<!DOCTYPE ETS PUBLIC "-//UMDLPS//DTD EEBOPROOF 2.0//EN">
<ETS>
<TEMPHEAD>
<REVDESCR>
<CHANGE>
<DATE>2011-04-12</DATE>
<RESPSTMT>
<NAME>Alexis Jakobson</NAME>
<RESP>MURP</RESP>
</RESPSTMT>
<ITEM>*Proofed title page(s).
*Reviewed structure.
*Checked division-marking material at heads and feet of divisions (HEADS, CLOSER, OPENER, ARGUMENT, EPIGRAPH, SIGNED, BYLINE, etc.).
*Added TYPEs to DIVs in order to validate.
*Checked for N=""s.
*Checked ^s.
*Checked placement and completeness of PBs.
*Checked for foreign, damage and missing-page GAPs, #, --.
*Checked for LBs, startqs / endqs, q;s, &abque;s, ABBRs and Qs.
*Checked for FIGUREs and decorated initials.
*Checked proofsheets and made corrections found there.
*Corrected <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="2 letters">s and <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 word">s etc.
*Converted <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="2 letters">s to GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="[vendor name]".
*Revalidated.</ITEM>
</CHANGE>
</REVDESCR>
</TEMPHEAD>
<EEBO>
<IDG S="marc" R="UM" ID="A91807">
<STC T="W">R142A</STC>
<STC T="T">E156_3</STC>
<BIBNO T="umi">99871975</BIBNO>
<VID>156866</VID>
</IDG>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<FRONT>
<DIV1 TYPE="title page">
<PB REF="1" MS="y">
<P>THE IVDGEMENT OF DOCTOR <HI>REIGNOLDS</HI> Concerning EPISCOPACY, Whether it be GODS Ordinance.</P>
<P>Expre&s;&s;ed in a Letter to Sir FRANCIS KNOVVLS, Concerning Doctor <HI>Bancrofts</HI> Sermon at <HI>Pauls</HI>-Cro&s;&s;e, the ninth of <HI>February,</HI> 1588. <HI>In the Parliament time.</HI></P>
<P><HI>LONDON,</HI> Printed by <HI>Thomas Paine,</HI> 1641.</P>
</DIV1>
</FRONT>
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="text">
<PB REF="2">
<PB REF="2">
<HEAD>DOCTOR <HI>REIGNOLDS</HI> HIS Letter to Sir FRANCIS KNOVVLS, concerning <HI>Doctor Bancrofts</HI> Sermon at <HI>Pauls-Cro&s;&s;e.</HI> 9. Febru: 1588. In the PARLIAMENT <HI>time.</HI></HEAD>
<P>_ALbeit (Right Honorable) I take grea|ter comfort in labouring to di&s;cover and over-throw the <HI>Errors</HI> of <HI>Ie&s;uites</HI> and <HI>Papi&s;ts,</HI> (enemies of Religion) than of the Mini&s;ters of <HI>Chri&s;t;</HI> yet &s;ee|ing it hath plea&s;ed your Honour to re|quire me, to &s;hew mine opinion of &s;om things, which certain of the&s;e men maintain and &s;tand in, I thought it my duty, by the example<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Deut. 33. 9.</NOTE> of <HI>Levie, who &s;aid of his Father, and Mother, I regard them not, nor acknow|ledged he his Brethren,</HI> to declare the truth, without re&s;pect of per&s;ons.</P>
<P>Of the two points therefore in <HI>Doctor Bancrofts</HI> Ser|mon, which your Honor, mentioneth, one is, concern|ing that he &s;eemeth to avouch, <HI>The &s;uperioritie which Bi|&s;hops have among us over the Clergie, to be Gods owne Ordi|nance;</HI> though not by expre&s;&s;e words, yet by nece&s;&s;ary con&s;equence; In that he affirmeth their opinion, who oppugne that &s;uperioritie, to be <HI>Here&s;ie.</HI> Wherein, I mu&s;t confe&s;&s;e, he hath committed an over&s;ight, in my judge|ment, and him&s;elfe, (I thinke) if he be adverti&s;ed there|of, will acknowledge it. For having<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">pag. 18.</NOTE> fir&s;t &s;aid that <HI>Ae|rius</HI> affirmeth, <HI>that there was no difference by the word of God betwixt a Prie&s;t and a Bi&s;hop,</HI> and afterward, that <HI>Mar|tin</HI> and his companions, doe maintaine this opinion of <HI>Aerius;</HI> he addeth that<NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">pag. 19.</NOTE> <HI>Aerius per&s;i&s;ting therein, was condemned for an heretike by the generall con&s;ent of the whole Church,</HI> and likewi&s;e<NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg">pag. 69.</NOTE> that <HI>Martins, and all his companions opinion hath herein been condemned for here&s;ie.</HI></P>
