s;t</HI> retained as delivered by the Apo|&s;tles. The Song of the three Children was generally received into the Liturgies of the Churches in this fourth Century.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Conc. toletam. Ep. c. <HI>13.</HI></NOTE> It is a tradition that the Hymne <HI>Te Deum landamus, &amp;c.</HI> (We prai&s;e thee O God We acknowledge thee to be the Lord, <HI>&amp;c.</HI>) was comdo&s;ed by <HI>Ambro&s;e,</HI> and &s;ung by <HI>Ambro&s;e,</HI> and <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI> after his Bapti&s;m. <HI>Ana&s;ta&s;ius</HI> Bi&s;hop of <HI>Rome</HI> en|joyned all to &s;tand at the reading of the Go&s;pel; after which followed the cu&s;tome of &s;tanding at the reading of the Creed.</P>
<P><HI>Hierome</HI> writing again&s;t <HI>&V;igilantius</HI> affirmeth, that in all the Churches of the <HI>Ea&s;t,</HI> when the Go&s;pel was to be read, candles were lighted the &s;un &s;hining; not &s;urely to drive away darkne&s;s, but for a &s;ign of gladne&s;s.</P>
<P>In the time of the&s;e la&s;t named Doctors, the Fea&s;ts of Saints were more in number, and celebrated with more &s;olemnity then in former times. Therein the Fea&s;t of our Saviours Na|tivity was generally ob&s;erved, and in the ancient Fathers &s;en&s;e, &s;aid to be in&s;tituted by the Apo&s;tles; whereas no approved Author of the former Centuries make mention of it. <HI>Chry|&s;o&s;tome,</HI> in a &s;ermon of his preached by him not long before the year 400, affirmeth,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Chry&s;o&s;t. &s;erm. in natalem.</NOTE> that Fea&s;t not to have come to the know|ledge of the Churches among which he lived, but ten within years before the preaching of that Sermon.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Tert. de idolola|tria. c. <HI>14.</HI> Vide Georgium in locum &amp; alios.</NOTE> And many Learned men collect from <HI>Tertullian,</HI> that in his time no other Fea&s;ts were commanded to be celebrated in the Churches (that he knew of) &s;ave onely the Lords day, Ea&s;ter and Penteco&s;t.</P>
<P>I &s;ay not this out of any di&s;like of this holy Fea&s;t,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Ubi multorum &s;trages jacet &s;ubtrahendum e&s;t aliquid &s;e|veritati, ut ad|datur amplius charitati, vide conc. Rom. <HI>3.</HI> an. <HI>1099.</HI></NOTE> or any other, which we receive from tho&s;e ancient times, (which without the adherent abu&s;es, I do heartily wi&s;h to be cele|brated with due &s;olemnity) but by this example to &s;hew, that every thing had not a beginning in the Apo&s;tles time, which is affirmed to be thence derived and de&s;cended by the te&s;timo|ny of &s;ome Fathers, who were both in this matter and other
<PB N="42" REF="31">things deceived by the counterfeited Canons and con&s;titutions and other writings bearing the names of the Apo&s;tles <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 word"> <HI>Clemens Romanus,</HI> or <HI>Diony&s;ius Areopag.</HI> whereof none <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="2 letters">re written before the year 300, yet being not well examined were received as genuine by <HI>Epiphanius,</HI> and &s;ome other old Doctors of the Church.</P>
<P>We read in this fourth Century of divers con&s;ecrations and benedictions which we do not read to be u&s;ed in the former times,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Sect.</HI> 16.</NOTE> as of con&s;ecrated Churches, Altars, Pa&s;chal. Wax-candles, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> and we find therein more regard and honour gi|ven to<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Chry&s;o&s;t. in Epi&s;t. ad Rom. hom. <HI>32.</HI></NOTE> relicks of Saints, to the &s;ign of the Cro&s;s, to the<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Nazianz in laudem Gorgo|niae &amp; in lau|dem Ba&s;ilii.</NOTE> Altar or Communion Table, the Bible, and the<NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">Chry&s;o&s;t. in Eph. hom. 3. In Epi&s;t. ad Or|thodox. &amp; in apoleg. <HI>2.</HI></NOTE> Ve&s;&s;els u&s;ed in the Divine Service and the like, then we can &s;ee to be given them in former ages; yet piou&s;ly without pa&s;&s;ing the bounds which in tho&s;e things Chri&s;tian religion had deter|mined, excepting perhaps in &s;ome particulars which humane frailty might extort from them. Willingly to break the holy Communion Cup, who can &s;ay but that it is a very great of|fence? it was (as it was &s;aid in <HI>Athana&s;ius</HI>) to do impiou&s;ly again&s;t Chri&s;t, to commit a &s;in then which none was greater.</P>
<P>Again&s;t the Carele&s;&s;ene&s;s of the&s;e times in the admini&s;tra|tion of the Lords Supper,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Augu&s;t. hom. <HI>26.</HI> ex <HI>50.</HI> Et Cyrill. Ga|tech. My&s;tagog. <HI>5.</HI></NOTE> the faying of <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI> is worthy of ob&s;ervation: with what care or &s;olicitude (&s;aith he) do we ob&s;erve, when the body of Chri&s;t is mini&s;tred unto us that nothing of it fall to the ground from our hands. It is likely that <HI>Tertullian</HI> &s;pake before him to the &s;ame purpo&s;e: we take it heavily (&s;aith he) that any of our Cup or Bread fall to the ground. <HI>Gregory Nazianz.</HI> (treating of the Birth of our ble&s;&s;ed Saviour) &s;aith, Adore the Manger (wherein he was laid.<NOTE PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign"> Nazianz. orat. in Chri&s;ti nati|vitatem. Hieron. ad Marcellam ut commigret Hie|ro&s;. idem in E|pitaph. Paulae.</NOTE>) The cro&s;s and the &s;ign were had in no le&s;s honour: Without the &s;ign of the Cro&s;s (&s;aith <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI>) neither Bap|ti&s;m, nor Confirmation, nor the Lords Supper can be rightly (as to the cu&s;tomes and Canons of the Church in tho&s;e times) performed. The Cro&s;s was ki&s;&s;ed, people fell down before it,<NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg">Paulinus l. <HI>2.</HI> Epi&s;t. <HI>3.</HI> &amp; Chry&s;o&s;t. in act. hom. <HI>12.</HI></NOTE> adored it: yet <HI>Ambro&s;e</HI> &s;aith of <HI>Helene</HI> the mother of <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI> the great, that &s;he found the title (of the Cro&s;s) and adored the King (Chri&s;t) &s;urely not the wood; that is the errour of the Gentiles. <HI>Minutius</HI> long before <HI>Ambro&s;e</HI> &s;aid
<PB N="43" REF="31">in the name of all Chri&s;tians, we do not wor&s;hip the Cro&s;s.</P>
<P>We &s;ee then, that in tho&s;e days the Cro&s;s was adored by Chri&s;tians, and yet that it was not adored by them: It was adored by an Eccle&s;ia&s;tical adoration, which was wont to be exhibited to things or per&s;ons accounted excellent, by rea|&s;on of &s;ome dignity and notable u&s;efulne&s;s, in being occa&s;i|ons, cau&s;es or in&s;truments of &s;ome very &s;ingular benefit; it was not adored by an adoration proper to God,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Aug contra Fau&s;tum Ma|nich. l. <HI>20.</HI> c. <HI>21.</HI> Super Gene&s;. quoe&s;t. <HI>60.</HI></NOTE> nor was it made either improperly or analogically or by accident par|taker thereof. <HI>Augu&s;tine,</HI> mentioning <HI>Abrahams</HI> adoring the Ancients of the people of the Land where he &s;ojourned, &s;aith, that therein he did not tran&s;gre&s;s Gods command; who did onely forbid men to &s;erve the creature with the &s;ervice and a|doration called <HI>Latreia.</HI> So <HI>Augu&s;tine. Latreia</HI> is when the Divine excellencies are the objects of the adoration, and the outward acts of adoration, are &s;ymboles of the &s;ubmi&s;&s;ion of the heart to them. The ancient Fathers did not of their own heads make a creature to &s;upply the place of any Divine per|&s;on, (as men do, and may make a fellow-creature to &s;upply the place of another, and perform &s;uch acts of veneration to it as are due to the per&s;on repre&s;ented, &s;uch be the &s;tatues of Emperors, and perhaps images and relicks of friends and benefactors) Nor did the Fathers offer &s;o to couple any creature unto the Divine per&s;on of our Saviour to partake in &s;ome &s;ort of his adoration, as his apparel, when he lived on earth, was by conjunction with his body made neer to his per&s;on, even, (as many judge) to an accidental participation of his Divine adoration. It cannot be proved that it was the inten|tion of the Church in tho&s;e times, to exhibite the external acts of divine adoration unto God, in, by, or through any created thing as co-&s;ubjects or co-objects of them: in all which ca&s;es the inward adoration proper to God is in &s;ome &s;ort rendred to the co-adored creature. The intention of tho&s;e holy men was to adore the cro&s;s onely with an eccle&s;ia&s;tical adoration, and &s;o adore it for the &s;ake of Chri&s;t, and for the benefits &s;ake redounding from the cro&s;s of Chri&s;t. They ado|red its excellency,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Concil. Con&s;tan|tinop. quinte|&s;ext, Can. <HI>73.</HI></NOTE> which con&s;i&s;ted in being an in&s;trument of the meritorious triumph of Chri&s;t, and in adoring, they pro|fe&s;&s;ed
<PB N="44" REF="32">a &s;ervice convenient to it, in order to the commending and maintenance of that its excellency: onely a created ex|cellency was the object of this adoration. When Chri&s;tian &s;ubjects exhibite to the King acts of civil wor&s;hip or adora|tion, as kneeling, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> they do this from a dutiful affection to God, and a like affection of love to their prince, which is Gods Vicegerent; yet they do not perform tho&s;e individual acts of adoration to God, in, by, or through him, that is, they do not perform them to God and the King, as two di&s;tinct ob|jects of one and the &s;ame external, and of two diver&s;e in|ward adorations, but terminate them onely in the King. It is true, that the Fathers many times &s;eemed to pre&s;ent the &s;ame individual acts both to God as &s;ymbols of their inward adoration of him, that is, of their affection of &s;ubmi&s;&s;ion to the divine excellencies, and al&s;o to the cro&s;s as &s;ymbols of their inward adoration of it, that is, of their affection of &s;ervice to its excellency, &s;o uniting two inward coordinate adorations in one and the &s;ame external adoration: but whether &s;o near a conjunction between the Divine and Eccle&s;ia&s;tical adoration, (if u&s;ed indeed by them) proceeded from humane frailty, or may be defended by the Holy Scriptures, or be not di&s;&s;o|nant to them, I refer to better con&s;ideration.</P>
<P>What hath been &s;aid of the adoration of the cro&s;s, may be ea&s;ily applied to the like adoration of the relicks of Saints, of the Altar or Communion-Table by bowing,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Chry&s;o&s;t. in 2 Cor. bom. 20. Et Ba&s;il, Liturg.</NOTE> <HI>&amp;c.</HI> of the book of the Evangels by ki&s;&s;ing, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> and the like, which were u&s;ed in the &s;ame time. It may be ea&s;ily di&s;cerned that the&s;e adorations of the Cro&s;s, Altars, Evangels, Relicks, and the like Eccle&s;ia&s;tical wor&s;hipings were very lubrick,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Liturg. Chry&s;.</NOTE> &s;o that it was a difficult matter to &s;tand upright in them, and not to fall to &s;u|per&s;tition or idolatry, as too many Churches did in after times.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Chry&s;o&s;t. in 2 Cor. hom. 20.</NOTE> The bowing to the Altar, which was done for the &s;ake of the Sacrament (which was much more to be partaker of the &s;ame adoration) when it became idolatrous, it ea&s;ily advanced the Here&s;y of Tran&s;ub&s;tantiation. The degeneration likewi&s;e of the adoration of the Cro&s;s and Relicks added to the former brought in, in &s;ub&s;equent times, the idolatrous adora|tion of images.</P>
<PB N="45" REF="32">
<P>And all the&s;e idolatrous adorations brought in the idola|trous adoration of the name of Je&s;us, either prolated or wri|ten; but not before about the year 1300.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Conc. Lugdu|nen&s;. an. 1374</NOTE> Our Church ad|mitted this la&s;t adoration of the name of Je&s;us purged as much as might be from idolatry and &s;uper&s;tition, re&s;training al&s;o the bowing to the naming of that comfortable name in the Di|vine Service. Yet it is a &s;lippery Ceremony, and made the more &s;lippery by the glo&s;s of &s;ome of our own Divines upon <HI>Philip.</HI> 2. Whence they would prove the bowing of our knee due to that ble&s;&s;ed name Je&s;us, affirming the Fathers &s;o to expound that Text. To &s;peak in &s;ober &s;adne&s;s and truth, there is not one Father that &s;o expounds it, although you produce the Catalogue of the Fathers to &s;weet and holy <HI>Bernard.</HI> There is not one Orthodox Author in all the length of that Cata|logue of Fathers, who &s;peaks of any adoration given or to be given or exhibited to that mo&s;t &s;weet name Je&s;us. The places produced by &s;ome late School-men out of the Fathers to make good their novel expo&s;ition of that place in the Epi&s;tle of the <HI>Philippians,</HI> (which our men believed, and were thereby decei|ved) have in them very &s;mall appearance of proof, and nothing truth, as the in&s;pection of the places them&s;elves, (and e&s;pecial|ly if compared with other plainer places of the &s;ame authors) will manife&s;tly di&s;cover. All the latter School-men maintain that adoration of the good name Je&s;us, whether &s;poken or wri|ten but all have not the bra&s;en Foreheads to produce the anci|ent Fathers as Patrons of it, or to expound the fore&s;aid text to prove it a duty. Let <HI>Va&s;ques</HI> a Learned Je&s;uite be heard;<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>In p. 3. q. 25. di&s;p.</HI> 111. <HI>c.</HI> 11.</NOTE> where it is &s;aid (&s;aith he) in the name of Je&s;us let every knee be bowed, (&s;o many Ancients read the text) <HI>&amp;c.</HI> by name, not the word [Je&s;us] but the thing it &s;elf, that is, [Chri&s;t] is under&s;tood. And a little after he faith, out of this place it is not &s;ufficiently proved, that any honour (no not by accident) is to be exhibited to the word [Je&s;us] writen or &s;poken, as to an image with its prototype. Therefore although there may be an innocency in tho&s;e adorations u&s;ed in the right manner and &s;en&s;e, yet it is hardly pre&s;erved, (I had almo&s;t &s;aid morally impo&s;&s;ible) by the vulgar: it is &s;o ea&s;ie a lap&s;e from the u&s;e of one of them to fall to the u&s;e of the re&s;t, and then to the
<PB N="46" REF="33" MS="y">abu&s;e of every of them: For tho&s;e Eccle&s;ia&s;tical adorations of the altar, Evangels and the name Je&s;us are u&s;ed mo&s;tly in the time of divine &s;ervice, when the like external acts of a|doration are exhibited to God, which near conjunction in time and place, between the one adoration and the other, and the beholding the &s;ame acts of wor&s;hip to be done to God and a &s;acred thing, doth puzzle the ignorant and unwary that either his zeal is as much to the creatures adoration, as to the Creators; or mingles in his mind both the adorations, where|by the be&s;t is deba&s;ed and corrupted.</P>
<P>Some may &s;ay, may we not bow to God, and kneel to him at the altar, without danger? It is &s;oon an&s;wered; That with|out doubt we may, and mu&s;t do &s;o, and in &s;o doing, our mind doth not intend the altar, as the object of our bowing: The danger is in bowing to the altar, for then we make it the ob|ject to which we bow.</P>
<P>It may be demanded if the Magi&s;trate make the naming of the name Je&s;us, the name of the Saviour of the world, to be a &s;ign when, in the divine &s;ervice, we mu&s;t bow to the per|&s;on of the Lord Je&s;us, God and man, and not to the name Je&s;us, may we not without danger &s;o do? I an&s;wer, fir&s;t, That it is our duty to bow our hearts, and al&s;o in convenient time and place, to bow our bodies to the man Je&s;us Chri&s;t, in the unity of the divine per&s;on. And this is intended in <HI>Philip.</HI> 2. Secondly, to bow our bodies at the naming of the name of Je&s;us is no duty that we are bound unto. It is indifferent then to bow or not to bow, as it is at the naming of the name of Chri&s;t. Thirdly, if the magi&s;trate command us either at the naming of the name Je&s;us, or at the naming of the name Chri&s;t in the divine &s;ervice, to wor&s;hip Chri&s;t, God and man, by bowing unto him, and not intending the name [Je&s;us] or [Chri&s;t] as an object of our bowing, it is our duty to o|bey our Superiours command. Fourthly, from the bowing [at] the name the vulgar ea&s;ily fall to the bowing [to] the name.</P>
<P>The&s;e adorations of the Cro&s;s, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> inward and outward may not be counted divine or properly and of their own na|ture, religious, becau&s;e no rule of true religion doth require
<PB N="47" REF="33">them, but they are properly Eccle&s;ia&s;tical, becau&s;e the Chur|ches did &s;ometime create them; and as things Eccle&s;ia&s;tical, and things any way made pertinent to religion, are counted re|ligious things, &s;o may the&s;e adorations be accidentally called religious. There is not that kind and degree of excellency in the Cro&s;s, Communion-Table, or name Je&s;us, or in any &s;uch &s;acred thing, which may in proper &s;en&s;e merit and require that mental regard from us, which &s;hould of right be te&s;tified by tho&s;e acts of wor&s;hip. Neither do we find that the Churches acknowledged any obligation upon them, to make any Canon requiring tho&s;e adorations, but onely, as circum&s;tances then were, a congruity to command their u&s;e: under which com|mand and judgement of the Church, individual per&s;ons were to acknowledge tho&s;e &s;acred things worthy tho&s;e honours. Wherefore if it plea&s;e our Superiors to continue the u&s;e of the&s;e Ceremonies, which are &s;o ea&s;ily abu&s;ed, it will be very nece&s;&s;ary to &s;tate and determine the right u&s;e of them, and to point at the dangers to be avoided, and to command that the cautions be at &s;et times read in the Churches, that none may erre for want of knowledge, or by forgetfulne&s;s.</P>
<P>The di&s;creet followers of the holy ancient Fathers of the Church are worthy commendation, but their apes are ridi|culous. To &s;ow the foul raggs of &s;ome late &s;lovenly School-men to the comely garment of our Church (as the mi&s;inter|preters of the text in <HI>Philip.</HI> 2. have attempted) is an act di&s;|graceful to the authors, derogating from the honour and dignity of our dear Mother and introductory of unwarranta|ble adorations, being pretended to be commanded by Al|mighty God. For, if it be once obtained that the adoration u&s;ed to the name Je&s;us is of divine in&s;titution, it will by the nece&s;|&s;ity of like rea&s;on follow, that the bowing to the cro&s;s and the Communion-Table, and e&s;pecially, to the holy bread and wine, is a duty which of divine right doth belong unto them.</P>
<P>But it is time to proceed to &s;peak of &s;ome other Ec|cle&s;ia&s;ticall Cu&s;tomes of the fourth Century,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Sect.</HI> 17.</NOTE> whereof one was derived from former times,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Chry&s;o&s;t. in 2 Cor. hom. 2.</NOTE> that in the Churches no Our Father was &s;aid in the prayers, &s;o long as the Catechumen and
<PB N="48" REF="34">Penicents (for whom &s;pecial prayers were made) were per|mitted to &s;tay in the Church.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Concil. Leodi|cen. can. <HI>19.</HI> Et Chry&s;o&s;t. in Eph. hom. <HI>3.</HI> Aug. de temp. &s;er. <HI>38.</HI> Amalar. de Of|fic. mi&s;&s;ae c. <HI>19.</HI> Vide concil. Valentin. c. <HI>1.</HI></NOTE> After their departure out of the Church began the <HI>&s;econd divine Service</HI> and prayers proper to the faithful, among which was the Lords Prayer, mo&s;t of the re&s;t were &s;ub&s;ervient to the ble&s;&s;ed Sacrament of the Lords Supper. When that Sacrament was to be admini&s;tred (which was then u&s;ually every Lords day) they offered bread and wine for the u&s;e of the Sacrament (in&s;tead of which we have offerings for the poor) and the Bi&s;hop or Presbyter went from the Pulpit or place where he prayed for the penitents or his &s;eat, to the Communion-Table; where it is to be noted, that he had not &s;o long and difficult a journey to go, as in mo&s;t parochial Churches the mini&s;ter hath, to pa&s;s from his rea|ding Pew or Pulpit through a throng of people to the holy Table, and therefore there is good rea&s;on to &s;pare him that labour in the days wherein is no Communion.</P>
<P>Per&s;ons excommunicated were nor received into Commu|nion of any Prayers in the Church,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Conc. Ancyram. can. <HI>6.</HI> &amp; <HI>25.</HI> Conc. Nicen. <HI>6.11.</HI></NOTE> no not with the Catechu|mens, until they had humbled them&s;elves before the Bi&s;hop, and earne&s;tly be&s;ought that they might be made partakers of his councel, concerning what was needful to be done by them, to the perfecting of meet repentance in them, and whereby they might give &s;ufficient proof thereof, for the &s;atisfaction of the Church offended by their tran&s;gre&s;&s;ions, promi&s;ing to follow his coun&s;el, and to perform the enjoyned <HI>pennance.</HI> Upon this &s;erious petition and promi&s;e the Bi&s;hops and Pres|byters enjoyned &s;uch works of unfained humiliation to be done by them, as they thought mo&s;t agreeable for their ca&s;e and condition, and praying for them admitted them to the num|ber and order of the Penitents. When the&s;e had fulfilled the enjoyned works of humiliation to be performed by them in that order, then they were admitted to the Communion of the prayers proper to the faithful, and after the works of repentance, which were commanded to be done by them in that rank, they were admitted to the Lords Supper, wherein was the perfection of Communion.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Conc. Nicen. c. <HI>12.</HI></NOTE> If any Penitent in the cour&s;e of humiliation was in an eminent and iminent danger of death, it was alway provided by the Fathers of the Church
<PB N="49" REF="34">that perfect Communion with the Church of God (without which Church is no &s;alvation) &s;hould be granted him in the participation of the body and blood of our ble&s;&s;ed Saviour, except the governours of the Church had ob&s;erved in him a very notorious defect in fulfilling his duty; of which yet if there was any the lea&s;t probable appearance of repentance, he was not denied the nece&s;&s;ary <HI>viaticum</HI> (as the Council of <HI>Nice</HI> calls it.) The be&s;t men ready to depart to a better life de&s;ired and took this caele&s;tial meat for their comfort and re|fre&s;hment in their pa&s;&s;age to God.</P>
<P>Some mini&s;ters are &s;o &s;trict and par&s;imonious in giving the Holy Sacrament, that they deny the &s;ame unto a con&s;iderable part (yea often, to mo&s;t part) of their pari&s;h, which be|fore had been admitted to it, without u&s;ing the method pre|&s;cribed by our Saviour in <HI>Matth.</HI> chap. 18. ver&s;. 15&punc;16, 17. Which text requires publick accu&s;ation and proof in the pre|&s;ence of the governours of the Church, and their publick con|demnation before the publick execution of &s;o high a cen&s;ure. They are al&s;o &s;o hard hearted to dying men, earne&s;tly de&s;iring that &s;oul-confirming &amp; mo&s;t refre&s;hing <HI>viaticum,</HI> that although they cannot truely before God and men, (if put to it,) a&s;&s;ure it, that they remain in a &s;tate of &s;in incon&s;i&s;tent with any de|gree of &s;aving grace, (as in ca&s;e of denial, they &s;hould be up|on good grounds a&s;&s;ured) yet they can be &s;o uncharitable and unmerciful, as to deny it unto them. The&s;e extreams on the one hand, and on the other hand, partly the not forgotten great abu&s;e of the holy cen&s;ures by Chancellors and Com|mi&s;&s;aries, partly the late ejecting of the &s;et publick formes of prayers out of the Churches, and partly the general con|tempt of all the holy ordinances &s;pread over the Kingdomes by the &s;everal Sects brought in and maintained by the Regi|cides, to &s;trengthen and perpetuate them&s;elves, (if they could) in their mo&s;t impious u&s;urpation and tyranny, the&s;e (I &s;ay) have made the Communion of Saints in the publick prayers, and the holy Sacraments, to be of very &s;mall e&s;teem with mo&s;t; in&s;omuch, that very many are brought to believe, they may go to heaven, notwith&s;tanding the neglect of them; for which mo&s;t pe&s;tilent di&s;ea&s;e, if &s;ea&s;onable and convenient
<PB N="50" REF="35">medicine be not found out and wifely applied, the Church of <HI>England</HI> will be uncapable of receiving any benefit by the meer Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Di&s;cipline; and the onely re&s;traint under God again&s;t the growing &s;ad effects of irreligious profane&s;s will lie in the &s;ole power of the Regal auctority.</P>
<P>What ge&s;ture of body was u&s;ed in tho&s;e ancient times in re|ceiving the holy Communion,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Sect.</HI> 17.</NOTE> whether &s;tanding, or kneeling, or at &s;ome times the one, and at other times the other, is not very clearly and expre&s;&s;ely &s;et down by the writers of that age, that I can remember. This onely is certain, that they did not kneel in the receiving of it on the Lords days, becau&s;e it was again&s;t a Canon of the Church, to adore God by bowing of the knee on tho&s;e dayes: It is probable, that on other days (except in the <HI>Penteco&s;t</HI>) they received kneeling,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Hieron. in E&s;a. c. <HI>45.</HI></NOTE> for St. <HI>Hie|rom</HI> &s;aith, that it was an Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Cu&s;tome to bow the knee to Chri&s;t,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Idem in Epi&s;t. ad Ephe&s;. c. <HI>3.</HI></NOTE> which we may under&s;tand to be in the recei|ving of that holy Sacrament, as well as in the publick pray|ers; notwith&s;tanding that this holy Doctor &s;aith in another place, that every one that is &s;ubject unto Chri&s;t, is &s;aid to bend his knee unto him; and citing the words of St. <HI>Paul</HI> [at the name of Je&s;us every knee &s;hall be bowed] addeth, that the words do not pertain to the knees of the body, but to the &s;ub|jection of the mind, and inclination of the &s;oul, and ob&s;e|quiou&s;ne&s;s of the heart to God: Which this mo&s;t learned Fa|ther would never have &s;aid or written, if the Cu&s;tome of the Church had been in his time to kneel not onely unto Chri&s;t him&s;elf, but al&s;o to his name Je&s;us, or if he had thought that this place of the Apo&s;tle did &s;ignifie it to be every mans duty to make the name Je&s;us a co-object with Chri&s;t of his a|doration by the bowing of the knee, as &s;ome of the latter Schoolmen have taught. In the time of St. <HI>Hierom</HI> and be|fore, the &s;tanding in receiving the Euchari&s;t on the Lords day was accompanied with a low bowing of the body even nigh to a pro&s;tration; for St. <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI> writing upon the 98 <HI>P&s;alm</HI> faith,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Augu&s;t. in P&s;. <HI>98.</HI></NOTE> none eateth that fle&s;h, unle&s;s he fir&s;t hath adored it. And in the words following he &s;peaketh of inclination and pro&s;tration to that earth, that is, the fle&s;h of our Saviour (not con&s;idered as apart from, but as in, and with the mo&s;t ble&s;&s;ed