<P>Touching <HI>Martin,</HI> if any man behave him&s;elfe other|wayes than in di&s;cretion and charitie he ought, let the
<PB N="4" REF="3">
blame be laid where the fault is, I defend him not; but if by the way, he utter a truth&punc; mingled with what&s;oever el&s;e, it is not rea&s;on that that which is of God, &s;hould be condemned for that which is of man; no more than the doctrine of the re&s;urrection &s;hould be reproved, becau&s;e <NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg"><HI>Act.</HI> 23. 8</NOTE> it was maintained and held by the Phari&s;es. Wherefore removing the odious name of <HI>Martin,</HI> from that which in &s;inceritie and love is to be dealt with, it appeareth, by the afore&s;aid words of D<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">. <HI>Bancroft,</HI> that he avoucheth the Superioritie which Bi&s;hops have over the Clergie to be of Gods owne ordinance; For he improveth the im|pugners of it, as holding with <HI>Aerius,</HI> that there is no difference by the word of God betwixt a <HI>Pri<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;t</HI> and a <HI>Bi|&s;h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">p</HI> which he could not doe with rea&s;on, unle&s;&s;e he him|&s;elfe approved the Bi&s;hops &s;uperioritie, as e&s;tabli&s;hed by Gods word: and he addeth, that their opi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">ion who gain|&s;ay it, is <HI>Here&s;ie&punc;</HI> whereof it in&s;ueth, he thinks it contrary to Gods word; &s;ith <HI>Here&s;ie</HI> is an error repugnant to the truth of the word of God, as (according to <NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg">1 <HI>Tim 6. 3. Titus 3. 10. 2 Pet. 1. 19. &amp;</HI> 21.</NOTE> the Scrip|tures) our owne Church <NOTE N="g" PLACE="marg">The defence of the Apology&punc; part 1&punc; &amp; 7. divi&s;ion 2. An&s;wer to the Rhem. <HI>T<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">tus</HI> 3. 10.</NOTE> doth teach us.</P>
<P>Now the Arguments which he bringeth to prove it an here&s;ie, are partly overweake, partly untrue: over|weake, that <NOTE N="h" PLACE="marg">p<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">g. 18.</NOTE> he beginneth with, out of <HI>Epiphanius;</HI> un|true, that he <NOTE N="i" PLACE="marg">p. 19. &amp; 69.</NOTE> adjoyneth of the generall con&s;ent of the Church. For though <HI>Epiphanius</HI> doe &s;ay, that <HI>Aerius his a&s;&s;ertion is full of folly,</HI> yet he di&s;proveth not the rea&s;on which&punc; <HI>A<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">rius</HI> &s;tood on, out of the Scriptures; nay he dealeth &s;o in &s;eeking to di&s;prove it, that <HI>Bellarmine</HI> the Je&s;uite, <NOTE N="k" PLACE="marg">Tom&punc; <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">. cont. <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter"> lib. 1&punc; c. 15.</NOTE> though de&s;irous to make the be&s;t of <HI>Epiphanius,</HI> who&s;e opinion herein he maintaineth again&s;t the Prote|&s;tants, yet is forced to confe&s;&s;e, that <HI>Epiphanius</HI> his an&s;wer is not all of the wi&s;e&s;t, not any way can fit the Te<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">t.</P>