<PB N="51" REF="35" MS="y">Divine per&s;on.)<NOTE PLACE="marg">Cyrill. Hiero&s;ol. Catech. My&s;ta|gog. <HI>5.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Cyrill</HI> of <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> &s;peaking of the Holy Communion, &s;aith, take the body of Chri&s;t &s;aying <HI>Amen:</HI> and a little after, come (&s;aith he) to the Cup of his blood, not extending thy hands, but incurving them (<GAP DESC="foreign">) and in manner of adoring and wor&s;hiping, &s;aying, <HI>Amen.</HI> But now, that the more urgent rea&s;ons, which moved the Fathers of the Primitive Church not to u&s;e kneeling in adoring God on the Lords days, are cea&s;ed, it &s;eems mo&s;t convenient to kneel in taking the Holy Sacrament, upon what day &s;oever we re|ceive it; for the nearer Chri&s;t comes to us, and the more he doth de&s;cend and conde&s;cend in coming to us, yea, and into us, my&s;tically in tho&s;e external weak Elements, the more &s;hould we de&s;cend, humble, and deba&s;e our &s;elves by the in|ward bowing of our &s;ouls, and the external bending of our knees in the receiving of him, thereby te&s;tifying our own un|worthine&s;s of that Grace, and commending the exceeding freene&s;s of it. In the Kingdome of <HI>Pre&s;ter John</HI> they &s;tand when they receive the holy Communion. In giving the Sa|crament the Bi&s;hop or Presbyter &s;aid,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Franci&s;c. Alva|rus apud Ca&s;|&s;andri liturg. De Sacrament. l. <HI>4.</HI> c. <HI>6.</HI></NOTE> the body of the Lord, and the receive &s;aid, <HI>Amen,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Ambro&s;e.</HI> About the year 600, in the Sacramentary of <HI>Gregory</HI> the great, it is &s;aid, while the prie&s;t giveth the Lords body, let him &s;ay, The Body of our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t pre&s;erve thee to eternal life, <HI>Amen.</HI> And in giving the Cup let him &s;ay, The blood of our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t pre&s;erve thee to eternal life. In the ma&s;s of &s;ome <HI>Armenians</HI> in <HI>Ru&s;&s;ia,</HI> the prie&s;t communicating faith,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Apud Ca&s;&s;and. liturg.</NOTE> By faith I believe in the mo&s;t holy Trinity the Father, Son and Holy Gho&s;t. By faith I eate thy quickning and &s;aving body, O Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t; let it be unto me to the ab&s;olution and remi&s;&s;ion of my &s;innes. And in drinking the Cup, I drink by faith thy holy unmixed blood, blotting out &s;ins,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Apud Eundem.</NOTE> O Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t, for the remi&s;&s;ion of my &s;ins, and of my Parents and of all the world. Every Communicant of the <HI>Armernians</HI> in <HI>In|dia</HI> goeth before the foot of the altar to receive. It is pro|vided in the Council of <HI>Laodic.</HI> before the year 400,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Can.</HI> 19.</NOTE> that only the mini&s;ters might go in to the altar, and there take the Com|munion.<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Can.</HI> 17.</NOTE> In the fourth Council of <HI>Tolet.</HI> it was appointed that the prie&s;ts and deacons &s;hould communicate before the
<PB N="52" REF="36">altar, the &s;ubordinate Clergy in the Quire, the people without the Quire. This Council drave the people far off from the <HI>railes</HI> of the altar.</P>
<P>Many more Rites and Ceremonies were u&s;ed in the fourth Century, which do not pertain to our purpo&s;e, and very many more were afterward added; e&s;pecially in the Roman Church.</P>
<P>From what hath been &s;aid, we may perceive, that the Com|po&s;ers of our Divine Service book made choice of the be&s;t things out of the mo&s;t ancient Liturgies of the Churches,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Sect.</HI> 18.</NOTE> which flouri&s;hed long before the birth of Antichri&s;t, leaving many Ceremonies u&s;ed in the primitive times, not very conve|nient to the pre&s;ent &s;tate of our Churches, retaining other, that the garment of Chri&s;tian religion with us might not al|together vary from the ancient form &s;o far as it could without prejudice to the body of religion be fitted to us.</P>
<P><HI>Tertullian</HI> &s;aith, that the &s;olemnities and my&s;teries of Idols gained credit and reputation with men, by the &s;umptuous rites and rich ornaments, whereby they were &s;et forth and adorned. It is likely that the ancient Fathers, when miracles began to cea&s;e, &s;aw it expedient (for the removing of &s;ome of the ob&s;tructions to Chri&s;tian faith) to add to the divine Solemni|ties &s;ome agreeable Rites, whereby the Chri&s;tian Doctrine might be commended to the rectitude of humane judgment, as not incredible or contemptible, and, it may be, thereby be commended as credible and worthy of good regard. The Schi&s;maticks in <HI>Tertullian</HI>'s time,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Tertull. de pre|&s;cript. baeret. c. <HI>41.</HI></NOTE> (as he &s;aith) named the decent Ceremonious Di&s;cipline of the Churches, a bawd, and counted the pro&s;tration of that Di&s;cipline by them&s;elves to be Chri&s;tian &s;implicity: Whereas in very deed that pro&s;tra|tion of edifying order and Ceremonies, cau&s;ed the confu&s;ion of the holy ordinances among them, and &s;lutti&s;hne&s;s in the celebrations of the divine in&s;titutions; as <HI>Tertullian</HI> noted in tho&s;e Schi&s;maticks, and we &s;ee now a days in ours. But on the other &s;ide we mu&s;t remember, that we may erre (as in the defect, &s;o) in the exce&s;s of Ceremonies, or in the choice, or in accounting and compelling others to own them for unchan|geable Apo&s;tolick in&s;titutes, or by too rigid pre&s;&s;ing the u&s;e of every of them, e&s;pecially upon people of weak capacity,
<PB N="53" REF="36">humble, peaceable, and of a &s;crupulous con&s;cience.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Augu&s;t. Epi&s;t. <HI>119.</HI> Placuit Spiri|tui S. nihil a|liud oneris im|ponere praeter|quam quae ne|ce&s;&s;ario &s;erva|re oportet. At quidam, haec nihil curantes, omnem quidem fornicationem pro nihilo ha|bent: De Die|bus autem &amp; feriis &amp; in&s;ti|tutis, perinde at&abque; de anima ip&s;a, decertant, Dei mandata invertentes, &amp; &s;ibi ip&s;is leges ferentes, per Socrat. hi&s;t. l. <HI>5.</HI> c. <HI>21.</HI> Edit. Ba&s;il. <HI>1570.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI> was grieved to &s;ee the tran&s;gre&s;&s;ion of a Ceremony to be more &s;everely reprehended then the tran&s;gre&s;&s;ion of Gods law: his judgment was, that the Ceremonies &s;hould not be many, &s;o as by them to pre&s;s with &s;ervile burthens the Church of Chri&s;t, which God would pre&s;erve free in the u&s;e onely of few Rites commended by manife&s;t rea&s;ons. Antiquity is venerable, yet it may not, ought not continue a Rite or Ceremony in any Church with who&s;e edification and peace it is become in|con&s;i&s;tent. There be but few ordinances meerly Eccle&s;ia&s;tical, which have not in &s;ome Churches become noxious, or at lea&s;t u&s;ele&s;s. And there is a vici&s;&s;itude of profit or detriment growing from them many times in the &s;ame Churches, ari&s;ing from notable changes in per&s;ons and circum&s;tances.</P>
<P><HI>Augu&s;tine</HI> thought that tho&s;e ob&s;ervances which the whole Church kept, and no diver&s;ity of manners had varied, were ordained by the Apo&s;tle St. <HI>Paul.</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Epi&s;t. <HI>110.</HI></NOTE> This his thought holds forth a probability and no demon&s;tration, for he him&s;elf in &s;ome place grants, that &s;uch univer&s;al (and <HI>de facto</HI> unvaried) rites might have been made by a general Council, and we may add by cu&s;tome. Many Ceremonies were univer&s;al (as many then believed) and unvaried in <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI>'s time, which were in following times, either altered, or altogether di&s;u&s;ed. Where|fore? &s;urely becau&s;e they cea&s;ed to be u&s;eful, or became hurt|ful. And therefore if St. <HI>Paul</HI> was the author of them, he gave them with con&s;ent of the Churches to be u&s;ed &s;o long as they &s;aw them to continue &s;erviceable, or at lea&s;t not hurt|ful to Chri&s;tian religion. It was difficult in the ancient times to know which rites de&s;cended from the Apo&s;tles, and which not, or which were univer&s;al in &s;uch an age by them that lived therein: They many times &s;aid &s;ome Rites to be univer&s;al, which were &s;o onely in the part of the Chri&s;tian world where they lived, as in the Ea&s;tern or We&s;tern Churches.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Socrat. hi&s;t. l. <HI>5.</HI> c. <HI>21.</HI> Et Sozom. l. <HI>7.</HI> c. <HI>18, 19.</HI></NOTE> It was be|fore &s;hewed, that many things were &s;aid by the Fathers to be of divine or Apo&s;tolical in&s;titution, which were not &s;o in|deed,
<PB N="54" REF="37">if we &s;peak of divine or Apo&s;tolick in&s;titutes in a pro|per &s;en&s;e: Sometime what was by one of the Fathers affirmed to be &s;o, was by &s;ome other ancient writers referred to a more recent author,<NOTE PLACE="marg">De offic. Eccl. l. <HI>1.</HI> c. <HI>15.</HI></NOTE> as to one Pope or other. So &s;ome a&s;cribe the Roman Liturgy to St. <HI>Peter,</HI> as <HI>I&s;idore,</HI> every part whereof is a&s;&s;igned to other authors by <HI>Gregory</HI> the great, or <HI>Amalarius,</HI> or <HI>Alcuinus,</HI> or <HI>Strabus,</HI> or &s;ome other which have writen of the Roman Service. I find none to determine in particular what part of that Service was made by St. <HI>Peter,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Duran. ratio|nale div. offic. pricip. l. <HI>4.</HI></NOTE> but onely a few affirming that he compo&s;ed three prayers of it. But if he had been the author of it as <HI>I&s;idore</HI> relates, it is not to be doubted, but that the <HI>We&s;tern</HI> Churches or mo&s;t of them, had u&s;ed onely that Liturgy. But the Church of <HI>Millaine</HI> had a proper Liturgy, the Churches of <HI>Spaine</HI> had another proper to them,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Concil. Mi|levit. Can. <HI>12.</HI> Et Carth. <HI>3.</HI> Can. <HI>23.</HI> Cur cum una &s;it fides, fint Eccle&s;iarum con&s;uetudines diver&s;ae? &amp; altera con&s;uetudo mi&s;&s;arum in Romana Eccle&s;ia, at&abque; altera in Gallia|rum Eccle&s;iis teneatur? huic interrogationi Augu&s;tini Anglorum Epi&s;copi &s;ic resp. Gregoriu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 letter"> Papa. <HI>1.</HI></NOTE> and the <HI>Africans</HI> had divers in divers Churches; &s;ome of which had unawares put into their Liturgy &s;ome prayers compo&s;ed by Hereticks; which cau&s;ed &s;ome <HI>African</HI> Councils to ordain, that no prayers &s;hould be received into the Liturgy, but &s;uch as were examined by Learned men or approved by a Council.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Novit fraternitas tua Romanae Eccle&s;iae con&s;uetudinem in qua &s;e meminit eruditam; Sed mihi placet, ut &s;ive in Romana, &s;ive in Gallicana &s;eu in qualibet Eccle&s;ia aliquid inveni&s;ti quod plus emnipotenti Deo po&s;&s;it placere, &s;olicite eligas &amp; in Anglorum Eccle&s;ia, quae adhuc ad fidem nova e&s;t, in&s;titutione praecipua, quae de multis Eccle&s;iis colligere potui&s;ii, infundas. Non enim pro locis res &s;ed pro bonis rebus loca amanda &s;unt. Ex quibu&s;&abque; ergo Eccle&s;iis, quae pia, quae religio&s;a, quae recta &s;unt, elige; &amp; haec qua&s;i in fa&s;ciculum collecta apud Anglorum mentes in con&s;uetudinem depone.</NOTE></P>
<P>Every Church, at lea&s;t every Provincial Church, compo&s;ed their prayers, or other parts of their divine Service, as &s;eemed mo&s;t conducible to their edification and after altered the &s;ame, or made a new form,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Vide Bern. Au|gien&s;. de qui|bud. rebus ad mi&s;&s;am perti|nent. c. <HI>2.</HI> Vide Sozom. hi&s;t. l. <HI>7.</HI> c. <HI>19.</HI></NOTE> or received a form u&s;ed in another Church, as they plea&s;ed: <HI>Spain</HI> or &s;ome part of it received the Roman Liturgy. And therefore if it &s;hould &s;eem good to the Church of <HI>England</HI> to mend their Liturgy, or compo&s;e a new one (if need be) more agreeable to the pre&s;ent time, they &s;hould do therein no more then the mo&s;t famous Churches have
<PB N="55" REF="37">done before, and which can be no di&s;paraging of the wi&s;dome and piety of the Compo&s;ers of it, which intended onely to make it as fit as could be for the &s;tate of the Church in their time (which I believe they performed very exactly) and not to frame and impo&s;e an unchangeable form which could never prove incongruous to any po&s;&s;ible variety in the &s;tate of the Church; for this is not in the power of any per&s;ons or Chur|ches. How&s;oever Ceremonies and a form of Liturgy, are no more nece&s;&s;ary for Epi&s;copal, then a Presbyterian Govern|ment, which may equally erre in defect or exce&s;s, or quality of the rites and divine Service.</P>
<P>Now although both the forms of government and all Ec|cle&s;ia&s;tical rites be in their nature changeable,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Sect.</HI> 19.</NOTE> becau&s;e of their dependance upon variable circum&s;tances, yet &s;ome have been le&s;s &s;ubject to change or abrogation then other, either becau&s;e they be of &s;mal efficacy to hurt or profit, or becau&s;e the hurt done by them is hardly di&s;cerned, or becau&s;e the circum|&s;tances, which are apt to make them noxious, &s;eldome happen, or becau&s;e they are believed to have the Apo&s;tles for their au|thors or approvers.</P>
<P>Of all other, Epi&s;copacy &s;eems lea&s;t &s;ubject to abrogation. Fir&s;t, becau&s;e the Churches in all parts of the world, were al|ways firmly per&s;waded, that the in&s;titution of Epi&s;copacy, had the Apo&s;tles hand and &s;eal joyned with the mother Chur|ches for the confirmation of it. Secondly, becau&s;e many believed that the Apo&s;tles never permitted the Colledge of Presbyters to ordain Presbyters in the time that they ruled in the Churches, this they received by tradition, to which they ea&s;ily gave their a&s;&s;ent, becau&s;e they found not in the Acts of the Apo&s;tles, or the Apo&s;tolical Epi&s;tles, that &s;ole Presbyters ordai|ned any (except perhaps by an immediate command of the Holy Gho&s;t, which is extraordinary) but with a Pre&s;ident ei|ther an Apo&s;tle or an Evangeli&s;t, or a Vicegerent of an Apo&s;tle, as <HI>Timothy, Titus, &amp;c.</HI> whence they thought it might be very probably collected, that the Apo&s;tles would have given a prin|cipality of the exerci&s;e of the power of ordination unto one Presbytet onely in every Church, &s;o as without him the whole Colledge could not ordain, and would have left the govern|ment
<PB N="56" REF="38">to be exerci&s;ed in common, equally by all, if the Col|ledge had not &s;o gro&s;ly abu&s;ed their ruling power, whereby it was &s;een that the Colledge had need of a Pre&s;ident both in the Government, and the Ordination, which was accordingly gi|ven them by the decree of the Church, approved by the Apo|&s;tles. St. <HI>Hierome</HI> him&s;elf hath &s;ome pa&s;&s;ages, which &s;eem to favour this opinion,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 letter">i pa&s;&s;im om|nibus (Pre&s;h.) e&s;&s;es conce&s;&s;um (ordinare,) tot admitte|rentur ad or|dines, quod non &s;ervaretur ordo; immo po|tius generare|tur confu&s;i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 letter">: &amp; ideo di&s;po&s;i|tum e&s;t Dei con|&s;ilie, quod &s;olis Epi&s;copis ordinum di&s;pen&s;atio &amp; aliorum officiorum, ut con&s;ecratio abbatum, monialium &amp; eccle&s;ia|rum &amp; con&s;imilium concedatur. Bonevent. in <HI>4. d. 25.</HI> q. <HI>1.</HI></NOTE> and therefore the Churches never &s;uf|fered a Presbyter, or Chor<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 letter">pi&s;cope, to ordaine, except he &s;up|plied the place of a Bi&s;hop, when he could not be pre&s;ent, and the Ordination could not be delayed; Thirdly, The Presby|terian Government was in u&s;e in the pure&s;t purity of the Chur|ches, beginning to &s;pread abroad over the world by the preach|ing of the Apo&s;tles, and yet in le&s;s then twenty years &s;pace Schi&s;mes grew out of it, which cau&s;ed the Churches to out it, and to e&s;tabli&s;h Epi&s;copacy as the be&s;t antidote again&s;t Schi&s;me, and for the re&s;tauration and maintenance of the Churches peace.</P>
<P>Now if the Presbyterian Government was uneffectuall for the pre&s;erving of peace among the mo&s;t godly, and con&s;e|quently the mo&s;t addicted to peace, who can expect it &s;hould be effectuall to re&s;tore union and peace, and to pre&s;erve it in Churches too full of pollutions and &s;taines, very much dege|nerated from the holine&s;s of the Apo&s;tolicall times? It &s;eems a de&s;perate and prepo&s;terous cour&s;e, to u&s;e that as a &s;overaigne Antidote in our time, which had the effect of a Poy&s;on upon the Churches in the Apo&s;ties time. A hurnt Child dreads the fire; and &s;hould not the weaker members of the body dread the fire, that burnt the &s;tronge&s;t and be&s;t able to re&s;i&s;t its force? Seeing the remainder of naturall corruption in the mo&s;t holy Churches drew the Poy&s;on of Sci&s;me from the Presbyterian forme of government, we cannot, without high pre&s;umption, think that the far higher degrees of &s;in remaining in us, will be idle, &amp; &s;uffer grace to make of it an Antidote again&s;t Schi&s;me. Mountebanks are &s;een &s;ometime to heal by improper Medi|cines, where the &s;trength of nature, and the concurrence of
<PB N="57" REF="38">&s;ome other &s;ecret cau&s;es do performe the cure, and not the na|ture of the Phy&s;ick. So may the Presbyterian government have in &s;ome place the credit of healing Schi&s;mes &amp; maintain|ing peace, when in very truth tho&s;e good effects proceed from the confluence of other cau&s;es, and not from the aptne&s;s of that government to effect them: For it &s;eems incredible that it &s;hould have in it an aptne&s;s to keep us in peace, that had in it an ineptitude to keep the mo&s;t peaceably di&s;po&s;ed Apo&s;tolick Chri&s;tians in unity and peace. Whence we may conclude, that although the ancient Epi&s;copacy be in its nature changeable, as being of the Churches, and by con&s;equence of humane con&s;ti|tution, yet morally and practically it may not be abrogated without dammage to the Church; which will a&s;&s;uredly fol|low, if &s;ome accidentall benigne influences of &s;ome other cau&s;es do not for &s;ome time hinder its birth.</P>
<P>I am very apt to believe, that the Churches, which &s;eem to u&s;e the Presbyterian government, never intended by any Law, de&s;erving the proper name of a Law, to &s;ettle the primi|tive Presbytery in their Churches, whence the &s;ad Schi&s;mes aro&s;e in the primitive times; much le&s;s to abrogate the an|cient Epi&s;copacy, which in the judgment of the be&s;t Chri&s;ti|ans, and of the Apo&s;tles, is the healer of Schi&s;mes, and the pre|&s;erver of peace: But that they intended (as they had good rea|&s;on) to abrogate the corrupted Hierarchy, with the multitude of its oppre&s;&s;ing attendants, and (as nece&s;&s;ity compelled them) &s;eemingly to &s;u&s;pend their reception of the ancient Epi&s;copa|cy, but in very deed receiving in &s;ome hidden &s;ort the &s;ub&s;tance of it, &s;ecretly giving that Authority to the moderator of the Colledge of Presbyters, which tantamounts the Authority of the ancient Bi&s;hops. This was done by them in their Emer|gency, out of the Gulfe of the Babyloni&s;h Idolatry and Haere|&s;ies, when the &s;tate of per&s;ons and Circum&s;tances would not permit them directly and manife&s;tly to &s;et up the ancient Epi&s;copacy, but covertly and cloathed with the apparel of Pre&s;|bytery; Becau&s;e the appearing of it in its native cloathing &s;eemed to threaten an extreme danger of returning again to Idolatrous <HI>Babylon.</HI> Thus when two duties became incon&s;i|&s;tent, the keeping out of Idolatry, and the open and manife&s;t
<PB N="58" REF="39">u&s;e of an Ordinance inferior to the maintenance of the purity of Gods wor&s;hip; they did, as it was their duty, &s;o far forbear the open u&s;e of Epi&s;copacy as &s;eemed needfull, that they might pre&s;erve the truth and &s;incerity of the wor&s;hip of God. I know many writers are of another mind, but the intentions of Churches are better &s;een in the cau&s;es of their actions, and the managing of them, then in the letter of a Law, or in the &s;pe|culative opinions of private per&s;ons.</P>
<P>Some think the pre&s;ent condition of our Church, to be al|mo&s;t the &s;ame with the &s;tate of tho&s;e Churches, when they fir&s;t began their Reformation, and therefore that we &s;tand in need of the &s;ame cure under the habit of the Presbyterian Govern|ment. Surely the&s;e are much deceived; fir&s;t, in their opinion of our pre&s;ent &s;tate; &s;econdly, in the &s;equele, if our ca&s;e were like theirs: for, when we were like them in departing from <HI>Babylon,</HI> we were unlike them in many other re&s;pects, and needed not the habit of Presbyters, but fall to purge the an|cient Epi&s;copacy from as many of the foul excre&s;cencies which the &s;ins of men made to grow to it, as the condition of that time would permit, whereby our Church kept more uniformi|ty with the primitive Churches, and by the ble&s;&s;ing of God up|on our endevour, obtained more mea&s;ure of the Heavenly light, and of the power of Godline&s;s in peace, and that for a longer time, then any part of tho&s;e Churches attained unto, which were nece&s;sitated to &s;hrowd them&s;elves under another habit of Government. This I &s;ay not any way to di&s;parage any other Church of Chri&s;t, (whom I honour and pray for from my heart) or to a&s;cribe any thing to our own wi&s;dome and providence, but to honour and glorifie the grace of God for his great mercies to our Church, and to defend her honour again&s;t the mi&s;takes of &s;ome.</P>
<P>But now our condition is changed our &s;ins have brought us to mi&s;ery, the light and glory of our Church is turned to dark|ne&s;s, confu&s;ion, and contempt; from which (notwith&s;tanding our unworthine&s;s) Gods infinite mercy (which hath mo&s;t gra|tiou&s;ly re&s;tored our Soveraign Lord the King unto his King|domes and Subjects) will be plea&s;ed, I tru&s;t, to deliver us, and to beautifie our Church with the primitive Apo&s;tolicall Epi&s;|copacy,
<PB N="59" REF="39">attended by his a&s;&s;e&s;&s;ors and Senate, the reverend, grave, wi&s;e, learned and pious Colledg of Presbyters, to go|vern the hou&s;e of God, after the be&s;t pattern of the primitive holy orders and di&s;cipline, for the obtaining whereof, God would have us a&s;&s;i&s;ted by His grace to contribute our ende|vours, improved to the uttermo&s;t of Chri&s;tian Wi&s;dom and moderation, to be crowned with his rich ble&s;&s;ing. And be|cau&s;e this bu&s;ine&s;s is about things for the mo&s;t part &s;pirituall, tending to the edification of Gods hou&s;e, it will, no doubt, plea&s;e our gracious King and his great Councell not to pro|ceed in this work without the advi&s;e and coun&s;ell of them, whom Chri&s;t hath ordained under Him&s;elf Mini&s;ter all buil|ders of His Hou&s;e; lea&s;t the neglect of His Ordinance and Mi|ni&s;ters cau&s;e the Lord to bla&s;t all other Coun&s;ells and endea|vours, how probable &s;oever they may &s;eem to be in the eye of the world. Give unto <HI>Ca&s;ar</HI> the things which are <HI>Cae&s;ars,</HI> and let the Vicegerents of Chri&s;t enjoy the things belonging to them, let all intere&s;ts have their due part in this weighty work; and then what&s;oever Government be &s;ettled, what form &s;oever of Divine &s;ervice, what Rites &s;oever and Ceremo|nies &s;hall be e&s;tabli&s;hed, they will with all readine&s;s and due &s;ubmi&s;&s;ion be received and embraced by all the people, and all the obedient Sons and Daughters of our deare&s;t Mother the Church of <HI>England:</HI> among whom if there &s;hall be &s;ome who&s;e judgments cannot acquie&s;ce in &s;ome determinations of the higher powers, they will wi&s;ely con&s;ider; fir&s;t, that in the re|mote conclu&s;ions of Divine maximes, all good men in this our infirmity will never agree, and that nature teacheth us that in controver&s;ies the re&s;olution of the major part mu&s;t be obeyed, without which debates would never be ended, and St. <HI>Paul</HI> &s;aith, let the &s;pirits of the Prophets be &s;ubject to the Prophets. Secondly, That God hath appointed the powers civil and Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall in his &s;tead to determine Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall contro|ver&s;ies, and to make Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Ordinances, from who&s;e judgment there is no appeal but only to God by prayer. Third|ly, That to pre&s;erve the peace of the Church and Charity the bond of perfectne&s;s, is a duty to be preferred before the duty of publick teaching, divulging, or preaching many of tho&s;e Di|vine
<PB N="60" REF="40">Truths, who&s;e ignorance (if not voluntary) doth not ex|clude from Heaven, when that teaching or publi&s;hing doth di|&s;turb the publick peace, and con&s;equently the keeping of the peace requireth ab&s;tinence in that ca&s;e from &s;uch divulging or preaching.</P>
<P>And from the&s;e con&s;iderations good men will infer that it is good for them, and that it is their duty both for the &s;ake of Gods Authority, for good order &s;ake, and for Charity and peace &s;ake, &amp; out of a Con&s;cientious regard to the higher pow|ers, to acquie&s;ce in their determinations, and to de&s;i&s;t from oppo&s;ing their private opinion to the publick judgment, and pur&s;uing their private intere&s;t to the prejudice of publick peace and Charity. For which Wi&s;edome and moderation, that they may be in all, let all good men pray to the onely wi&s;e and mo&s;t mercifull God, the Author of Truth and peace.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="appendix">
<HEAD>An APENDIX.</HEAD>
<P>THe manner of the Ordination of Bi&s;hops (forgotten to be &s;hewed by me in due place) is declared by the fourth Councill of <HI>Carthage</HI> in the&s;e words;<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Can.</HI> 2.</NOTE> When a Bi&s;hop is or|dained, lay and hold the book of the Evangeli&s;ts upon his head and neck, and one Bi&s;hop pronouncing the Benediction over him, let the re&s;t of the Bi&s;hops pre&s;ent touch his head with their hands. The Church never accounted any to be capable of this Epi&s;copall Ordination that was not fir&s;t ordained a Presbyter, the manner of who&s;e Ordination, was that the Bi&s;hop ble&s;&s;ing him (&s;aying, <HI>receive the Holy Gho&s;t, who&s;oever &s;ins you &s;hall remitt,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Concil earth. Can <HI>3.</HI></NOTE> &amp;c.) and laying his hand upon his head, the Presbyters pre&s;ent lay their hands upon his head by the hand of the Bi&s;hop.</P>
<P>There was a<NOTE N="(a)" PLACE="marg">Tert. de prae&s;cript. c. <HI>41.</HI> Cyprian. Epi&s;t. ad Antonianum Hier. ad Heliodorum Conc. Sardicen&s;. c. <HI>13.</HI></NOTE> Canon in u&s;e in the &s;econd Century (when
<PB N="61" REF="40">it was made it is not known) which required that every one that would be an Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Officer &s;hould begin with; and for &s;ome &s;et time officiate in the lowe&s;t Office, and &s;o by de|grees a&s;cend to the Epi&s;copacy, if the Church did de&s;ire his ad|vancement. Yet we find that &s;ome laicks, yea &s;ome unbapti&s;ed per&s;ons have been by the Clergy and people cho&s;en Bi&s;hops, as <HI>Ambro&s;e, Nectarius,</HI> and other,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Paulinus in vi|ta Ambro&s;ij. Niceph. Calli&s;t. Eccl. hi&s;t. l. <HI>12.</HI> c. <HI>12.</HI></NOTE> who leaping over the infe|riour offices, and the time wherein they &s;hould have given proofe of their faithfulne&s;s and indu&s;try in the order of Presby|tery, have been Bapti&s;ed, made Presbyters, and then Bi&s;hops within few dayes, and &s;ome (it may be) took the&s;e two la&s;t or|ders in the &s;ame houre. But this was very rare, and by di&s;pen|&s;ation, or was liable to an Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall cen&s;ure.</P>
<P>When any under the degree of a Presbyter, was by the igno|rance or perver&s;ne&s;s of &s;ome Bi&s;hops, ordained a Bi&s;hop, no|thing done by him was e&s;teemed valid, but what his former degree did warrant, or a Laick might in nece&s;&s;ity do, untill he was made a Presbyter. <HI>Bellarmine</HI> &s;aith truly, that it is im|po&s;&s;ible that one &s;hould be ordained a Bi&s;hop <HI>(fit to officiate)</HI> which was not before a Presbyter, or did not take both orders together. For (&s;aith he) Epi&s;copacy includes Presbytery in its e&s;&s;ence, and a Bi&s;hop, no Presbyter, is a figment,<NOTE PLACE="marg">De Sacramento Ordinis. l. <HI>1.</HI> c. <HI>5.</HI></NOTE> a Bi&s;hop being nothing el&s;e but the fir&s;t or chief Presbyter. Whence he doth rightly infer that the Ordination of a Bi&s;hop, com|pared with the Ordination of a Presbyter, is (being in it &s;elf preci&s;ely con&s;idered) inferior to it, as being of no efficacy as to acts meerly Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall, and which the civil Magi&s;trate cannot execute.</P>
<P>Here &s;ome doubts are rai&s;ed which by divers are diver&s;ely re&s;olved. As whether Chri&s;t did ordaine the Apo&s;tles in the fir&s;t place Presbyters, and after that Bi&s;hops? and if &s;o, when was this done? or if it be &s;aid that Chri&s;t made them Apo&s;tles, Presbyters and Bi&s;hops, in one and the &s;ame Ordination, how can it be proved that Chri&s;t gave the Apo&s;tles the powers now proper to Bi&s;hops, not only as they were extraordinary Offi|cers, but al&s;o as they were to have &s;ucce&s;&s;ors; and not rather that Chri&s;t re&s;erved tho&s;e powers as they were to be conveyed by &s;ucce&s;&s;ion to be given in a more convenient time? it is