<P>As for the general<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter"> con&s;ent of the whole Church, which D<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">. <HI>Bancroft</HI> &s;aith, condemned that opinion of <HI>Ae|rius</HI> for an <HI>here&s;ie,</HI> and him&s;elfe for an <HI>h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">retik<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">,</HI> becau&s;e he per&s;i&s;t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">d in it, that is a large &s;peech: but what proofe hath h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter"> that th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter"> whole Church did &s;o. It appeareth he &s;aith in <NOTE N="l" PLACE="marg">Here&s;ie 15&punc;</NOTE> <HI>Epiphanius.</HI> It doth not, and the contrary appeareth by <NOTE N="m" PLACE="marg">I<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter"> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 word"> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">d <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 word"> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter"> &amp; <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">p<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;t. 8<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter"> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="2 words">.</NOTE> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="2 letters"> <HI><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 word">,</HI> &amp; &s;undry others&punc; who lived, &s;ome in the &s;ame time, &s;ome after <HI>Epiphanius&punc;</HI> even S<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter"> <HI>Au&s;tin</HI> him&s;elfe,
<PB N="5" REF="3">
though Dr <HI>Bancroft</HI> cite him, as bearing witne&s;&s;e thereof likewi&s;e; I grant S<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter"> <HI>Austin</HI> <NOTE N="n" PLACE="marg">Cap. 53.</NOTE> in his book of here&s;ies, a&s;cri|beth this to <HI>Aerius,</HI> for one, that he &s;aid, <HI>Presbyterum ab e|pi&s;copo nulla differentia deberi di&s;cerni:</HI> but it is one thing to &s;ay, <HI>there ought to be no difference betwixt them,</HI> (which <HI>Ae|rius</HI> &s;aying condemned the Churches order, yea made a &s;chi&s;me therein, and &s;o is cen&s;ured by S^t <HI>Au&s;tin,</HI> counting it an here&s;ie, as <NOTE N="o" PLACE="marg">In Argu. pre+fix. l. 3. Tom. 2.</NOTE> in <HI>Epiphanius</HI> he took it recorded, him|&s;elfe, as <NOTE N="p" PLACE="marg">D<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter"> haere&s;. ad quod vult De|um in prefa|tione.</NOTE> he witne&s;&s;eth not knowing how farre the name of Here&s;ie &s;hould be &s;tretched) another thing to &s;ay, <HI>that by the word of God there is no difference betwixt them,</HI> but by the order and cu&s;tome of the Church, which S^t <HI>Austin</HI> <NOTE N="q" PLACE="marg">Epi&s;t. 19.</NOTE> &s;ayth in effect him&s;elfe, &s;o far was he from witne&s;&s;ing this to be here&s;ie by the generall con&s;ent of the whole Church. Which untruth, how wrongfully it is fathered on him, and on <HI>Epiphanius</HI> (who yet are all the witne&s;&s;es that Dr <HI>Bancroft</HI> hath produced for the proofe hereof, or can for ought that I know) it may appeare by this, that our learned Country man (of godly memory) Bi&s;hop <NOTE N="r" PLACE="marg">Def. of the Apol. part. 2. ca. 9&punc; divi&s;. 1. page 198.</NOTE> <HI>Iewell,</HI> when <HI>Harding</HI> to convince the &s;ame opinion of here&s;ie, alleaged the &s;ame witne&s;&s;es, he citing to the con|trary <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tome, Ierom, Au&s;tin,</HI> and <HI>Ambro&s;e,</HI> knit up his an&s;wer with the&s;e words: <HI>All the&s;e, and other moe holy Fa|thers, together with the Apo&s;tle S^t</HI> Paul, <HI>for thus &s;aying, by Hardings advice, mu&s;t be held for heretikes.