<PB N="62" REF="41">generally acknowledged that Presbyters were vertually or|dained when the Apo&s;tles were ordained. If Chri&s;t made the Apo&s;tles both Presbyters and Bi&s;hops in one Ordination, how dur&s;t the Church alter our Saviours Ordinance, as to ordain them by two actuall Ordinations whom He Him&s;elf had or|dained in one virtuall Ordination? to &s;ay that our ble&s;&s;ed Sa|viour ordained the Apo&s;tles fir&s;t Presbyters, and afterwards Bi&s;hops, is to affirm that which the Evangeli&s;ts do not menti|on. To Preach, Bapti&s;e, admini&s;ter the Lords Supper, to feed the Sheep, to bind and loo&s;e, all the&s;e offices appear by clear Te&s;timonies of the holy Scriptures, and the con&s;ent of the Ca|tholick Church to belong to Presbyters; and therefore it may not be rea&s;onably thought that any of tho&s;e places of the Evan|geli&s;ts which promi&s;e tho&s;e powers, or intimate them to be given, or require the execution of them, conveigh an Epi&s;copa|cy to the Apo&s;tles &s;uppo&s;ed before ordained Presbyters. Some &s;ay, that St. <HI>Cyprian</HI> and &s;ome other of the Fathers affirm Chri&s;t in ordaining the Apo&s;tles to have ordained Bi&s;hops, and that Bi&s;hops are the Apo&s;tles &s;ucce&s;&s;ors, and Presbyters the &s;ucce&s;&s;ors of the 70 Di&s;ciples. To the&s;e Objections the an&s;wers are ready and ea&s;ie.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Ad Dr<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="2 letters">conti|am in P&s;. <HI>44.</HI></NOTE> Fir&s;t, <HI>Athana&s;ius</HI> &s;aith, that Chri&s;t by his Apo&s;tles con&s;tituted and ordained Bi&s;hops, and <HI>Au|gu&s;tine</HI> &s;aith, that the Church conceived Bi&s;hops, neither of them writeth that Bi&s;hops were vertually ordained in the Apo&s;tles Ordination, neither is this expre&s;ly &s;aid in any anci|ent Author.<NOTE PLACE="marg">In Epi&s;t. <HI>1.</HI> ad Timoth, <HI>c. 3.</HI></NOTE> Secondly, <HI>Ambro&s;e</HI> the contemporary or elder then the true <HI>Ambro&s;e</HI> &s;aith, that the Ordination of a Presby|ter and Bi&s;hop is one and the &s;ame, this may &s;eem &s;trange, for in his and the preceding times, they were di&s;tinct, but his following words declare his meaning when he gives this rea|&s;on, namely,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Cyprian ad florentium, &amp;c. Epi&s;t.</NOTE> becau&s;e both Presbyter and Bi&s;hop are <HI>Sacerdo|tes,</HI> Prie&s;ts, which &s;hews that in &s;aying, that the Ordination of a Presbyter and Bi&s;hop is the &s;ame, he meant <HI>quatenus Sa|cerdotes,</HI> as they were Prie&s;ts or Presbyters, their ordination was the &s;ame.</P>
<P>So the other auncient Doctors which &s;ay that Chri&s;t in &s;peaking &s;ome things to the Apo&s;tles, as, <HI>He that heareth you, heareth me,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Ba&s;il. con&s;tit. mona&s;t. <HI>c. 22.</HI></NOTE> &amp;c. <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 word"> &s;pake in and by them to Bi&s;hops, or that in
<PB N="63" REF="41" MS="y">them Chri&s;t ordained Bi&s;hops, did mean, That our Saviour &s;pake in and by the Apo&s;tles to Bi&s;hops, (not as Bi&s;hops) but as they were <HI>Sacerdotes,</HI> Prie&s;ts, and Presbyters, and only con&s;equently and remotely, by the means of a &s;ub&s;equent Ordinance, as they were Bi&s;hops, that is, Presbyters, having a pre&s;idency over their Brethren, when the Pa&s;tors of that primitive Church &s;ay, that Bi&s;hops are Succe&s;&s;ors of the Apo&s;tles, and Presbyters &s;ucce&s;&s;ors of the 70 Di&s;ciples, their meaning was, That having re&s;pect to the Di&s;tinction which the Apo&s;tles made, between one Presbyter and the re&s;t, by exalting one in every Church to a pre&s;idency over the re&s;t: The Pre&s;ident Presbyter, which is the Bi&s;hop, &s;ucceeds the Apo&s;tles, who&s;e Succe&s;&s;ors, and the &s;ubject Presbyters &s;ucceeded the 70 Di&s;ciples, in &s;ome likene&s;s of &s;uperiority and inferiority.</P>
<P>The Fathers could not mean, That the Presbyters were ordained in the Ordination of the 70. For</P>
<P>Fir&s;t, None of them had any good ground to affirm, That the 70 either had &s;o ample an ordinary power (if they had any ordinary power) as the Presbytery have; or that the power they received was rather the power of an Office to continue in them,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Ad Rodolphum Archiepi&s;copum Senonen&s;. in apparandarum rerum addend. po&s;t <HI>tom. 7. Concil.</HI></NOTE> then a power only to do &s;ome acts for a certain time after, which the power was to leave them, although Pope <HI>Nicholas</HI> the fir&s;t affirms, That the 70 Di&s;ciples had the Offices of Bi&s;hops, and could ordain Presbyters.</P>
<P>Secondly, The Form of Ordination, both in our Church, and in the Roman pontificial, doth manife&s;tly &s;hew, That Presbyters were virtually ordained in the Ordination of the Apo&s;tles, after our Saviours Re&s;urrection, when he &s;aid, <HI>Receive ye the Holy Gho&s;t, Who&s;e&s;oever &s;ins ye remit,</HI> &amp;c. the which entire words are u&s;ed in Presbyters Ordination, and only one member of the words are u&s;ed in the ordination of bi&s;hops, that is, <HI>Receive the Holy Gho&s;t,</HI> which words do not &s;erve to conveigh unto them all power to remit, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> which they had received in their Ordination, to Presbytery, but they &s;erve to give them the power of Pre&s;idency, whereby the Bi&s;hop is con&s;tituted: and therefore Presbyters and Bi&s;hops, as they be Presbyters, are the primary Succe&s;&s;ors of the Apo&s;tles, and Bi&s;hops, as
<PB N="64" REF="42">Bi&s;hops, that is, as to their pre&s;idency are onely &s;econdary Succe&s;&s;ors of the Apo&s;tles.</P>
<P>There is no great cau&s;e of doubt whether tho&s;e words a|bove&s;aid, u&s;ed at this time in the ordination of Bi&s;hops or Presbyters,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Cum Eccle&s;ia in ordinatio|ne &s;acerdotum Chri&s;tum imi|tata ritu per|petuo ei&s;d. ver|bis &amp; forma il|la, Accipite Spi|ritum Sanctum quorum remi|&s;eritis peccata, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Semper u|&s;a fuerit, quis ambigat idem omnino quod Chri&s;tum face|re, <HI>&amp;c. Va&s;q.</HI> in <HI>3.</HI> p. di&s;p. <HI>239.</HI> c. <HI>4.</HI></NOTE> were together with impo&s;ition of hands therein u&s;ed in and from the Primitive times, becau&s;e they are not expre&s;&s;ely mentioned in any ancient Author, for a thou&s;and years and above (for any thing I could learn) for fir&s;t the Fathers do often &s;ay, that impo&s;ition of hands was u&s;ed in tho&s;e ordinations (and ought to be u&s;ed) as al&s;o a benediction and prayers: which prayers (no que&s;tion) were accommodated in each ordination to the di&s;tinction made by the Apo&s;tles be|tween Presbyters and Bi&s;hops, and therefore the words [<HI>Receive the Holy Gho&s;t, who&s;oevers &s;ins ye remit,</HI> &amp;c.] might be u&s;ed in the prayers of the Bi&s;hops ordination, for an in|crea&s;e of the grace and power received by them in their Pre&s;|byterial ordination, and omitted in the prayers of Presby|ters ordination (wherein they con&s;titute the benediction,) becau&s;e the fulne&s;s of the exerci&s;e of the power given by the mini&s;tery of tho&s;e words, and other parts of their ordination is &s;omething re&s;trained by the con&s;titution of Epi&s;copacy.</P>
<P>The rea&s;on why tho&s;e holy men did not &s;et down in their writings the very words of benediction &s;poken at the impo|&s;ition of hands,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>In</HI> 2 Cor. <HI>hom.</HI> 6.</NOTE> and the particular forms of prayers then u&s;ed is declared by <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tome;</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Nota, patres &amp; concilia non con&s;uevi&s;&s;e ex|plicare totum ritum Sacra|mentorum (non enim &s;cribe|bant libros ri|tuales) &s;ed &s;o|lum attigi&s;&s;e u|nam partem e&s;|&s;entialem ex qua caetera omnia intelli|gerentur. <HI>Bel|larm.</HI> de Sa|cram. Ord. l. <HI>1.</HI> c. <HI>9.</HI></NOTE> who, &s;peaking of Bi&s;hops begin|ning the Act of ordination, &s;aith, That &s;uch and &s;uch words were &s;poken which the initiated knew, for it is not lawful (&s;aith he) to detect all before the profane.</P>
<P>As for the forms of Ordination which were written be|tween the years 700 and 1000 and the forms in <HI>Clements</HI> con|&s;titutions, be&s;ides that they are of &s;mall credit, they are imperfect and di&s;agree among them&s;elves. In one form of Bi&s;hops con&s;ecration the book is not remembred to be held over the head of the per&s;on to be ordained; in another form there is no mention of the impo&s;ition of hands. In a form of the ordination of a Presbyter, the Bi&s;hop and Presbyters holding their hands on the head of the ordained, it is &s;aid, <HI>&amp; det orationem &s;uper eum,</HI> and let the Bi&s;hop pray above him,
<PB N="65" REF="42">then many &s;orts of prayers follow. Whence we may gather, that the prayer to be made over him differs from the other prayers, and that under the word [Prayer] the words of benediction, which are, <HI>Receive the Holy Gho&s;t, Who&s;oever &s;ins ye remit,</HI> &amp;c. are comprehended. For tho&s;e words pro|nounced by the Bi&s;hop as the mouth of the Church are a vir|tual prayer; the heavenly gift &s;ignified by them,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Manus impo&s;i|tiones verba &s;unt my&s;tica quibus confir|matur ad opus electus accipi|ens auctorita|tem te&s;te con|&s;cientia &s;ua, ut audeat vice Domini &s;acri|ficium Deo of|ferre. <HI>Ambro&s;.</HI> in Epi&s;t. <HI>2.</HI> ad <HI>Timoth.</HI> c. <HI>4.</HI> Homo imponit. manus, Deus largitur gra|tiam, homo im|ponit &s;uppli|cem dexteram, &amp; Deus bene|dicit potenti dextera. <HI>Am|bro&s;.</HI> de digni|tate &s;acerd. <HI>a Greg.</HI> Epi&s;t. l. <HI>7.</HI> Epi&s;t. <HI>63.</HI></NOTE> and to be given in the u&s;e of them, being begged of God in the pre|ceding, and al&s;o in the &s;ub&s;equent prayers. And as they are pronounced by the Bi&s;hop &s;upplying the place and in&s;tead of Chri&s;t, they are Chri&s;ts benediction, and a &s;ignification of his o|perative will in giving the Holy Gho&s;t unto &s;ome (that's Pres|byters in their ordination) to authori&s;e them to do the exter|nal acts of binding and loo&s;ing, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> and to accompany tho&s;e acts duely exerci&s;ed in the union and communion of the true|ly Catholick Church; and unto others (that is, Bi&s;hops, in their ordination) to authorize and enable them for the emi|nent, univer&s;al, and pre&s;idential u&s;e and admini&s;tration of the power of binding and loo&s;ing before received in their Pre&s;|byterial ordination, and for the &s;ole exerci&s;e of the power of ordination, and to accompany their &s;ervice duely perfor|med in the union and communion of the true Church of Chri&s;t. So the words of the in&s;titution of the Lords Supper are in them&s;elves no prayers, but con&s;idered as a part of the prayer preceding them (called by <HI>Gregory</HI> the great, the Canon, which is not reputed to be ended before tho&s;e words be prolated) they are a virtual prayer being pre&s;ented unto God in the &s;upplication of the Church for the obtaining of an heavenly effect in the imitation of the act of Chri&s;t like unto that effect which was granted at the act of prolation of them by Chri&s;t him&s;elf.</P>
<P><HI>Major</HI> &amp; <HI>Angel.</HI> affirm, that they &s;aw &s;ome Pontificals which were both without the words [<HI>Receive the Holy Gho&s;t,</HI> &amp;c.] and al&s;o without impo&s;ition of hands. Therefore tho&s;e omi&s;|&s;ions are no &s;ufficient arguments to prove that the fore&s;aid words of benediction were not u&s;ed in the Primitive times. We may further prove them to be then in u&s;e by this, that of all the integral parts of Presbyters ordination, we find
<PB N="66" REF="43">nothing proper to the Bi&s;hop,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="foreign">. Ba&s;il. <HI>ad</HI> Am|philock. <HI>Can.</HI> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="1 letter">1.</NOTE> but onely tho&s;e words of benediction; for the Presbyters impo&s;e their hands as well as the Bi&s;hops, the Presbyters and people fa&s;t and pray with the Bi&s;hop, there's nothing left but the prolation of the words of benediction, in the name and place of Chri&s;t. This is confirmed by the &s;tory of the purblind Bi&s;hop, who having laid his hand to ordain a Presbyter, and the Presbyters their hands, u&s;ed the eyes and mouth of a Presbyter to read and pronounce the benediction.<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Cone.</HI> Hi&s;pal. 2. <HI>c.</HI> 5.</NOTE> Its not &s;aid that the Presbyter read the prayers (although its mo&s;t likely he read them) but the benediction. And why? &s;urely becau&s;e the prayers were the common prayers of the whole Church, and the benediction onely proper to the Bi&s;hop, and therefore that ordination was rejected as unlawful and invalid, a Presbyter and not a Bi|&s;hop having prolated the benediction: and the Bi&s;hops com|mi&s;&s;ion was of no value, becau&s;e prohibited by the Canons in force at that time. Above 300 years before this Bi&s;hop, in the time of <HI>Athana&s;ius,</HI> all the Presbyters (and <HI>I&s;chyras</HI> among them) which were ordained by <HI>Colythus</HI> a pretended Bi&s;hop, were refu&s;ed to be received by the Church in that degree,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Athana&s;. <HI>in a|polog.</HI> 2.</NOTE> becau&s;e <HI>Colythus</HI> was proved to be onely a Presbyter, who&s;e ordination, in the judgment of the Church, the con&s;titution of the Apo&s;tles had made invalid.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Serm. de extel|lent. &s;acrorum Ord.</NOTE> <HI>Ivo Carnoten&s;is</HI> &s;peaking of the ordination of Presbyters, and having &s;aid, that the Bi&s;hop and Presbyters had laid their hands, he adds, and they invo|cate the Holy Gho&s;t upon them which are ordained; where he leaves nothing proper for the Bi&s;hop but the words of be|nediction prolated by him, and onely by him as in the place of Chri&s;t. The Bi&s;hop invocated in the name of the whole con|gregation, and ble&s;&s;ed in the name and place of our Saviour. St. <HI>Ambro&s;e</HI> writing to a Bi&s;hop whom he had ordained,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Epi&s;t. l. <HI>1.</HI> Epi&s;t. <HI>3.</HI> ad Epi&s;co|pum Comen&s;em.</NOTE> &s;aith, the ordination which thou ha&s;t received by the impo&s;ition of my hands, and benediction in the name of the Lord Je&s;us is not reprehended.<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>in</HI> E&s;a. <HI>c.</HI> 58.</NOTE> <HI>Hierome</HI> &s;aith that ordination is not ful|filled onely by imprecation of the voyce, but al&s;o by impo&s;i|tion of hand. Now becau&s;e the benediction was and ought to be &s;aid, while the Bi&s;hop and Presbyters (in the ordination of the&s;e) impo&s;e and hold their hands on the head of the
<PB N="67" REF="43">per&s;on to be ordained (the formal prayer going before the impo&s;ition and following after it,) and becau&s;e it is the prin|cipal part of the ordination, to which the impo&s;ition of hand is &s;ub&s;ervient, as it is a vertual prayer, St. <HI>Augu&s;t.</HI> &s;aith,<NOTE PLACE="marg">De bapti&s;. con|tra Donati&s;t. l. <HI>3.</HI> c. <HI>16.</HI></NOTE> what is impo&s;ition of hand, but a prayer over a man? And as it is &s;poken by the Bi&s;hop in Chri&s;ts &s;tead, delivering the Ec|cle&s;ia&s;tical power in Chri&s;ts name, <HI>Ambro&s;e</HI> &s;aith,<NOTE PLACE="marg">In Epi&s;t. <HI>1.</HI> ad <HI>Timoth.</HI> c. <HI>4.</HI></NOTE> that the impo&s;ition of hands are my&s;tical words whereby the elect <HI>(to the office of the &s;acred mini&s;tery)</HI> receiving authority is con|firmed for his work, that he may be bold to offer Sacrifice to God in Chri&s;ts &s;teed. Whereby we &s;ee that impo&s;ition of hand, and the benediction, are di&s;tinct parts of ordination, yet &s;o conjunct, and the benediction &s;o excelling the impo&s;ition of hand, that the whole is reckoned nothing el&s;e but a bene|diction or prayer.</P>
<P>I confe&s;s that I did &s;ometime begin to &s;u&s;pect, that when the Roman Court had determined ordination to be a Sacra|ment properly &s;o called, as bapti&s;m, and in&s;tituted by our Sa|viour, they put in tho&s;e words in the &s;olemnity of ordina|tion, for the better confirmation and propagation of their new opinion; but con&s;idering the rea&s;ons afore&s;aid, and e&s;|pecially that the ble&s;&s;ed Reformers of our Church have retai|ned the &s;ame words, and nothing doubting but that in &s;o doing they did not favour the popi&s;h opinion, but were per&s;waded they did therein follow their pattern, which was the u&s;age of the Primitive Church, I rejected that conceit and &s;u&s;pition.</P>
<P>The fir&s;t Author that I can remember to have read, more expre&s;&s;ely intimating the &s;aid words of benediction to be u&s;ed in the ordination of Presbyters, is our Country-man <HI>Alexander</HI> of <HI>Hale,</HI> in the&s;e words;<NOTE PLACE="marg">Summ. part. <HI>4.</HI> q. <HI>21.</HI> mem|br. <HI>4.</HI></NOTE> the Keyes (&s;aith he) are given with the &s;acerdotal order, when it is &s;aid, <HI>who&s;e fins you remit,</HI> &amp;c. and when a Bi&s;hop is con&s;ecrated, another Key is not conferred upon him, but the u&s;e of that fir&s;t Key is extended. Thus far he, who flouri&s;hed about the year 1240.</P>
<P>In the words [<HI>Who&s;e &s;ins ye remit,</HI> &amp;c.] remi&s;&s;ion mu&s;t not be taken preci&s;ely for the taking away the guilt of &s;in, or the reconciling of paenitents upon their private or publick re|pentance for &s;ins committed after bapti&s;m, but al&s;o for the
<PB N="68" REF="44">taking away the power and raign of &s;in, which is done by in|fu&s;ed grace, which having removed the &s;piritual darkne&s;s and death, illuminates the &s;oul, and makes it alive to God. E|very part of the Presbyterial function, tends to this la&s;t ef|fect as well as to the former, although one pa&s;toral office may be more e&s;pecially directed to the former, and another in a more &s;pecial manner to the latter effect.</P>
<P>The Fathers do often apply tho&s;e words in St. <HI>John</HI> now frequently remembred, and the like in <HI>Matth.</HI> ch. 16. and chap. 18. to the act of reconciling Paenitents to God and the Church, and much oftner then they do to any other kind of the mini&s;terial loo&s;ing or remi&s;&s;ion, and they had good rea&s;ons moving them &s;o to do. For, fir&s;t, Haereticks began in the &s;e|cond Century to deny that Chri&s;t left any mini&s;terial power in his Church for the remi&s;&s;ion of any great &s;in committed after bapti&s;m; and this Here&s;ie was revived by <HI>Novatian</HI> and <HI>Novatus</HI> in the third Century, and quickned by the Donati&s;ts in the fourth Century. Again&s;t which, the Orthodox Pa&s;tors of the Church u&s;ed tho&s;e places of Scripture, to prove that the power of reconciling &s;uch Penitents was given to the Church of Chri&s;t. Secondly, the zeal of the people in the Primitive Times, and the encouragements of the Mini&s;ters, and after, the Canons of the Church inclined the people to make confe&s;&s;ion of their &s;ecret enormities to the Church or Pa&s;tors (not becau&s;e nece&s;&s;ary to &s;alvation, but becau&s;e it was found very profitable as the times and per&s;ons were then qualified,) and publick offendors were brought to publick repentance, and (this being duely performed) were publick|ly reconciled to God and his Church. The&s;e things being &s;o frequent and &s;olemn, yet very irk&s;ome and grievous to fle&s;h and blood, it was very nece&s;&s;ary for the Fathers of the Church to put the people dayly in mind of the benefit of tho&s;e con|fe&s;&s;ions and penitence, and the nece&s;&s;ity of both as to &s;can|dalous offences in order to a publick reconciliation, which they could not otherwi&s;e do better then by making u&s;e of tho&s;e places of Scripture for the Demon&s;tration and proof of the peoples Duty, and the certainty and comfort of their reconciliation.</P>
<PB N="69" REF="44">
<P>None of tho&s;e holy Pa&s;tors denyed the mini&s;terial power of remi&s;&s;ion or loo&s;&s;ing to be exerci&s;ed in the other mini&s;te|rial offices, in&s;tituted as the means which God would ble&s;s (if not abu&s;ed) for the begetting and increa&s;ing of &s;aving grace. Yea &s;ome of them have expre&s;&s;ely taught, that the preaching of the word, bapti&s;m, and con&s;equently the Lords Supper are Keyes which open Heaven to &s;ome, and &s;hut Hea|ven again&s;t others, and are the in&s;truments of Gods power to loo&s;e &s;ome from the bonds of the guilt and power of &s;in, and to bind tho&s;e that refu&s;e to be loo&s;ed by them. For, doth not the Lords Supper bind the unworthy receivers, who eat and drink their own damnation! and doth it not &s;et at liberty and open Heaven to them, who in eating and drinking ac|cording to the will of Chri&s;t eat and drink their own &s;alva|tion? but lets hear what holy <HI>Hierome</HI> &s;aith, the Apo&s;tles do loo&s;e men (&s;aith he) by the words of God,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>In</HI> E&s;a. <HI>c.</HI> 14.</NOTE> the te&s;timony of the Scriptures and exhortation of vertues.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Epi&s;t. ad He|dib. q. <HI>9.</HI></NOTE> And again in another place, the Apo&s;tles (&s;aith he) in the fir&s;t day of Chri&s;ts re&s;urrection received the grace of the Holy Gho&s;t, whereby they might remit &s;ins and bapti&s;e and make &s;ons of God, and give the &s;pirit of adoption to believers, our Sa|viour him&s;elf &s;aying, <HI>Who&s;oevers &s;ins ye remit, they &s;hall be re|mitted.</HI> Thus far <HI>Hierome.</HI></P>
<P>The powers promi&s;ed unto St. <HI>Peter</HI> in <HI>Matth.</HI> ch. 16. and the powers given unto the Apo&s;tles, when our Saviour breath|ed upon them and &s;aid, <HI>Receive the Holy Gho&s;t,</HI> &amp;c. and the powers mentioned in the 18 chap. of St. <HI>Matthew,</HI> &s;uppo&s;ed before given, or to be in a &s;pecial manner given in time to come, are one and the &s;ame powers,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Chry&s;o&s;t.</HI> de &s;acerdotio. l. <HI>3. Ambro&s;.</HI> l. <HI>1.</HI> de<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="2 letters">aenit. c. <HI>1.</HI> &amp; <HI>6. Hier.</HI> ad <HI>He|liod.</HI> de vita &s;olit. <HI>Athana&s;.</HI> &s;erm. in illud [p<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="OXF" EXTENT="2 letters">o|fecti in pagum, &amp;c.] <HI>Cypr.</HI> de &s;im|plicit Praelat.</NOTE> and &s;o taken to be by the Doctors of the Primitive Church, which they do unanimou&s;ly acknowledge to be given unto the Apo&s;tles both in right and po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion (as to the e&s;&s;ential parts of the powers) before Chri&s;ts death: although there is &s;ome &s;eeming variety among them concerning the punct of time before his death, wherein Chri&s;t gave them declaratively unto them, and the immediate &s;ubject to whom they were given.</P>
<P>Con&s;idering their &s;ayings concerning this matter, and com|paring them together, and &s;o expounding them that they
<PB N="70" REF="45">may agree with the Scriptures and among them&s;elves, the&s;e following a&s;&s;ertions may be gathered from them. Fir&s;t, They do not deny the &s;aid powers to have been given (as to their e&s;&s;entials) unto the Apo&s;tles when he called them to the Apo|&s;tle&s;hip, and gave them the name of Apo&s;tles; For they could not think, that Chri&s;t gave them the name of the office, without the office it &s;elf: And it appears that the Apo&s;tles preached and bapti&s;ed before the promi&s;e of them was made unto <HI>Pe|ter.</HI> They received with the name of Apo&s;tles the powers to mini&s;ter all the doctrine and means of &s;alvation which Chri&s;t intended in due time to deliver unto them.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Act. 1.24, 25. Act. 26.16.</NOTE> And therefore when the Sacrament of the Euchari&s;t was in&s;tituted, they needed not a new ordination, but onely a &s;ignification of Chri&s;ts plea&s;ure, that they &s;hould u&s;e the power before given them in the admini&s;tration of this ordinance, which is but an extention of the power to a new object. Secondly, they agree,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Chry&s;o&s;t.</HI> in <HI>Joh.</HI> hom. <HI>85. Cyprian.</HI> de &s;implicit. Prae|latoruus. <HI>Aug.</HI> de Trini|tate, &amp; civi|tate Dei c. <HI>4.</HI> &amp; quae&s;t. ex vet. &amp; Novi Te&s;tam. c. <HI>93.</HI></NOTE> that all the Apo&s;tles received tho&s;e powers when our Saviour breathed upon them, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> and that this was a &s;olemn or|dination of them, giving them more grace to accompany their mini&s;tery then they had in their fir&s;t call and le&s;s &s;olemn or|dination, or in the &s;ub&s;equent manife&s;tation thereof before his death. This is the more proper ordination of the mini|&s;ters of the new te&s;tament, the full original and &s;eminal tra|dition of the mini&s;terial powers, whereby all future ordina|tions of the like kind are &s;anctified: and for the&s;e cau&s;es our Saviour iterated their ordination to the pa&s;toral extraordinary and ordinary offices, and the rather lea&s;t his death might be thought to have made void their fir&s;t more &s;ecret and covert ordination. Some late writers think, that Chri&s;t, le&s;t his a&s;|cen&s;ion into heaven might &s;eem to have nullified the &s;econd ordination, did ordain the Apo&s;tles the third time in the day of <HI>Penteco&s;t;</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Hier.</HI> epi&s;t. ad Hedib. q. <HI>9.</HI></NOTE> but its more likely that he did then onely com|plete their ordination in the mea&s;ure of extraordinary and ordinary gifts of the &s;pirit, enabling them, and in them the &s;ucceeding Pa&s;tors for the better execution of their pa&s;toral functions. Thirdly, the fathers agree al&s;o in this, that Chri&s;t gave equal power and authority unto all the Apo&s;tles and made them all mini&s;terial rocks and fundations,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Cyprian.</HI> de &s;implicit. Prae|lat.</NOTE> gave unto
<PB N="71" REF="45">them the Keyes of the heavenly Kingdome, and gave them with the Keyes in their hands unto the Church,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Aug.</HI> de verbis Domini &s;erm. <HI>11.</HI> &amp; de doct. Chri&s;t. l. <HI>1.</HI> c. <HI>18.</HI></NOTE> for who&s;e ae|dification onely they and their &s;ucce&s;&s;ors were to u&s;e them. The eyes are not more the bodies, then Pa&s;tors and their Keyes are the Churches; and as the body cannot &s;ee but by the eyes, &s;o the Church cannot enter into heaven by any other member (under Chri&s;t) of the my&s;tical body, without the &s;ervice of the Pa&s;tors opening with their Keyes the gates of heaven for her. As the Apo&s;tles were mini&s;terial rocks, &s;o was <HI>Peters</HI> confe&s;&s;ion an in&s;trumental rock: and in a &s;econd place, the confe&s;&s;ion and preaching of the re&s;t of the Apo&s;tles were &s;o too; by the means of which rocks the Church is built upon the foundation of foundations, the principal rock our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Hilar. <HI>in</HI> Math. <HI>Can.</HI> 11. Matth. 16.</NOTE> Yet <HI>Peters</HI> confe&s;&s;ion was not without a great reward: He had the fir&s;t promi&s;e of the Keyes to be given unto him after Chri&s;t's re&s;urrection, with the more abun|dant mea&s;ure of the grace of the Holy Gho&s;t, which he then received with the re&s;t of the Apo&s;tles; yet &s;o that he was the fir&s;t in order which received them before the re&s;t. He had a name given him by our Saviour from the principal rock.<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Ambro&s;.</HI> &s;erm. <HI>89. Cyprian.</HI> de habiiu virgin.</NOTE> He was made the fir&s;t in order and head of the Apo&s;tles: the fir&s;t mini&s;terial rock: and his preaching was made the fir&s;t in&s;tru|mental rock. He was made the fir&s;t preacher to, and convertor of the Jews and Gentiles;<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Joh. 10.</HI> &amp; <HI>Ambro&s;.</HI> &s;er. <HI>47.</HI> De <HI>Petro</HI> vide <HI>Aug.</HI> retract. l. <HI>1.</HI> c. <HI>21. Ambro&s;.</HI> de incarn. Dom. &s;acramento <HI>Cypr.</HI> nbi &s;up. &amp; ad <HI>Antoni|anum.</HI></NOTE> the Apo&s;tle and Pa&s;tor of the fir&s;t Chri&s;tian Church after Chri&s;ts a&s;cen&s;ion, which was the mother of all other Churches. And becau&s;e it was believed that he had his choyce&s;t and longe&s;t re&s;idence in <HI>Rome,</HI> where|in by his mini&s;tery the Go&s;pel was fir&s;t planted, that Church was counted the Prince&s;s of Churches, the mother of Chur|ches, as he was accounted and called the Prince of the A|po&s;tles. All the&s;e priviledges did &s;erve to &s;hew the unity of the Church, and the unity of the holy mini&s;tery and mini&s;ters thereof, and to commend unto all the &s;ons of the Church, the pre&s;ervation of unity in doctrine, wor&s;hip, Di&s;cipline and charity. There be many particular Churches of Chri&s;t, yet all but one Church, as <HI>Peters</HI> Church was one, there be many Bi&s;hops and Presbyters, yet as <HI>Peter</HI> was alone the A|po&s;tle of the fir&s;t Church which repre&s;ented all the &s;ucceeding