</HI> And <HI>Michell Medina,</HI> <NOTE N="&s;" PLACE="marg">De &s;acrif. hom orig &amp; confir&punc; lib. 1. cap. 5.</NOTE> a man of great account in the Councell of <HI>Trent,</HI> more ingenious herein than many other Papi&s;ts, affir|meth, not onely the former ancient writers, alledged by Bi&s;hop <HI>Iewel</HI> but al&s;o an other <HI>Jerom, Theodoret, Prima&s;ius, Sedulius,</HI> and <HI>Theophilact</HI> were of the &s;ame mind touching this matter with <HI>Aerius.</HI> With whom agree likewi&s;e<NOTE N="t" PLACE="marg">In 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3.</NOTE> <HI>Oecumenius,</HI> and <NOTE N="u" PLACE="marg">In Epi&s;t. ad Titum.</NOTE> <HI>An&s;elus</HI> Archb: of <HI>Canterbury,</HI> and <NOTE N="x" PLACE="marg">Collect. Ca<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">. li. 7. cap. 87. &amp; 1 27.</NOTE> another <HI>An&s;elmus</HI> and <NOTE N="y" PLACE="marg">Policar. lib. 2. Tit. 19. &amp; 39.</NOTE> <HI>Gregory</HI> and <NOTE N="z" PLACE="marg">Cap. <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="2 letters">gimus, di&s;t&punc; <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">9. ca&punc; <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">|l<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">mp. di&s;t 95.</NOTE> <HI>Gra<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="3 letters"></HI> and after them how many? It being once inrolled in the Canon law for &s;ound, and catholique doctrine, and thereupon pub|likely taught by <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Author g<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">o&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">. in ca. di&s;t. citat. <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">odo<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">ous caol Ave, l<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">t in <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">on|<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">il, <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 word"> Dua|ren de &s;a<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">ra ec|cle&punc; mini&s;t. lib. <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">&punc; <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="3 letters">. 7.</NOTE> learned men; All which doe beare wit|ne&s;&s;e again&s;t D^r <HI>Bancroft,</HI> of the poynt in que&s;tion, that it was not condemned for an <HI>here&s;ie</HI> by the generall con&s;ent of the whole Church&punc; For if he &s;hould reply&punc; that the&s;e later witne&s;&s;es did live a thou&s;and yeares after Chri&s;t,
<PB N="6" REF="4">
and therefore touch not him who <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">pag. 19.</NOTE> &s;aid, it was condem|ned &s;o in the time of S^t <HI>Au&s;tin,</HI> and of <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">pag 69.</NOTE> <HI>Epiphanius,</HI> the mo&s;t flouri&s;hing time of the Church that ever happened &s;ince the Apo&s;tles dayes, either in re&s;pect of learning, or of zeale; fir&s;t they whom I named, though living in a latter time, yet are witne&s;&s;es of the former.</P>