<PB N="72" REF="46">Churches,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Ba&s;il. con&s;titut. Mona&s;t. c. <HI>22.</HI></NOTE> &s;o the many mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel are one in <HI>Peter,</HI> and the mini&s;tery one in him. And as the Churches and mini&s;ters were one in their fountains and roots, &s;o they ought to pre&s;erve the like unity among them&s;elves, the mi|ni&s;ters imitating the faithfulne&s;s of <HI>Peter,</HI> and the flock imi|tating the obedience and holine&s;s of the Church of <HI>Peter.</HI> If <HI>Rome</HI> had per&s;i&s;ted in, and contented her &s;elf with the do|ctrine of St. <HI>Peter,</HI> and not added thereto Idolatry, &s;uper&s;ti|tions and haere&s;ies, we would gladly have owned and honour|ed her Bi&s;hops as the prime &s;ucce&s;&s;ors of <HI>Peter,</HI> and the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> as the like &s;ucce&s;&s;or of <HI>Peter</HI>'s Church: but, to our hearts un&s;peakable grief we &s;peak it, the gold is become dimme, the mo&s;t fine gold is changed, the holy City is be|come an harlot. O that &s;he would return to her fir&s;t husband that we might return to her! Ther's <HI>Peter</HI>'s chair where <HI>Peter</HI>'s preaching is &s;incerely imitated, that's <HI>Peters</HI> Church which imitates her faith and holine&s;s, which when <HI>Rome</HI> &s;hall do, &s;he &s;hall recover her precedency of &s;ucce&s;&s;ion.</P>
<P>Thus <HI>Peter</HI> had a primacy among the Apo&s;tles, but no &s;upe|riority of command over them: All pa&s;tors were in him fir&s;t and &s;econdarily in the re&s;t of the Apo&s;tles.<NOTE PLACE="marg">De dignitate Sacerd. c. <HI>2. Jo. 21.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Peter</HI> (&s;aith <HI>Am|bro&s;e</HI>) did not alone receive the &s;heep, but received them with us, and we received them with him. Chri&s;t in the Apo&s;tles gave unto all Pa&s;tors the power of ordaining Pa&s;tors; becau&s;e he gave them the Keyes to be conveyed to &s;ucce&s;&s;ors. But the power of appointing who among the Presbyters &s;hould exerci&s;e them, and how, and who among them &s;hould be governours of the u&s;e of the Keyes, was not conveyed with the Keyes to all Pa&s;tors in the Apo&s;tolical ordination; becau&s;e it was pe|culiar to the extraordinary office of the Apo&s;tles, either to leave that to the wi&s;dome of the Church and ordinary Pa&s;tors to order, or to &s;ettle it in one Presbyter a&s;&s;i&s;ted with the Colledge of Presbyters, or otherwi&s;e, as the Holy Gho&s;t &s;hould guide them. We may not think that our Saviour did give unto every Presbyter power to ordain, preach, admini&s;ter the Sacraments, excommunicate, or ab&s;olve, at his own will and plea&s;ure, without any appointment of a flock, or calling him to account of his Steward&s;hip, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> for this is again&s;t the light of
<PB N="73" REF="46">nature, unle&s;s God had given unto every Presbyter wi&s;dome and a will which could not erre in the orderly u&s;e of the Keyes, as he gave unto the Apo&s;tles; without which extra|ordinary grace the hou&s;e of God in that ca&s;e had been full of di&s;order and confu&s;ion, which Chri&s;t would not permit.</P>
<P>If the power of di&s;po&s;ing and governing the act of ordi|nation, and the exerci&s;e of the acts of binding and loo&s;ing had been given to the body of the Presbyters by our Saviour, the Apo&s;tles and univer&s;al Church had never deprived the Col|ledge of that authority: Wherefore as the fir&s;t planting of the Chri&s;tian Churches was proper to the Apo&s;tles, &s;o the con|&s;tituting of the form of government, and the governors of the exerci&s;e of the acts of ordination, and the Keyes was com|mitted onely to their tru&s;t. And it was very congruous that Chri&s;t would not determine the form of the government of his Church and Pa&s;tors thereof before his a&s;cention into hea|ven, and the taking full po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion of his government and Kingdome at the right hand of his Father.</P>
<P>The Apo&s;tles planted the Churches after this manner: When God had ble&s;&s;ed their mini&s;tery in Cities and con&s;ide|rable Towns, and in the Country adjacent, in the conver&s;ion of many to God, they con&s;tituted one congregation or Church of all the converts in that City or good Town and the Coun|try about it, So ordering Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Corporations as might, as much as could be, be&s;t agree with the civil corpo|rations and their divi&s;ion. For the feeding of which Church they ordained Pa&s;tors, and tho&s;e many in every City-Church,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Ubi e&s;t Eccle|&s;ia ni&s;i ubi vir|ga &amp; gratia floret &s;acerdo|talis. <HI>Ambro&s;.</HI> de <HI>I|&s;aac</HI> &amp; anima c. <HI>7.</HI> Es <HI>Hier.</HI> contra Lucifer. Eccle|&s;ia non e&s;t quoe|non habet Sa|cerdotem.</NOTE> in which they left the Colledge of Presbyters governors both of the Pa&s;tors individually con&s;idered, and the whole flock, yet with and under them&s;elves or their vicegerents as pre&s;i|dents, when either of them were pre&s;ent. But within a &s;hort time, when Chri&s;tianity was much &s;pread in &s;everal Nations, and many City-Churches were grown populous, &s;o that they had many le&s;&s;er Churches under them; and the Apo&s;tles and their Vicegerents could be pre&s;ent but in very few in compari|&s;on of the far greater number which wanted their &s;ociety, the Colledges in the&s;e began to be divided among them&s;elves, and to divide the Churches, which cau&s;ed the Apo&s;tles guided
<PB N="74" REF="47">thereto by the Spirit of Chri&s;t to con&s;ent to a change of the government which was by the Colledges (bodies without a head, and &s;o apt to &s;werve in ruling populous Churches) into a pre&s;ident in every Church cho&s;en out of the Pa&s;tors, toge|ther with the Colledge of the City and be&s;t Presbyters as his Senate and Coun&s;ellors. And then both the Apo&s;tles and E|vangeli&s;ts, or Apo&s;tolical helpers, which were extraordinary Bi&s;hops, become ordinary Bi&s;hops to be &s;ucceded by others. And the&s;e la&s;t were like our Arch-bi&s;hops, having many Bi|&s;hops under them, as <HI>Titus</HI> in <HI>Creet, &amp;c.</HI> and the Apo&s;tles were like our Primates but of higher authority, and having more Arch-bi&s;hops under them. Here we may ob&s;erve, that the original occa&s;ion of Epi&s;copacy doth very much commend it, it being introduced to heal the evil of Schi&s;me, and, by pre|venting it for time to come, to &s;ecure the peace of the Church: And it hath and will be the more acceptable to the Churches, becau&s;e it was in&s;tituted or confirmed by the Apo&s;tles at their de&s;ire.</P>
<P>Unto the impo&s;ition of hands, benediction and prayers (which were of the e&s;&s;ence of the ordinations of Bi&s;hops and Presbyters) many Ceremonies were in time added, &s;ome &s;ooner, &s;ome later, which &s;erved to make a clearer mani|fe&s;tation of the Eccle&s;ia&s;tical powers received in and by them; which additional Ceremonies in time became occa&s;ions of foul mi&s;takes: Some making the additions to be the e&s;&s;ence of the ordinations, or part thereof; other multiplying the ordina|tion of the Apo&s;tles according to the diver&s;ity of kinds of the powers, which they in very deed received, but in one or|dination, although iterated for &s;ome &s;pecial rea&s;ons.</P>
<P>When the Schoolmen began to write, they found the Roman Court full of corrupt doctrine, which they thought them&s;elves bound to maintain, mi&s;taking &amp; mi&s;calling the evil good, and the good evil. They found in the ordination of a Presbyter the Patene with Bread, and the Cup with the Wine (both un|con&s;ecrated) to be delivered unto the party to be ordained, with the&s;e words &s;poken by the Bi&s;hop,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Cont. Florent. <HI>Sotus</HI> in <HI>4.</HI> d. <HI>24.</HI> &amp; <HI>Major</HI> &amp; <HI>Tho.</HI> in <HI>4.</HI> d. <HI>24.</HI></NOTE> <HI>viz.</HI> Take power to offer, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> which Ceremony added to that ordination about the year 700 (as is probable,) &s;ome Schoolmen, and al&s;o
<PB N="75" REF="47">Pope <HI>Eugenius</HI> the fourth, affirm to be the matter and forme of the con&s;ecration of a Presbyter, making the impo&s;ition of hands with the words, <HI>Receive the Holy Gho&s;t, &amp;c.</HI> to belong onely to the &s;olemnity thereof, and not to be e&s;&s;ential to it; again&s;t the judgment of all antiqui|ty.</P>
<P>Other maintain the delivery of the Patene with Bread,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Scotus</HI> in <HI>4.</HI> d. <HI>24. Va&s;q.</HI> in <HI>3.</HI> di&s;p. <HI>239. Bellar.</HI> de &s;a|cramento ord. i. <HI>1.</HI> c. <HI>9.</HI></NOTE> and the Cup with wine in it, together with the &s;aid words &s;poken by the Bi&s;hop, to be one part of the ordination; and the im|po&s;ition of hands with the words, <HI>Receive the Holy Gho&s;t, &amp;c.</HI> to be an other part thereof; and both the&s;e parts to con&s;titute the whole e&s;&s;ence of the ordination: As if our Saviour had made the Apo&s;tles Presbyters by two di&s;tinct ordinations, the one before his death, and the other after his re&s;urrection, whereof the fir&s;t (if we will without rea&s;on believe them) made them Prie&s;ts, the &s;econd gave them the power of bind|ing and loo&s;ing, and made them complete Presbyters.</P>
<P>As concerning the ordination of Bi&s;hops, Divines (&s;aith <HI>&V;a&s;q.</HI>) do not well agree at what time they were ordained,<NOTE PLACE="marg">In <HI>3.</HI> p. d. <HI>242.</HI> c. <HI>7.</HI></NOTE> Some think that Chri&s;t ordained them, when he &s;aid, <HI>Receive the Holy Gho&s;t, Who&s;e &s;ins ye remit, &amp;c.</HI> this opinion is ju&s;tly re|jected by <HI>Va&s;ques;</HI> unle&s;s it may be made good, that Bi&s;hops and Presbyters had one and the &s;ame ordination; for all grant that Presbyters were ordained by tho&s;e words. Other ima|gine <HI>Peter</HI> alone to have been imediately ordained by our Sa|viour, and the re&s;t of the Apo&s;tles by <HI>Peter, &amp;c.</HI> &s;o <HI>Bellar|mine</HI> and others: but this a&s;&s;ertion doth not plea&s;e <HI>Va&s;ques</HI> and we cannot be plea&s;ed with &s;uch figments. Others doe conceive our Saviour to have ordained them Prie&s;ts and Bi|&s;hops, when he &s;aid, <HI>Do this in remembrance of me;</HI> This opinion is as fal&s;e as the la&s;t. Some think them ordained in the day of <HI>Penteco&s;t;</HI> and <HI>Va&s;ques</HI> him&s;elf thinks them to have been ordained, when Chri&s;t &s;aid unto them, <HI>Go teach all na|tions, &amp;c.</HI> which is as groundle&s;s an opinion as any of the re&s;t: Whereas in truth when they were ordained Apo&s;tles, they were made Presbyters, having the pa&s;toral powers which were to be tran&s;mitted to &s;ucce&s;&s;ors, and were al&s;o made ex|traordinary Bi&s;hops, having as e&s;&s;ential to their extraordinary
<PB N="76" REF="48">function of Apo&s;tle&s;hip, an extraordinary pre&s;idency and &s;uperintendency over the u&s;e and exerci&s;e of all the pa&s;toral offices, but were not made Bi&s;hops, which were to be &s;ucceeded, until they them&s;elves, by confirming the prudent choice of the Churches, had in&s;tituted Epi&s;copacy.</P>
<P>The Schoolmen found the Laicks impower'd by commi&s;|&s;ion from <HI>Rome, &amp;c.</HI> to excommunicate: Hence they di&s;tin|gui&s;h between the power of the Order and the power of ju|ri&s;diction. We gather from the holy Scriptures and the pra|ctice of the Primitive Church, that excommunication was ordained to be a mean to bring a per&s;on, guilty of &s;ome &s;candalous &s;in committed after Bapti&s;m, to the degree of re|pentance and humiliation; meet fir&s;t, to receive pardon of &s;in through faith in Chri&s;ts blood. Secondly, to &s;atisfie and edifie the Church by good example in proportion to the of|fence given and harme done by his bad example. Thirdly, to take away the evil propen&s;ity, the skars and blots made in the Soul by the &s;in committed, and to re&s;tore the offender to the degree of purity of Soul, and con&s;equently of communion with God, and of Gods love to him which he enjoyed before his fall; which are obtained when God is glorified and plea&s;ed by the humiliation in proportion to the di&s;honour done to God, and the divine di&s;plea&s;ure incurred by &s;in. Fourthly, to receive more &s;trength to make the penitent able to &s;tand, and avoid the like fall in time to come. In the fir&s;t four Cen|turies after our Saviours birth, a full ab&s;olution was not gran|ted to any Penitent (except in ca&s;e of nece&s;&s;ity) until the Bi&s;hop and Presbyters judged his repentance and humiliation to have re&s;tored him to Gods grace and favour,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Cyprian.</HI> ad clerum. De Presbyteris qui temer&egrave; pacem lap&s;is dede|rant.</NOTE> the good opi|nion of the Church, and to his former &s;piritual &s;trength in grace. And therefore we may be a&s;&s;ured, that no man was ex|communicated from the Church militant, but in order to receive grace to re&s;tore him to and fit him for the Church tri|umphant; and that it was the &s;ame Key which did &s;hut the dores of both Churches again&s;t the offender, and was to open the dores unto him, having given &s;ufficient te&s;timony of a due humiliation. The Catholick Church in the Primitive times did not divide excommunication into two di&s;tinct
<PB N="77" REF="48">kinds, that is, into excommunication from the Church tri|umphant, and excommunication from the Church militant, the fir&s;t proper to the Bi&s;hop and Presbyter; and the other peculiar to the Bi&s;hops and his Committees, Presbyters or lay; this to be exerci&s;ed by the power of Juri&s;diction the for|mer to be exerci&s;ed by the power of order, that is, the power which Bi&s;hops and Presbyters received from Chri&s;t by their ordination. Whereby we under&s;tand the power of juri&s;di|ction, in this &s;en&s;e as oppo&s;ed to the power of order, to be the gift neither of Chri&s;t nor of his Apo&s;tles. If the Church gave this power, it was a corrupt Church that gave it, for by this ordinance of man the ordinance of Chri&s;t is made void; The ordinance of man, is exalted above the ordinance of Chri&s;t; for the excommunication which is Chri&s;ts ordi|nance may be executed by the Presbyter (in &s;ubordination to the Bi&s;hop, but) without his Commi&s;&s;ion; the humane ex|communication is made peculiar to the Bi&s;hop the chief of|ficer in the Church, to be executed by him&s;elf or &s;ome other by his commi&s;&s;ion. Much good do it to the Roman Bi&s;hops who&s;e cheif Bi&s;hop fir&s;t invented it: our Bi&s;hops like it not, it hath been too importunate to &s;tick (in part) unto them, but they will perfectly &s;hake it off, as &s;oon as they can.</P>
<P>The excommunication which is Chri&s;ts ordinance hath parts or members, whereby it may be more or le&s;s full, grea|ter or le&s;&s;er; but it ought not to be coupled with a mate, a brat of mans invention.<NOTE PLACE="marg">De paenitentia l. <HI>1.</HI> c. <HI>2.</HI> Munus Spiritu Sancti e&s;t offi|cium Sacerdo|tis, jus autem Spiritus Sar|cti in &s;olvend ligandis&abque; cri|minibuse&s;t. Ibi</NOTE> <HI>Deus par jus</HI> (&s;aith <HI>Ambro&s;e</HI>) <HI>&amp; &s;ol|vendi e&s;&s;e voluit &amp; ligandi:</HI> God would that there &s;hould be equally, as a right of loo&s;ing, &s;o a right of binding. And therefore he that hath not the right of loo&s;ing (&s;aith he) neither hath he the right of binding. And a little after, he that hath (&s;aith he) a right to loo&s;e, he hath a right to bind. And a little after, the &s;ame Father &s;aith, that this right (or power) of loo&s;ing and binding, is permitted onely to Prie&s;ts (that is, Bi&s;hops and Presbyters) and thence concludes that Hereticks which had no Prie&s;ts could not challenge this power. Then this Holy man &s;heweth the &s;pring of the &s;ame power, he that receiveth the Holy Gho&s;t (&s;aith he) recei|veth the power both of loo&s;ing and of binding, as it is written,
<PB N="78" REF="49"><HI>Receive the Holy Gho&s;t,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Jo. 20.</NOTE> <HI>who&s;e &s;ius ye remit, &amp;c.</HI> Therefore he that cannot loo&s;e &s;in hath not the Holy Gho&s;t (that is,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Si fictus e&s;t (Praesbyter aut Epi&s;copus) Spiritus San|ctus Di&s;ciplinae effugiet fictum, dee&s;t &s;aluti e|jus, mini&s;terium tamen ejus non de&s;erit, quo per eum &s;alutem o|peratur alio|rum. <HI>Aug.</HI> contra e|pi&s;t. <HI>Parmen.</HI> l. <HI>2.</HI> c. <HI>11.</HI></NOTE> as ma|king him an able mini&s;ter of the New Te&s;tament, and of the &s;pirit for the remi&s;&s;ion of &s;ins.) Thus far <HI>Ambro&s;e.</HI> Whereby we &s;ee that the Holy Gho&s;t gives unto Bi&s;hops and Presbyters the power of binding by excommunication, and of loo&s;ing by ab&s;olution, and that the Holy Gho&s;t doth accompany their &s;ervice to cure them that will not refu&s;e to be healed. Away then with the excommunication that hath not the Holy Spirit to warrant it, nor the operation of the Holy Gho&s;t to make it effectual to mans &s;alvation. Away with the lay ex|communication that makes the Holy Gho&s;t a &s;ervant to de|nounce it. Away with <HI>Jeroboams</HI> Prie&s;ts made of the lowe&s;t of the people, which are not of the &s;ons of <HI>Levi,</HI> which have not received the Holy Gho&s;t to make them able mini&s;ters of the new Te&s;tament, not of the letter but of the Spirit.</P>
<P>It is the duty of the lay Chri&s;tian magi&s;trate to over&s;ee, facilitate and corroborate the due execution of the &s;piritual cen&s;ure of excommunication performed by Bi&s;hops princi|pally and Presbyters &s;ubordinately: but if any ask, whether he may not excommunicate either by him&s;elf or by a &s;ub&s;ti|tute? although the an&s;wer is already given in the premi&s;es, yet I &s;ay, he may do &s;o, and if he have the gift, may preach in publick, and mini&s;ter the holy Sacraments as lawfully as the 250 per&s;ons &s;poken of in the &s;ixteenth chap. of <HI>Numbers,</HI> took cen&s;er and offered incen&s;e,<NOTE PLACE="marg">2 Chron. <HI>c.</HI> 27.</NOTE> and as lawfully as King <HI>Uzziah</HI> did the like: And as to the curing of the Lepro&s;y of the &s;oul, he may expect the like &s;ucce&s;s as <HI>Naaman</HI> would have had as to the healing of the Lepro&s;y of his body,<NOTE PLACE="marg">2 King. <HI>c.</HI> 5.</NOTE> if he had wa&s;hed him&s;elf in any other river then <HI>Jordan,</HI> wherein the Prophet commanded him to wa&s;h him&s;elf in order to his clean&s;ing.</P>
<P>The Kings Proclamation prevaileth more with many to leave their &s;candalous vices and to live &s;oberly, then the Ser|mons of the be&s;t Bi&s;hops and Presbyters u&s;ually do with mo&s;t men: Will any therefore conclude that the Proclamation of the King, is an effectual means for the infu&s;ion of Gods &s;aving grace, as well as the preaching of the Go&s;pel by them that are lawfully called to that &s;acred work? the Chri&s;tian Ma|gi&s;trates
<PB N="79" REF="49">power is ver&s;ed about the externals of Chri&s;tian vir|tues, and reacheth onely accidentally and by Gods indulgence &s;ometime to the &s;ouls of men, and the life of virtues; Where|as the mini&s;terial power of the Go&s;pel, is primarily ordai|ned to be a means alwayes effectual for the infu&s;ion of the &s;oul and life of all &s;aving Chri&s;tian virtues, if the operation of the Holy Gho&s;t, which doth con&s;tantly work with the mini&s;tery of the Go&s;pel (in all the offices thereof,) be not deliberate|ly re&s;i&s;ted. Men are &s;aved by means in&s;tituted and &s;anctified by the wi&s;dome and power of God, and not by means which onely the wi&s;dome of man judgeth to be mo&s;t probable to ef|fect our eternal &s;alvation. We live by faith, and not by &s;en&s;e.</P>
<P>The Independent congregations blame the reverend Bi|&s;hops for &s;ome mi&s;carriages about the heavy cen&s;ure of ex|communication, and exclaim both again&s;t them, and again&s;t Presbyters for being more zealous for ceremonies, then for the due execution of our function in the maine offices thereof, and for the power of godline&s;s. As for the abu&s;e of excommu|nication, the blame was to have been imputed unto others, and not to the Bi&s;hops. And to &s;ay the very truth, in this matter of excommunication, the Canons of our Church are defective and require amendment, which perhaps &s;ome invincible hin|derances would not permit to be done in times pa&s;t. As for the mi&s;placing of the intention of our zeal; Fir&s;t, as being my &s;elf a Presbyter, although one of the meane&s;t, I mu&s;t an&s;wer for my &s;elf, that although (it may be) no man will or can condemn me, yet truely I cannot ju&s;tifie my &s;elf be|fore the judgment &s;eat of Almighty God, but mu&s;t make my earne&s;t &s;upplication for mercy to my judge. I fear lea&s;t any &s;oul mi&s;carry, or mi&s;carried through my default, that his blood &s;hould be required at my hands; And therefore I tremble when I con&s;ider what account I am to give of my Steward|&s;hip. And now having knowledge and experience of the mo&s;t heavy weight of this &s;acred vocation, and the great propen|&s;ity of our nature, &s;trengthened by manifold temptations, unto unfaithfulne&s;s therein, if I were now to enter into it, the con&s;cience of my weakne&s;s and fear of mi&s;carriage would cau&s;e me to decline it, but being long &s;ince entred, woe
<PB N="80" REF="50">unto me if I preach not the Go&s;pel; and I will not be di&s;|couraged having the power and mercy of God in whom I tru&s;t to be my &s;trength and comfort. I de&s;ire all good men, as charitably to cen&s;ure us, &s;o to pray earne&s;tly to God for us, that the great afflictions which we have &s;uffered may be &s;an|ctified to us, that remembring the afflictions and mi&s;eries, the Wormwood and the Gall, our &s;ouls may be humbled in us, and that the extraordinary deliverance and ble&s;&s;ings may entirely ingage our hearts to &s;erve the Lord with all diligence and faithfulne&s;s in the holy mini&s;tery, and to feed the flock of God, taking the over&s;ight thereof not by con&s;traint but willingly, not for filthy Lucre (a pe&s;tilence in the Church) but of a ready mind, neither being Lords over Gods Heritage (&s;o unbecoming the me&s;&s;engers of the Lamb of God, who wa&s;hed his Di&s;ciples feet,) but being examples to the flock of &s;obriety, humility, meekne&s;s, Chri&s;tian bounty to the poor, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> it becomes not good men to cen&s;ure us for u&s;ing tho&s;e Rites and Ceremonies, which we are per&s;waded not to be prohibited by Gods Law, and both they and we do &s;urely know to be commanded to be u&s;ed by mans Law duely made, which is Gods ordinance, to which we mu&s;t be &s;ubject for con|&s;cience &s;ake. We pity the tender con&s;cience which cannot without offence either obey or di&s;obey that ordinance. And where any of a good life is &s;een to have that tenderne&s;s with|out the malignity of pride, and labour to propagate it and di|vide the Church, the piety and di&s;cretion of the Bi&s;hop will u&s;e him gently, in&s;truct him, pray for him, waite patiently for his amendment, and, unle&s;&s;e the example of the party is &s;een to corrupt the &s;ound, will hardly be drawn to go beyond a threatning, becau&s;e puni&s;hment to a man of that temper, &s;eems rather to be an addition of mi&s;ery to him, then whole|&s;ome Phy&s;ick meet to cure him.</P>
<P>If any will attempt to be Authors of Combinations, to ex|tort, by &s;hew of multitudes and by tumults, the alteration or abrogation of any part of the e&s;tabli&s;hed laws Civil or Ec|cle&s;ia&s;tical, they will thereby evidently manife&s;t them&s;elves to be but meer pretenders to a tender con&s;cience and power of godline&s;s; for they that labour to extort a part, if they
<PB N="80" REF="50">prevaile, mu&s;t have the whole in their power. And can they that attempt &s;o great robbery love God, and the power of Godline&s;s? By this cur&s;ed fruit we know the&s;e to be mo&s;t vile Hypocrites. Let no good people be deceived by their &s;heeps cloathing; look upon this bitter fruit, and you &s;ee that they are within but greedy and ravening Wolves:<NOTE PLACE="marg">Contra epi&s;t. Parmen. l. <HI>2.13.</HI> c. <HI>15.</HI> apud The|od. bal&s;am. c. <HI>5.</HI> Vide Baron an|nal. an. <HI>389.</HI> &s;ect. <HI>74.</HI> &amp; conc. African. temp. Bonifac. &amp; caele&s;tin. c. <HI>15.</HI> Conc. earth. <HI>5.</HI> c. <HI>6.</HI> Greg. <HI>3.</HI> epi&s;t. <HI>5.</HI></NOTE> God deliver us from them, and deliver them from the wickedne&s;s of their hearts and wayes: but leaving the&s;e I proceed. It is very pertinent to the matter in hand to &s;peak of reordination; but becau&s;e this &s;ubject is two large, I will onely &s;ay thus much, that St. <HI>Aug.</HI> and the Council of <HI>Carthage,</HI> and ge|nerally all antiquity are again&s;t reordination, as well as a|gain&s;t rebaptization, both truely &s;o called. In ca&s;es of doubt whether one were truely bapti&s;ed or truely ordained, it was never accounted a rebaptization to bapti&s;e the one, or reor|dination to ordain the other. The ordination of a Presbyter by Presbyters without Commi&s;&s;ion from a Bi&s;hop; was al|wayes judged of dubious validity at the lea&s;t. Some &s;o or|dained in foreine Churches were not rejected by the Bi&s;hops of the Church of <HI>England;</HI> I believe, becau&s;e they thought that to judge of the fact of another Church in matter of no greater moment would not tend to &s;trengthen unity between the Churches, but rather to dimini&s;h and weaken it; Or, it may be, they did not admit them, as certainly knowing them to be &s;o ordained, but as charitably believing they had been ordained by a Bi&s;hop, for charity covereth the multitude of &s;ins: a doubtful ordination e&s;tabli&s;hed in all the parts of it, by the publick con&s;ent and authority of a Church is far more tolerable, then the like ordination celebrated in all the parts of it, without and again&s;t the legal con&s;ent and authority of the Church. For in this la&s;t ca&s;e, many are doubtful of the validity of Bapti&s;m, and the other divine ordinances admi|ni&s;tred by them that were &s;o ordained. But the Higher power partly hath, and in convenient time will remove all &s;uch doubts to the full &s;atisfaction of all good men. I have already exceeded my intended brevity. I will &s;ay no more, but de&s;ire the candid reader to believe that I have not maintained E|pi&s;copacy to be an in&s;titution of Chri&s;t by the Apo&s;tles, and
<PB N="81" REF="51">not an in&s;titution of Chri&s;t in the Apo&s;tles (as &s;ome hold, in|duced by many fair probabilities) out of a &s;pirit of contra|diction; but becau&s;e the &s;entence cho&s;en by me &s;eems to be &s;ubject to le&s;s difficulties, and more agreeable to the ancient pa&s;toral and Epi&s;copal ordinations which be received and u&s;ed in the Church of <HI>England,</HI> and e&s;pecially becau&s;e it doth more incline and conduce to moderation. What&s;oever I have herein written, I humbly &s;ubmit to the judgement and cor|rection of my Superiors.</P>
<P><HI>Ne&abque; enim Epi&s;copi propter nos &s;umus, &s;ed propter eos quibus ver|bum &amp; Sacramentum Dominicum mini&s;tramus; ac per hoc ut eo|rum &s;ine &s;candalo gubernandorum &s;e&s;e nece&s;&s;itas tulerit, ita vel e&s;&s;e vel non e&s;&s;e debemus, quod non propter nos &s;ed propter alios &s;umus.</HI> Aug <HI>contra</HI> Cre&s;con. <HI>Grammatic. l.</HI> 2. <HI>c.</HI> 11.</P>
<TRAILER>FINIS.</TRAILER>
</DIV1>
</BODY>
<BACK>
<DIV1 TYPE="errata">
<PB REF="51">
<HEAD>Errata.</HEAD>
<P>PAg. 4. line penult. after [of the Apo&s;tles] add [before our Saviours death] <HI>p.</HI> 10. marg. <HI>r.</HI> Jubain. <HI>p.</HI> 14. marg. <HI>r.</HI> in E&s;ai. <HI>p.</HI> 15. <HI>l.</HI> 12. <HI>r.</HI> dicit. <HI>l.</HI> 22. <HI>r.</HI> dicit. ib. <HI>r.</HI> con&s;ecratione. <HI>l.</HI> 36. <HI>r.</HI> po&s;tea. <HI>p.</HI> 26. <HI>l.</HI> 10. dele [of] exped. <HI>p.</HI> 30. <HI>l.</HI> penult. <HI>r.</HI> &s;aith. <HI>l.</HI> 27. <HI>r.</HI> enable [them] the. <HI>p</HI> 32. <HI>l.</HI> 13. <HI>r.</HI> whom. <HI>l.</HI> 31. <HI>r. Walafridus. p.</HI> 39. <HI>l.</HI> 31. <HI>r.</HI> Tungren&s;. &s;o in marg. pro Vigren&s;. <HI>r.</HI> Tungren&s;. <HI>p,</HI> 41. <HI>l.</HI> 27. <HI>r.</HI> within ten. in marg. <HI>r.</HI> natalem Domini Toletan. the quota|tion ubi multorum is mi&s;placed. <HI>p.</HI> 42. <HI>l.</HI> 9, 10. <HI>r.</HI> Pa&s;chal VVax. candle. <HI>p.</HI> 46. over again&s;t <HI>l.</HI> 24. <HI>r.</HI> in marg. <HI>Greg. Ny&s;&s;en.</HI> contra <HI>Hunom.</HI> Orat. 16. <HI>p.</HI> 47. ult. <HI>r.</HI> Catechumens. <HI>p.</HI> 51. in marg. dele [<HI>Paulinus</HI> in vita <HI>Ambro&s;.</HI>] <HI>l.</HI> 10. marg. <HI>r.</HI> c. 5. <HI>p.</HI> 53. in marg. dele [per] <HI>Socrat. p.</HI> 54. in marg. pro praecip. <HI>r.</HI> princip. <HI>p.</HI> 56. <HI>l.</HI> 8. <HI>r.</HI> Chorepi&s;cope. <HI>p.</HI> 59. for Mini&s;ter, all, <HI>r.</HI> Mini&s;teriall. <HI>p.</HI> 62. <HI>l.</HI> 20. <HI>r.</HI> 70 di&s;cip. in marg. <HI>r.</HI> Dracontium. Aug. in P&s;al. 44. <HI>l.</HI> ult. dele (and.) <HI>p.</HI> 63. <HI>l.</HI> 6. <HI>r.</HI> Brethren [.] &mdash; of [the] <HI>l.</HI> 13. dele [who&s;e Succe&s;sors] <HI>l.</HI> 14. <HI>r.</HI> &s;ucceede. <HI>p.</HI> 69. marg. <HI>r.</HI> paenit: after <HI>r.</HI> [profecti] in pagum.</P>
<P><HI>It may be, that, by rea&s;on of the Authours ab&s;ence and &s;ome ob&s;cu|rity in the Copy, a few other faults may have e&s;caped undi&s;cer|ned, as mi&s;placing &s;ome Authors cited in the Margent, or in the Figures, or in Pointing, and the like, which being &s;mall, the goodne&s;s of the Reader will ea&s;ily pardon.</HI></P>
</DIV1>
</BACK>
</TEXT>
</EEBO>
</ETS>