<P><HI>Oecumenius</HI> the Greek Scholia&s;t treading in the &s;teps of the old greek Fathers, and the two <HI>An&s;elmes,</HI> with <HI>Gre|gory</HI> and <HI>Gratian,</HI> expre&s;&s;ing S^t&punc; <HI>Ieromes</HI> &s;entence word by word. Be&s;ides that, perhaps it is not very likely that <HI>An|&s;elmus</HI> of <HI>Canterbury</HI> &s;hould have been canonized by the <HI>Pope</HI> of <HI>Rome,</HI> and wor&s;hipped for a Saint; that the other <HI>An&s;elmus</HI> and <HI>Gregory</HI> &s;hould have &s;uch place in the <HI>Popes</HI> Library, and be e&s;teemed of as they are; that <HI>Gratians</HI> works &s;hould be allowed &s;o long time by &s;o many <HI>Popes</HI> for the golden foundation of the Canon law, if they had taught that for catholike, and &s;ound, which by the gene|rall con&s;ent of the whole Church, in the mo&s;t flouri&s;hing time that ever happened &s;ince the Apo&s;tles dayes, was condemned for <HI>here&s;ie:</HI> chiefly in a matter of &s;uch weight and moment, to the Popes &s;upremacy; which as they doe claime over all <HI>Bi&s;hops</HI> by the ordinance of God, &s;o mu&s;t they allow to Bi&s;hops over Prie&s;ts by the &s;ame ordinance as they &s;aw at length: and there&punc; ore have not onely de|creed it now in the <NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg">Se&s;&s;. 23. c. 4. Can. 6. &amp; 7.</NOTE> Councell of <HI>Trent,</HI> but al&s;o in <NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg">Annot marg. ad cap&punc; legimus di&s;t&punc; 43.</NOTE> the new edition of their Canon law have &s;et down this note, that on <HI>Hughes</HI> Glo&s;&s;e allowed by the Archdeacon (&s;ay|ing, <HI>that Bi&s;hops have differed from Prie&s;ts alwayes as they doe now in Government, and Prelat&s;hip and Offices, and Sacra|ments but n<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">t in the name and title of Bi&s;hop, which was com|mon to them both) mu&s;t be held hereafter for S^t</HI> Jeroms <HI>mean|ing:</HI> at lea&s;t for the meaning of the Canon taken out of S^t <HI>Jerom</HI> though his words be flat and plaine again&s;t this glo&s;&s;e, as <HI>Bellarmine</HI> <NOTE N="g" PLACE="marg">Tom. 1. con|tro. 5. lib. 2. cap.</NOTE> him&s;elfe confe&s;&s;eth. Whereto may be added, that they al&s;o who have laboured about the re|forming of the Church the&s;e 500 years, have taught that all Pa&s;tors, be they intituled Bi&s;hops, or Prie&s;ts, have e|quall authoritie and power by Gods word. Fir&s;t the <NOTE N="h" PLACE="marg"><HI>Aeneas Sil|vius bi&s;to. Bo|<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">em.</HI> cap. 35 &amp; <HI>P<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">gh&punc;</HI> Hierarch Eccle&s;. l. <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">. c. 10</NOTE> <HI>Wal|den&s;es,</HI> next <NOTE N="i" PLACE="marg">Defen&s;. pacis part 2. cap. 15.</NOTE> <HI>Mar&s;ilius Patavinus&punc;</HI> then <NOTE N="k" PLACE="marg"><HI>Tho. Walden</HI> Doc. fidei Tom 1. lib. 2. cap. 60. &amp; Tom&punc; <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">. c. 17.</NOTE> <HI>Wickliffe&punc;</HI> and his &s;chollers; afterward <NOTE N="l" PLACE="marg"><HI>Aeneas Silvi|us</HI> loco citato.</NOTE> <HI>Hu&s;&s;e,</HI> and the <HI>Hu&s;&s;ites&punc;</HI> la&s;t of all
<PB N="7" REF="4">
<NOTE N="m" PLACE="marg">Adver&s;us fal|&s;o nominat or|din&punc; <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 word"> &amp; ad|ver. Papa. Rom.</NOTE> <HI>Luther,</HI> <NOTE N="n" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">n Epi&s;t ad <HI>Philip.</HI> 1. &amp; <HI>Ti|tus</HI> 1.</NOTE> <HI>C<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">lvin,</HI> <NOTE N="o" PLACE="marg">Apol. Confe&s;. Wittenb c. 21.</NOTE> <HI>Brentius,</HI> <NOTE N="p" PLACE="marg">Decad. 5. &s;er. 3</NOTE> <HI>Bullinger,</HI> <NOTE N="q" PLACE="marg">Loc. Com. Tit. de mini&s;t. verbi.</NOTE> <HI>Mu&s;culus,</HI> and other, who might be reckoned particularly in great number, &s;ith as here with us both <NOTE N="r" PLACE="marg"><HI>Iewel</HI> loco ci|tat et <HI>Pilking|ton</HI> in the trea|ti&s;e of burning <HI>Pauls</HI> Church.</NOTE> <HI>Bi&s;hps,</HI> and the <HI>Queenes</HI> <NOTE N="&s;" PLACE="marg">D. <HI>Humphrey</HI> in Camp. &amp; in Duraeum Ie&s;ui|tas part 2. rat. 3 &amp; D. <HI>White&punc;</HI> ad rat. Campiani, 6 &amp; Confuta, Duraei Ie&s;uitae lib. 6.</NOTE> Profe&s;&s;ors of Divi|nitie in our <HI>&V;niver&s;ities,</HI> and <NOTE N="t" PLACE="marg">M. <HI>Bradford, Lambert,</HI> and o|thers. M. <HI>Fox,</HI> Acts, &amp;c. D. <HI>Fulke</HI> again&s;t <HI>Bri&s;tow,</HI> mo|tive 40 and an|&s;wer to the Re|mi&s;ts, <HI>Tit</HI> 1. 5.</NOTE> other learned men doe con&s;ent <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="2 letters">erein: &s;o in forreine Nations all&punc; whom I have read treating of <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 word"> matter, and many moe, (no d<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="2 letters">bt) whom I have not read.</P>
<P>The &s;ifting and examining of the <HI>Trent Councell</HI> hath been undertaken by onely two, which I have &s;eene, the one a divine, the other a Lawyer, <NOTE N="u" PLACE="marg">part 2. lib. 4.</NOTE> <HI>Kemni&s;ius,</HI> and <HI>Gentilletus;</HI> they both con|demne the contrary doctrine thereunto, as a <HI>Trent</HI> error; the one by &s;criptures, and Fathers; the other by the Canon law. But what doe I further &s;peak of &s;everall per&s;ons? It is the common judgement of the Reformed Churches of <HI>Helvetia, Savoy, France, Scotland, Germany, Hungary, Polony,</HI> the <HI>Low Countries, and our owne,</HI> witne&s;&s;e the <NOTE N="y" PLACE="marg">Harmony &s;ec. 11. in <HI>Helvet,</HI> po&s;t <HI>Gallia Bel|gia, Anglia,</HI> &amp;c</NOTE> <HI>Harmony of Confe&s;&s;ions.</HI></P>
<P>Wherefore &s;ith D^r <HI>Bancroft</HI> (I a&s;&s;ure my &s;elfe) will not &s;ay that all the&s;e have approved that as &s;ound &amp; chri&s;tian doctrine, w^c^h by the generall con&s;ent of the whol Church, in a mo&s;t flouri&s;h|ing time, was co~demned for <HI>here&s;ie:</HI> I hope he will acknowledg, that he was over&s;eene, in that he avouched the Superiority w^c^h Bi&s;hops have among us over the Clergy to be of Gods own or|dina~ce. And thus far of the former point of D^r <HI>Bancrofts</HI> Sermo~.</P>
<P>The latter is, concerning that he affirmeth, that S^t <HI>Ierom</HI> <NOTE N="z" PLACE="marg">pa. 14. &amp; 69.</NOTE> &s;aith, and M^r <HI>Calvin</HI> &s;eemeth on his report, to confe&s;&s;e that Bi&s;hops have had the &s;aid &s;uperiority ever &s;ince the time of S^t <HI>Mark</HI> the Evangeli&s;t. Of the which poynt I think as of the former; &s;ith neither <HI>Ierom</HI> &s;aith it, neither doth <HI>Calvin</HI> &s;eeme to confe&s;&s;e it on his report. For <HI>Bi&s;hops</HI> among us, be&s;ides ordeining, and lay|ing on of hands, may doe &s;undry other things, which inferior Mini&s;ters, or Prie&s;ts (as D^r <HI>Bancroft&punc;</HI> termeth them) may not; But <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Epi&s;t. ad E|vagrium.</NOTE> <HI>Ierom,</HI> after mention of the &s;uperioritie allotted to Bi&s;hops &s;ince S^t <HI>Marks</HI> time, <HI>What doth a Bi&s;hop</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>except ordina|tion, which a Prie&s;t doth not?</HI> Meaning and inforcing by this kind of &s;peech, as a thing mo&s;t evident, and &s;uch as no man could de|ny, that <HI>Bi&s;hops</HI> had that only power above Prie&s;ts then, which <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Hom. 11. in 1 <HI>Tim.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tome</HI> al&s;o witne&s;&s;eth.</P>
<P>Though neither had they it alone in all places, as it is appa|rant by a <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">Concil&punc; 4. Can. 3.</NOTE> Councell of <HI>Carthage,</HI> &s;hewing their Churches order; that the Prie&s;ts layd their hands together with the Bi&s;hop on tho&s;e who were ordeined. Yet <HI>Ierom</HI> having proved by te&s;ti|mony
<PB N="8" REF="5">
of Scripture, that in the Apo&s;tles times, Bi&s;hops &amp; Prie&s;ts were all one, even in the right <NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg">In 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 4. 4. <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 word"></NOTE> of this too, granteth that after|wards Bi&s;hops had that peculiar unto them&s;elves &s;ome where, but nothing el&s;e &s;ave it. S^t <HI>Ierom</HI> therefore &s;aith not of that &s;u|perioritie whereof the que&s;tion is, that Bi&s;hops have had it <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">+ver &s;ince S^t <HI>Marks</HI> time.</P>
<P>No more doth M^r <HI>Calvin</HI> &s;ee<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter"> to confe&s;&s;e it upon his report. For <HI>Calvin</HI> (in the &s;ame <NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter"> In&s;tit. li. 4. cap. 4. &s;ect. 2.</NOTE> place that D^r <HI>Bancroft</HI> quoteth&punc; &s;hew|ing how in old time the Mini&s;ters that had charge to teach, cho&s;e of their company one in every Citie, to whom they did e&s;pecially give the title of Bi&s;hop; lea&s;t equalitie &s;hould breed di&s;&s;ention, yet &s;aith he) the Bi&s;hop was not above them in ho|nor and dignity&punc; that he had rule over them, but looke what is the Con&s;uls dutie in the Senate, to propo&s;e&punc; matters, to ask their opinions, to direct others by giving them advi&s;e, by admoni&s;h|ing, by exhorting, to guide the whole action by his authority, and &s;ee that performed which was agreed upon by their com|mon con&s;ent, that charge had the Bi&s;hop in the a&s;&s;embly of Mini&s;ters. And having declared, that S^t <HI>Ierom</HI> &s;heweth this to have been brought in by the con&s;ent of men upon the fir&s;t of <HI>Titus,</HI> he addeth that the &s;ame S^t <HI>Ierom</HI> other where &s;heweth, how ancient an order of the Church it was, even from S^t <HI>Marks</HI> time to <HI>Hereclas,</HI> and <HI>Diony&s;ius</HI> at <HI>Alexandria.</HI> In which words of <HI>Calvin,</HI> &s;eeing that the order of the Church he mentioneth, hath evident relation to that before de&s;cribed, and that in the de&s;cribing of it, he had &s;aid, the Bi&s;hop was not &s;o above the re&s;t in honor, that he had rule over them: It followeth that M^r <HI>Calvin</HI> doth not &s;o much as &s;eeme to confe&s;&s;e of <HI>Ieroms</HI> report, that ever &s;ince S^t <HI>Marks</HI> time Bi&s;hops have had a ruling &s;upe|rioritie over the Clergie. Wherefore to u&s;e no more proofes in a thing manife&s;t, which el&s;e might ea&s;ily be proved more at large out of S^t <HI>Ierom</HI> and M^r <HI>Calvin</HI> both: It is certaine, that nei|ther of them doth affirme, that Bi&s;hops &s;o long time have had &s;uch &s;uperiority as D^r <HI>Bancroft</HI> &s;eemeth to father upon them.</P>
<P>Thus have I &s;ignified mine opinion of the points that your Honor &s;pecified in D^r <HI>Bancrofts</HI> Sermon. Which yet if he or a|ny doe prove, that I have erred in, or take him otherwi&s;e than I ought, I &s;hall be very willing by Gods grace to correct: remem|bring the Apo&s;tles le&s;&s;on, that&punc; <HI>The &s;pirits of the Prophets are &s;ub|ject</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14. 3<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="apex" EXTENT="1 letter">.</NOTE> <HI>to the Prophets.</HI></P>
<CLOSER><DATELINE><DATE>19. Septemb. 1598.</DATE></DATELINE></CLOSER>
<TRAILER>FINIS.</TRAILER>
</DIV1>
</BODY>
</TEXT>
</EEBO>
</ETS>
